|James Love||Sep 30, 1998 10:18 am|
|Brett Glass||Sep 30, 1998 11:05 am|
|Open Systems Networking||Sep 30, 1998 11:24 am|
|Frank Pawlak||Oct 2, 1998 8:04 pm|
|Jordan K. Hubbard||Oct 2, 1998 8:51 pm|
|Greg Lehey||Oct 2, 1998 9:04 pm|
|Brett Glass||Oct 2, 1998 9:11 pm|
|Nicholas Charles Brawn||Oct 2, 1998 9:26 pm|
|John Birrell||Oct 2, 1998 9:26 pm|
|Jason C. Wells||Oct 3, 1998 2:10 am|
|Jeremy Lea||Oct 3, 1998 5:08 am|
|Eivind Eklund||Oct 3, 1998 6:25 am|
|Bill/Carolyn Pechter||Oct 3, 1998 7:13 am|
|Jordan K. Hubbard||Oct 3, 1998 7:24 am|
|Bill/Carolyn Pechter||Oct 3, 1998 9:34 am|
|Jerry Hicks||Oct 3, 1998 11:34 am|
|Jordan K. Hubbard||Oct 3, 1998 12:24 pm|
|Bill/Carolyn Pechter||Oct 3, 1998 1:35 pm|
|Stephane Legrand||Oct 4, 1998 12:59 pm|
|Wes Peters||Oct 9, 1998 12:52 pm|
|David Greenman||Oct 9, 1998 8:46 pm|
|Open Systems Networking||Oct 9, 1998 8:53 pm|
|Kevin Lam||Oct 9, 1998 11:23 pm|
|Open Systems Networking||Oct 9, 1998 11:53 pm|
|Subject:||Re: Device Drivers for Linux and Intel's annoucement|
|From:||Jeremy Lea (re...@shale.csir.co.za)|
|Date:||Oct 3, 1998 5:08:45 am|
On Sat, Oct 03, 1998 at 01:34:21PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
Your're very much entitled to your opinion. On the other hand, when you go out on lists like that, many people will consider you to be a typical FreeBSD user, which I think you are not. Both Jordan and I have repeatedly stated that we think you are harming FreeBSD more than you're helping it (though we both appreciate the good you do, as Jordan shows above).
We could be wrong. Question to everybody who's seen Brett's messages: should he continue, or should he stop? If the consensus is that he should continue, I'll shut up (that places no similar requirement on Jordan, of course :-)
I think the real problem here is a mismatch of motives.
FreeBSD developers, from what I've seen, are hackers. They are motivated by doing the Right Thing(tm). They don't care if FreeBSD becomes the next dominant OS, they don't care if other people don't want to use it, provided it meets their own needs. I believe the same is true for Linux developers, especially Linus (see a recent interview with him on ZDTV).
Then we have the advocates, who have hit on FreeBSD, found that it's a really good OS, and want to sing it's praises. And beat up anyone who doesn't agree with them. They want to show the world that there are better products than Windows, which is obvious. Linux has plenty of them too.
I think Linux's success in recent weeks is as a result of neither factor. It is the result of an industry polarised by one monopolistic company. All of the players investing in Linux (via Red Hat and other companies), are doing it to save themselves. It's another set of battle lines. Notice that these investors are the main players in the OMG, in the Open Group, in Java, etc. They're desperately trying to find ways to stop the giant. And Linux is a good vehicle. It stands in direct competition to NT 5.0 in Microsoft's main market, which will be small business and internet servers. It's got a nice balance between power and usability. And it's not vaporware.
An added benefit of Linux is that Microsoft can only loose by fighting it. If their marketing machine kicks in, then they will be the monopoly fighting the people. If they use the embrace and extend tactic (like Java), then they have to fight the GPL. And they can never undercut the price like they did with Netscape.
Linux's downfall is that they have the ear of the hackers, while Microsoft has the ear of the managers. That's where the investment in Red Hat comes into play. Intel are spreading their bets.
Turning back to FreeBSD. I think we should keep a low profile in the next 12 to 24 months. Encourage people to use Open Source, and help Linux to become big in the market. The Linux distributions are going to fracture and become incompatible, just like the whole Unix market. For the success of FreeBSD, NT 5.0 has to fail. After that it's just a case of pitching FreeBSD as a Open Source Unix, just like Red Hat Linux. Then we compete based on technical merit. Getting FreeBSD versions of products is easy when the vendor already has to do several Unix versions.
Investment has little to do with technical merit. Witness Windows. With so much money and so many programmers, you would think they would have the best. I started using FreeBSD in '95 and it's now '98. Take a look at the combined release notes from 2.2 through to 3.0 over that period and you'll see what a small band of really brilliant hackers can do. To be the best we don't need investment. We need to be the 'gurus of the gurus' and so attract the best developers.
Making big noises now is only going to win us enemies. Especially if we appear to be fighting Linux. Flame wars are only going to drive the hackers away.
Think I overspent my 2c. -Jeremy
-- | ----------------------------------------------------- --+-- "What a crazy world we live in, | we save the whales yet support abortion" - MIC | -----------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message