Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Mar 2006 11:28 UTC, submitted by anonymous
OpenBSD "Even if you don't use OpenBSD, you're likely to be benefiting from it unknowingly. If you're using Solaris, SCO UnixWare, OS X, SUSE Linux, or Red Hat Enterprise Linux, chances are you're using the OpenBSD-developed OpenSSH for secure shell access to remote machines. If so many are using this software, why are so few paying for it? Official responses (and non-responses) from Sun Microsystems, IBM, Novell, and Red Hat are below, but if you're one of the freeloaders who hasn't contributed to OpenBSD or OpenSSH, what's your excuse?"
Permalink for comment 109256
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Fund Raising
by tony on Wed 29th Mar 2006 17:27 UTC
tony
Member since:
2005-07-06

It seems to me it's not so much of an issue with companies leeching, but a lack of awareness of the need for funding.

I would think a polite, thoughtful fund-raising campaign on the part of OpenBSD (done by someone with a bit more tact than Theo perhaps?) would work wonders. NetBSD did a fund raising campaign a while back that was thoughtful, polite, and brought in the cash they were looking for.

It's a matter of setting expectations, telling people what you would like. Making contacts with big users of the technology and soliciting donations.

It's one thing to make the rounds, ask for money, recieve nothing, and lament about people taking your work and giving nothing back.

It's quite another when you do something, not actively solicite donations, and then throw your arms up in dispair when modest checks don't roll in.

I'm not saying that either of those cases are what's happening, but if OpenBSD has made a concerted effort for fundraising, I'm not aware of it.

OpenBSD isn't the... warm and fuzziest of projects, in terms of public relations, and perhaps this is a symptom of that. But it's a pretty simple fix I would think.

As for the big Linux vendors and other OS vendors, I really don't think they consider OpenBSD much of a competitive threat.

Reply Score: 1