Linked by fvillanustre on Fri 6th May 2011 22:19 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y When comparing the evolution in market share of Linux and OpenBSD, two operating systems that were born around the same time, a question comes to mind: why is there such a difference in market penetration? Linux, on one side of the spectrum, with a license that supposedly impairs commercial venues, has enticed companies and organizations to adopt and support it under varying commercial models, while the BSD derivatives (FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD), with a larger history and an allegedly more commercial friendly license haven't been as successful to gather a large installed base and widespread adoption.
Permalink for comment 472150
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Because....
by karunko on Sat 7th May 2011 10:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Because...."
karunko
Member since:
2008-10-28

"Because there is no comercial interest in developing your code with a license that allows your competitors to grab your code, build something on top of it, publish a competig product and not release the changes that the competitor made.


Tell that to Juniper, IronPort etc etc.
"

Not to mention that little thing called OS X. I've heard it's doing pretty well...

More in general, I would say that the premise of the article is wrong: since Linux has more market share (really?) and definitely more buzz around it, then it must be because of the different license and not, say, for a lot of other reasons that have been mentioned here.

And, since we're talking about market share, then surely Windows must have an even better license? ;-)


RT.

Reply Parent Score: 5