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.
Thread beginning with comment 472121
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Because....
by orestes on Sat 7th May 2011 02:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Because...."
orestes
Member since:
2005-07-06

Development structure. FreeBSD's always developed itself as one cohesive source tree with a relatively small group of people allowed to work on it as opposed to the half billion Linux based forks all going out in divergent directions all catering to different niche groups.

Which style is better is up to perspective, but you can't deny the Linux world has a much deeper "genetic pool" to draw from, even if it does get slightly polluted at times.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Because....
by Soulbender on Sat 7th May 2011 06:35 in reply to "RE[3]: Because...."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Development structure. FreeBSD's always developed itself as one cohesive source tree with a relatively small group of people allowed to work on it as opposed to the half billion Linux based forks all going out in divergent directions all catering to different niche groups.


Anyone is allowed to fork the BSD code at any time, this is the same for both Linux and BSD's.
I don't know why people seem to think that Linux is this happy.democratic dreamland where every man and his dogs has commit access. If Linux don't want your stuff in the kernel it's not getting there. This has happened many times before and it will happen again (and there'a nothing wrong with this).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Because....
by danieldk on Sat 7th May 2011 15:51 in reply to "RE[4]: Because...."
danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

If Linux don't want your stuff in the kernel it's not getting there.


Still, there is a huge difference in mentality. Very often, I have code seen shot down in the BSDs for reasons that could be summarized as 'it is not perfect', 'it makes life miserable for VAX users', and 'it does not conform to the BSD/Unix mindset'.

The Linux community has embraced 'perfect is the enemy of good'. While it doesn't conform to a high standard of perfection, it is actually usable for the average person.

How often hasn't Ubuntu been burned for not conforming to the UNIX philosophy, turning Linux in a Windows/OS X clone and whatnot? The fact is that it is probably the most popular desktop system outside Windows and OS X.

Reply Parent Score: 4