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 472154
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Laurence on Sat 7th May 2011 12:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

The USL vs Berkeley lawsuit was settled in 1994, 17 years ago. Certainly the legal cloud had an impact at the beginning, but it can't be blamed anymore.

Why not?

People are naturally going to develop for the platform that already has the most support. The early adoption to Linux meant that it gained critical mass quicker so naturally corporations and developers would more likely be drawn to Linux over the lesser supported BSD.

This is still true. You can have a fully functional FreeBSD desktop however when things go wrong there's less sources for help. So most people who want an open source desktop turn to Linux due to the significantly larger number of support forums, mailing lists, and developers on hand.

Reply Parent Score: 5