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 472185
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Because....
by Valhalla on Sat 7th May 2011 19:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Because...."
Valhalla
Member since:
2006-01-24


Tell that to Juniper, IronPort etc etc.
Your argument is a fallacy. Since you are not required to release your derivative work under an OSS license YOU decide if you want to "risk" your competitors getting their hands on it. If you dont want to, nothing is forcing you.

But isn't that the point the author tried to make, that since companies don't have to contribute their enhancements back they simply don't and instead keep them as a competitive edge? Are Juniper Networks, Cisco contributing their code back to Freebsd (it uses that right?), are they hiring full time Freebsd developers to work on the main Freebsd project?

By comparison, Linux is pretty much entirely developed by people who'm companies have hired to work fulltime on the kernel, which is certainly atleast part of the reason that it develops at such a high pace.

Again, I say that I think GPL makes better sense for companies to do cooperative development under, particularly in competitive areas such as this. They can share the burden of development with everyone being legally obliged to submit their enhancements.

So in my opinion, BSD-style licenced code is what companies prefer to use, GPL licenced code is what they prefer to contribute to.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Because....
by Oliver on Sat 7th May 2011 20:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Because...."
Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

>Are Juniper Networks, Cisco contributing their code back to Freebsd (it uses that right?), are they hiring full time Freebsd developers to work on the main Freebsd project?

Yes! Did this answer your questions? There is less to none hype arround BSD so you have to read mailinglist or speak to FreeBSD devs to get such answers. But hey, it's that easy: just ask instead of making up folklore.

Do you really want to know what's hurting the BSD's? It's this silly folklore, the hype arround some bubbles of hot air called Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Because....
by Soulbender on Sun 8th May 2011 00:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Because...."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

But isn't that the point the author tried to make, that since companies don't have to contribute their enhancements back they simply don't and instead keep them as a competitive edge


The author maybe but not the OP I responded to.

Reply Parent Score: 2