> On 20020201.1024, Larry Price said ... > > On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Jacob Shaw wrote: > > The BSD's are good operating systems, the machine i'm typing this on used > to run freebsd before debian took over, and I'm running OpenBSD on my > laptop. But, there is a reason that the linux kernel now runs on almost as > many platforms as netbsd, that IBM, NEC, and oracle are picking up on > GNU/Linux, and not *bsd; and that reason is the GPL. Not directly, true, > and most of the major commercial players hated the idea from a business > standpoint at first until they understood that while closed source (which > is what BSD-licensed software becomes if you make changes and keep them > private) provide a short-term advantage in tactical terms it kept them in > the minority culture which is and will be a long-term > strategic disadvantage.
Other than the disadvantage of choosing a platform in the minority, what's the reason to choose a GPLd platform? Or, why NOT choose *BSD? If both *bsd and GNU/Linux were equally popular, from a business perspective, I would think the *BSDs would be chosen. -- Rob <rob_at_euglug_dot_net> my @euglugCode = qw(v+++ e--- eug+ bsd+++ gnu+ S+++);
