On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 06:08:02PM -0800, Mark Bigler wrote: > On Saturday 02 February 2002 15:40, Jacob Meuser wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 12:31:46PM -0800, Bob Miller wrote: > > > Contrast the history of BSD with the history of a certain > > > GPL'd OS whose name we've debated recently. > > > > Linux was developed to run on the PC. The internet was open to the > > average Joe in the early 90s. How many people had "developer level" > > access to VAXen, and/or the internet, as well as enough time on both > > to acutally use these to work on a pet project in the early 80s? > > What about the overall number of hackers in the early 80s, as > > compared to the early 90s? What about the economy of the early 80s > > as compared to the economy of the early 90s? > > At the risk of a flame war, I ask, are you saying that simply by virtue > of having a more euphonious name, Linux pulled ahead of the BSDs in > popularity?
Possibly, but that's not the point I was making. I'm just pointing out that there are other factors that may have helped Linux become popular by "being in the right place at the right time". > They certainly had a head start. And so why rewrite something that is already (mostly) complete? I'm sure a lot of Linux (the kernel) development was done for fun and the challenge of filling in the gaps, while at the same time BSD development was (and is) more "polishing" and porting (and keeping up with new hardware). > And even as far as PCs > vs VAXen, et al. go, wasn't 386BSD around well before a viable Linux? IIRC, they bacame "viable" around the same time. But, like I said, it was proably more fun to develop for Linux. There wasn't someone there to say, "No, that's not going to replace what we already have." Or, "That doesn't fit our style/standards." In short, a developer probably had (and probably still has) a better chance of getting his code integrated. But, my point is, this was all happening when the internet was really starting to take off and computers were getting cheaper. I've heard Linux described as an internet phenomenom on more than one occasion. > Or is it a personality thing -- is Linus just the more charismatic of > the OS project leaders? That could very well be. I can think of an OS project leader that many consider to be an a**hole. > What dynamic(s) do you see at work? I try to see everything as an extension of and affected by everything else. For example, I doubt I would have discovered OpenBSD if it weren't for GNU/Linux. It's possible that OpenBSD wouldn't even exist had GNU/Linux never been invented. I understand that someone would be more willing to release software under the GPL than under the BSD license because they don't want someone making money off their work. But then, that's not because the person cares about what they're doing, but what somone else is doing. That's why I don't prefer the GPL. It must be the anarchist in me. That's not to say I'm not grateful for the work RMS and the FSF have done to promote OpenSource software. I just find it disheartening that it takes a license (law) for people to understand why releasing source is a good thing. > (I bet your already on record on this and all I need to do is check the > achieves.) Probably ;) -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
