Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!tcsi.tcs.com!uunet!spcuna!metro.atlanta.com!nntp.mindspring.com!nntp.mindspring.com!rsanders
From: rsanders@mindspring.com (Robert Sanders)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: DooM for NetBSD, will it become a reality?
Date: 19 Sep 1994 08:39:58 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <RSANDERS.94Sep19043958@hrothgar.mindspring.com>
References: <3595ak$l2i@jetsam.ee.pdx.edu>
<MICHAELV.94Sep15214739@MindBender.HeadCandy.com>
<35hgjs$t2n@fw.novatel.ca>
<MICHAELV.94Sep18152042@MindBender.HeadCandy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hrothgar.mindspring.com
In-reply-to: michaelv@MindBender.HeadCandy.com's message of 18 Sep 1994 20:20:42 GMT
On 18 Sep 1994 20:20:42 GMT, michaelv@MindBender.HeadCandy.com (Michael L. VanLoon) said:
> loan him something, it would also be nice if a commercial software
> company would also follow through and serve a market if they're going
> to step into it to begin with (free "unix" market). I will not
> install Linux just so I can run Doom, and I will not be buying Doom,
> since I don't run Linux or Windoze (at home). So, it appears to me
> that it is Id who had their chance and missed it.
They've also missed the Apple IIgs market, but I don't think it'll
kill them. Since when did id make a moral commitment to the free
"unix" market? I hesitate to belabor the obvious (and factual) here,
but they're in business to make money.
> bottom line, I'm sure a commercial software house has to have at least
> enough resource to temporarily devote ONE PC to a quick port to the
> free BSD's.
I think they need a pre-installed system more than they need the
actual hardware. They really don't have time to futz around with
installing every Unixy OS and its brother.
> The fact that they played favoritism to the Linux
> whiners, simply because there are so much more of them, and they had
> the resources to donate a PC to a commercial company, leaves a very
> bad taste in my mouth.
Er, um... I think you may not be reasoning entirely clearly here.
They also played favoritism to DOS -- Doom still doesn't work
wonderfully well on OS/2. Guess what? They didn't even port it to
Windows. They let Microsoft do that. The QNX guys did the QNX port.
By the way, here's an excerpt from the Linux port README:
I did this 'cause Linux gives me a woody. It doesn't generate
revenue. Please don't call or write us with bug reports. They
cost us money, and I get sorta ragged on for wasting my time on
UNIX ports anyway.
> for our OS. After all, isn't the sole reason we pay money to these
> people so that they can use *their* resources to develop software that
> works for us?
Yes. Conversely, the sole reason most software companies develop
software is to make money. Although I'm going to buy the DOS version
of DOOM to get the registered .WAD file, I really don't believe that
id will make a lot of money on it.
I know everyone is going to scream about this, but I have an idea.
You see, because of rampant favoritism and lack of a true commitment
to free Unixes, several companies have produced ports of their
products to Linux. Perhaps it would be worth someone's while to
produce a Linux emulator? It should be pretty easy to do, and fit
fairly well within the framework of the supposedly developing iBCS
emulator. The iBCS developers for Linux have already toyed with *BSD
compatibility.
Oh, and don't forget to fix your broken select() :-)
-- Robert