Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news1!not-for-mail From: root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net Message-ID: <4akkkj$14b@dyson.iquest.net> Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin) Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine References: <489kuu$rbo@pelican.cs.ucla.edu> <4aa6k2$9et@josie.abo.fi> <4aajus$nd@dyson.iquest.net> <kevinbDJGqtq.Fup@netcom.com> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 19:19:47 GMT Lines: 39 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.advocacy:30112 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:10317 In article <kevinbDJGqtq.Fup@netcom.com>, Kevin Brown <kevin@frobozz.sccsi.com> wrote: > >End result? In the free sector, the compiler ends up evolving >primarily as a result of the needs of individual consumers who >contract someone to implement the features they need, and therefore it >acquires the features that the consumer group as a whole desires. >Otherwise they buy the commercial version and deal with the well-known >consequences of that. This is likely to result in a free compiler >that keeps up well with the commercial versions in terms of truly >needed features. > Except one thing -- assumptions are being made that the GPLed compiler is "good enough". It is true that the gcc compiler is pretty good -- but compare it to a Micro$oft compiler on an X86. It is amazing what that compiler can do... I doubt that anyone would want to spend the amount of research and money required to make gcc do what the Micro$oft stuff does (if they need to make it public.) For example, look at the intel Pentium patches -- they help a bit, but don't really do that much good. It is my position that GPL hinders in many ways as much as it helps. In fact, if I was creating a start-up company -- I would like to keep things private as long as I could, if I really had something to sell. It is just good business. In fact, I could release the source under contract (or put it in escrow) so that my customer is not left hanging if I go out of business, but it protects me from another startup. I see that GPL can hinder startup businesses significantly. Yes, there are companies that make their business supporting GPLed software. But again, compare gcc vs Micro$oft C V4.0... For being proprietary and costing about $200-400 (I forget how much), it isn't all that bad... If I had a revolutionary idea (fat chance :-)), it would *very* unlikely be embodied in a GPLed document. And if the software had to be GPLed, I probably would not waste the effort to do it (If it was complex or expensive in time to do.) John dyson@freebsd.org