*BSD News Article 65940


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!inferno.mpx.com.au!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!reason.cdrom.com!usenet
From: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX)
Date: 15 Apr 1996 09:51:23 -0700
Organization: The FreeBSD Project
Lines: 79
Sender: jkh@time.cdrom.com
Message-ID: <yfgbuktfn1w.fsf@time.cdrom.com>
References: <NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: time.cdrom.com
In-reply-to: nelson@ns.crynwr.com's message of 15 Apr 1996 05:05:53 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:21364 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:587 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3193 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3001 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17325 comp.os.linux.advocacy:45411

In article <NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com> nelson@ns.crynwr.com (Russell Nelson) writes:

   I don't think you understand the problem here, Jordan.  The problem is
   not "which is easier to use?".  This question is technically
   answerable, however, the answer is meaningless.  The problem is that
   Microsoft has complete mindshare.  People don't evaluate which

I don't think there there's any single problem to point to, Russell.
UNIX is not as easy to use, fact.  Its adherants have spent more
energy in fighting one another than in redressing that balance, fact.
Microsoft has a marketing juggernaut that could sell processed fecal
waste and call it milk chocolate, fact.  We're both right, so what?

   If they could buy a computer with Linux and (a fully functional) Wine
   installed, they would use it with no hesitation.

That's a pretty sweeping statement, and even so predicated on one very
large "if" at the beginning.  That and statements like "if I just had
a hundred million dollars.." won't buy a cup of coffee.

   In order to create a market for Linux, we need to say, and say again,
   that Linux is THE ONLY RELIABLE 32-bit desktop operating system.  The
   only other choices simply are not up to the task.  This is not about
   stating what is, but about what should be.

Sorry, but that's just totally inane.  Even if I agreed that Linux was
all you claim it to be, and I most definitely do not, who's to say
that I find the existing situation of competition between the various
free software camps to be in any way undesirable?  You think we'd have
the same motivation to move as far and as fast without such a healthy
degree of competition?  If you think that volunteers will line up
around the block just for for the privilege of getting a shot in at
Microsoft then you're not a very good judge of people and certainly
not someone who's been dealing with the OS volunteer community for
very long.  People do things for widely different reasons, and if they
were motivated solely by a desire to beat the commercial products at
their own game then I can assure you that you'd see the proof of this
in a wholly different variety of contributions out there.

   Now, given that we have to use the same weapon to win the war, where
   do we start?  Do we try to introduce the idea that there are multiple

Who says we do?  Who says it would even *work* for us?  We're not
Microsoft, and we don't have an army of people who are paid to indulge
in every form of slimey propaganda campaign known to man - trying to
suggest that we can beat them simply by adopting their tactics is sort
of like saying that the war in Bosnia could be easily solved by giving
one side nukes and biological weapons.  What works for one group of
people in one situation may be wholly inappropriate for another.

   Bad, bad, bad.  It confuses people.  There is room for only one free
   32-bit operating system.  Which is it to be, Linux or *BSD*?  Linux

I don't accept this premise at all, so the rest of our argument is
pretty much moot.

   But you didn't answer my question: what is wrong with Linux that you
   cannot fix?

Because you didn't ask the right question.  The right question is:

"What is wrong with Linux that I and a goodly number of the people I
work with WANT to fix?"

And the answer is, of course, nothing.  I like Linux just the way it
is, and I hope that the people working on it continue to make
progress.  For my own tastes, it's not a solution I care to embrace
because my tastes are simply different.  I prefer a different type of
organization, a different copyright, a different group of people to
work with.  Vive la difference!  Just because I happen to admire a set
of silken undergarnments on a member of the opposite sex by no means
implies that I have any desire to wear such things myself (though
maybe that will change once I'm older and kinkier - I'll leave my
options open :-).

					Jordan
-- 
- Jordan Hubbard
  President, FreeBSD Project