« Microsoft: don't get me started about (South) Africans | Main | Why hackers FLOSS »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Curt

Are you kidding me? There is a reason why FreeBSD continues to use the BSD license...it's because they believe it is the better license. This is why they promote it. Part of promotion is showing the advantages over the competition. Many will say Linux isn't competition, and mostly they'd be right, but from a donation stand point they'd be wrong.

True freedom, viva la BSD license.

mtg

Hi Curt,

Thanks for your comment. Well, I'm all for comparing but stating things that are blatantly false and relying on FUD is not helping either the FOSS community or FreeBSD.

rtend

While Apple doesn't seem to support FreeBSD directly, they have employed Jordan Hubbard for years and I'll bet he's making a decent salary.. I don't know of any other cases of FreeBSD commiters that are employed by Apple, but I'd be willing to bet there are more than just Jordan.

Not that I'd give Apple a complete pass in regard to their FOSS practices and policies, but I think you've muddied the waters in regard to their return to the FreeBSD community by stating that they contribute nothing.

mtg

@rtend

Yes Apple do employ FreeBSD contributors and committers. But as I mentioned they don't contribute to fund the FreeBSD foundation however they do contribute by releasing large chunk of their BSD/Mach code. Of course, they're not forced to. Pretty cool though.

Robert

Mac OS X is significantly different from FreeBSD, and never was based on it; it just uses some of the same libraries (it also uses code from the OpenBSD and NetBSD projects). From its Mach microkernel core, to the IOKit device driver system, not to mention filesystems and above all the huge Carbon/Cocoa layers, etc. the architecture is completely different.

Also, Mac OS X is now officially a UNIX, under the UINX 03 standard, not just UNIX-like.

So I'd amend your post to be that OS X is the most widely distributed UNIX.

mtg

Hello Robert,

The detailed description of the kernel figures in the link of the note (1).

you write: "So I'd amend your post to be that OS X is the most widely distributed UNIX."

If I were to do that it would miss the point that Apple doesn't need anybody's marketing when FreeBSD deserves more exposure.

BTW: UNIX yes but only for i386 32 bits architecture (and only since Leopard)

Oz

Add Cisco to your list of companies. IIRC, last year, they announced on the FreeBSD mailing list that the next generation of their products will be based on FreeBSD.

mtg

@Oz

Many thanks, I've added it in the post.

Source Inspector

Cite some god damn sources.

mtg

@source inspector

Source about what? Apple's projections/sales? Done. But would help to be more explicit when you want to report a bug :-)

Garrett Cooper

- Cisco doesn't use FreeBSD; they abandoned it for Linux because of internal politics (can't go more in depth because of the NDA I signed). Juniper uses FreeBSD for JunOS though, and Ironport (an acquired Cisco subsidiary) uses FreeBSD.
- FreeBSD is comprised of many GNU apps, but many of those core apps are being phased out for BSD licensed equivalents (GNU grep -> BSD grep, libreadline -> editline, gcc / binutils -> llvm / various tools). My guess is that eventually only CVS will remain in the base system because it's a widely used tool for distributing source, but then again CVS is far from perfect as an SCM tool, and will most likely be completely obsolete in a few years.
- From a developers point of view, the fact that the Linux vs FSF group lag in terms of libraries and headers, and are driven by political goals (FSF) vs code (Linux) leads to a lot of contention between both camps. Take Stallman with GNU/Hurd vs Torvalds with GNU/Linux; Stallman says Hurd is the best thing since sliced bread (because he is the God of GNU), but Torvalds rightfully so calls it a PoS because it can't run anything without Linux code. Etc, etc. At least the BSD groups align themselves along common goals (Free => general usability in server / desktop, Net => porting / tinkering, Open => security, PC => desktop usability market, ...).
- From a user's perspective, I haven't found a decent distro that gets customization vs optimization quite right. I don't want Fedora or Ubuntu (Gnome bloat for touchy feeling UI's), Gentoo takes too long to compile, Fedora and Slackware don't have any real software support, etc etc. At least I have a fairly wide range of hardware support with FreeBSD and a nice selection of packages and ports to choose from...

Oh yeah, and installation only takes 15 mins to perform 8-).

HTH.

Cheers,
-Garrett

The comments to this entry are closed.