Slashdot Mirror
OpenBSD 5.2 Released
An anonymous reader writes "OpenBSD 5.2 has been released and is available for download. One of the most significant changes in this release is the replacement of the user-level uthreads by kernel-level rthreads, allowing multithreaded programs to utilize multiple CPUs/cores."
Three of us you insensitive clod!
More seriously, I don't have a problem with how Theo treats people. In fact it's quite funny.
Yeah, Netcraft confirms it is dying, yadda, yadda, yadda, etc... Linus said they were masturbating monkeys, the 1990s called, and they want their rthreads back, etc... etc...
Seriously, folks, if you haven't tried OpenBSD before, give it a spin, you might like it. Sure, it ain't no penguin, but that nice pointy fish is stable, solid, secure and quite a nice little beast to work with. I have had nothing but good experiences with that OS.
Just my US$ 0.02.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
Users are the worst security threat around.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Everyone can learn from that real world-class asshole... he totally dissed a friend of mine in a semi-professional environment, and I figure that a man *that* amazingly, butt-clenchingly unprofessional is just not worth the time of day. To hell with them.
As a side note, did you know that tyler durden is the name of an old cypherpunk from Bell Communications Research?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypherpunk#Noteworthy_cypherpunks
second and third that.
Well guess that makes me number four. I use an old SGI O2 as light www duty. Its a small secure OS that comes with a bare minimum of bloat. Whats not to like about that? I don't care what attitude Theo has, I've never met him. To the average person on the street RMS speaking would resemble a crazy homeless person.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Outside of homeless I am pretty sure most people would consider RMS crazy, most zealots are.
Get your PostgreSQL here: http://www.commandprompt.com/
i used to use it a lot
it doesnt' have much going for it, in the scheme of modern unix-like operating systems.. it's a bit of an underdog. it doesn't have fancy high-performance schedulers, its io layer is slow.. it's missing drivers for lots of commodity hardware, some of them because of principles.. theo is an asshole sometimes, with his constant 'im always right and you're always an idiot' thing.. but..
for one, the documentation is beautiful. whoever maintains the documentation should get a medal. there are few typos, everything has a man page, and every man page has EXAMPLES and is easy to understand. better than any other operating system out there. and that's a big plus: if you try any linux distribution and find an unfamilar file in /etc, you have a 50/50 shot of it being documented properly. with openbsd, it's garunteed
because their entire mission is based on thorough auditing, they make sure their code is very well documented and easy to understand. that's a big bonus too. modifying and developing on openbsd, as a platform, is a very nice experience
openssh is a very beautifully written piece of software. it's nice to use, and it's nice to read the source code. when is the last time it gave you any problems? openbsd is an entire operating system written with the same standards.
give it a try if you haven't, it wont hurt you.. virtual machines don't cost anything..
If Theo hadn't systematically pissed off everyone in large corporations that he's come in contact with, they might have written some drivers.
Linus is pragmatic, manages a team of experts well and the so the corporations are happy to work with him.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
RMS is amazingly useful that way.
Standing next to him, all sorts of people look sane. Get enough like-minded people together, Open Source might even start to seem (gasp!) normal.
I believe that the flow of digital information will shape the human landscape as powerfully and inexorably as water carves continents.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Honest question...
I'm amazed that people keep whining about Theo de Raadt having a strong personality when OpenBSD's main focus is security. Security. Security. Security.
How many mandatory Java patches for remote root DoS and exploits in 2011? How many in 2012? How many if, dare you, you had applets allowed in your browser?
How many remote root exploits affecting Linux?
How many *days* before a security firm claimed to have a 0-day for Windows 8?
How many critical OS X flaws needing patches?
Everytime I hear about a machine rebooting because it got patched to me it's a fail.
Fail, fail and fail.
Keep whining all you want about Theo and have fun with your insecure OS.
As to me I'd rather run an app mono-threaded on a quad-core on a secure OS than multi-threaded on an insecure OS...
NetBSD people are not famous for pissing anyone, but that did not caused manufacturers to write drivers for them.
True. The difference is that if a NetBSD developer emailed me to ask about using RdRand in the kernel (A thing I would know about) I would happily enter into a technical discussion and help them out. If Theo emailed, I would have to refer the email to the lawyers.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Have you looked at the power usage of that thing recently? It's a 15 year old system that has less processing power than my cellphone & probably draws a few hundred watts with minimal power saving features. It's probably costing you $10-15/month to run that beast - how long would it take for a modern, low-power ARM or Atom box take to pay itself off?
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
Who the hell cares about how Theo treats other people?
Did Steve Jobs piss people off? Did he not treat other people like shit on numerous occasions?
Yet people still lust after Apple products.
You buy/use the product for the sake of the product.
I can set up my OpenBSD server and forget about it for a year, with almost a guarantee that it hasn't been hacked.
That's why I use OpenBSD.
And if Theo is an asshole then Steve Jobs was a much bigger one.
There are two replies to this:
1) OpenBSD supports tons of hardware. Click on one of the supported platforms. First you'll notice is OpenBSD runs on more than x86. Second, click through. You have to work hard to find a class of hardware that doesn't have some support. Most mainstream hardware is supported with many vendors to select from. When you do find missing hardware it's due to the point 2 below.
2) There may be some truth to the claim that Theo has pissed-off some vendors but it plays a small part. A more significant reason there aren't tons of corporate drivers for OpenBSD is the OpenBSD community won't accept any undocumented code (settings that use magic numbers), binary blobs (other than micro code or firmware) and won't sign NDAs to get the info. For code to go in the base it also has to be licensed under a BSD or ISC license.[1]
Many vendors want us to buy their hardware and trust their giant binary blob won't crash our systems. That's their call. Refusing to buy their hardware is ours.
Because of Theo's and the developer's stand against binary blobs OpenBSD base is one of the freest OSs you'll find. If that means a few missing drivers then so be it. Our systems run fine without them.
[1] The only GPL licensed code in base I can think of is gcc.
Question...as someone who has never made a *BSD firewall, what makes it better to go that way as opposed to buying a Sonicwall or Cisco? What features are worth the extra expense required to use a computer as a firewall, VS just using a prebuilt ARM one?
As someone who has never homebuilt a firewall I'm curious, is it just because you want to save some old hardware? I've got an old Sempron I use as a nettop so I know that feeling,but is there more to it than that?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Theo and the OpenBSD team deserve kudos
they set a new standard in BSD style software, it's really too bad that principles often make work much more difficult
then again, the difficulty is part of their reward, doing great things despite every hurdle thrown at them
I hope they keep up the good work
How would your situation be different if the emailer was a NetBSD developer? Your either divulge something your company doesn't want you to divulge or you don't. The way the information is asked have little relevance to the way it is handled once codified under the BSD license.
I heard they JUST got ACPI S3/SUSPEND working... only on x86 (not AMD64) and with a lot of footnotes and exceptions. Sign me up!
I used OpenBSD as my primary desktop for a good number of years, but I wouldn't recommend it. That was back when Linux was a mess, too, so OpenBSD being a bit *more broken* didn't look so bad. Unsupported hardware was a big one... Ported software being ancient as all hell and much of it broken, was a big one, too. It's still a good choice for a firewall (please god kill iptables already, and get PF fully functional on Linux!), but I'm not so sure about that if WiFi is involved, and but it's fallen farther and farther behind over the years, to the point it's hard to recommend for much of anything.
On the plus side, my years of fighting with OpenBSD taught me a lot... The crufty old system and out-dated GCC versions made porting open source programs to proprietary Unices a breeze. The init scripts and overall boot process were/are much easier to learn and understand than anything else. OpenSSH, PF, mksh, and other code to come out of OpenBSD is great, and immensely useful on other platforms.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
It's closer to $20 USD per month if it's continually on. However, don't overlook the value of nostalgia.
I'd equate it to the difference between being a Windows Admin, and a Unix Admin... The two are worlds apart.
First off, PF syntax is heaven compared to all else. Linux's IPTables syntax is a utter nightmare. Cisco's NAT and ACL syntax is ugly, very limited, so abstracted in syntax and terminology from what it's really doing that it can be impossible to understand without a book of Cisco's own reference material, etc. Juniper's Netscreens are even worse. If anyone tells you otherwise, start asking a few questions about setting-up multi-homed internet service, multicast routing, or trying to determine whether/why a certain connection is being rejected by that 2,000-line ACL rule-set (or failing somewhere else). And this black-box isn't an issue of amateurs who just don't read enough... There really aren't any publications detailing more complex use-cases, and I've exchanged many words with Cisco support managers after multiple level-2 technicians put in explicit writing that some specific multihoming scearios were NOT POSSIBLE on their gear, only to try it out and find it does, in-fact, work exactly as it should.
This isn't something you're likely to hear network admins complain about, because using something better like OpenBSD is never an option they've had, and they know they MUST learn the insane ways of Cisco, to be able to support routers, switches, etc., anyhow.
PF's syntax for ACLs and NAT is dead simple, and as flexible as it can get. What's more, you edit it locally, with your choice of text editor, can syntax check it with a short command, and atomically apply it with all changes (no down-time at all). You've also got unlimited options for commenting it as you choose, making backups, generating it from some dynamic system, including dynamic lists of IPs in a rule that are added/removed by, say, a mail server tracking spammers, or having entire rulesets that are applied only when someone SSHes in to the box, to allow specific services or whatever you want. These are things that network admins DO bemoan on a continual basis... Some network software won't let you insert ACL rules above others (line editing), instead requiring erasing everything below where you want it, then inserting the ACL, then restorting the previous. Others may allow line-editing, but only for permit/deny rules, tossing-out the option of using remarks to properly comment your ACLs.
Network monitoring, debugging, and packet tracing is unimaginably easier. You can run tcpdump, pktstat, or any other utilities RIGHT ON YOUR FIREWALL, telling you EXACTLY what's happening, and where. Easy to filter down to what you want to see, yet can be focused to the point giving you complete packet headers and payloads if you so desire. Cisco pretty recently saw that omitting this functionality can make certain scenarios absolutely impossible to get through, and ASAs now allows generating a pcap/tcpdump/wireshark file, but it must by transferred off to a real computer for analysis in delayed, non-real time.
Anybody using a firewall "appliance" is PROBABLY also using a Unix box to support it in real-time as well... On either side of that ASA / Sonicwall / etc. is a switch configured for "port mirroring", to duplicate ALL that traffic to a Linux box, running SNORT and probably lots of other software, too. That Linux box getting copies of traffic still only provides a modicum of the monitoring, debugging, and reporting options that running your firewall on an actual, full-fledged Unix system can provide, but at least it makes a network admins' difficult job even POSSIBLE to do.
While home "routers" really aren't in the same class, there are MANY reasons you'd want something GOO
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Aren't Juniper's OS BSD based? All BSDs, from what I understand, use PF, and so even if an OS uses something like FreeBSD or NetBSD instead of OpenBSD as its base, whatever it used for the IP filtering would be based on PF, wouldn't it? Or are there IPTables versions on BSD as well?
Also, how is OpenBSD better than other FreeBSD based distros, such as pFsense and m0n0wall,which are aimed solely at being firewalls, unlike OpenBSD, which is more of a general purpose BSD - good for servers AND firewalls. Also, how does OpenBSD's routing compare to that of either m0n0wall or pFsense - particularly for IPv6?
Which file systems does OBSD come w/? UFS? XFS? VFS? BRTFS? Which ones?
BSDs have their advantages over Linux, but portability ain't one of them, given that Linux has been ported to far more platforms than NetBSD. If you want a BSD like OS for your toaster, or some embedded product, why not go w/ Minix 3.2, which is NetBSD userland over Minix microkernel?
How is FreeBSD? Do they have tons of more drivers?
On another note, why don't they include a port for the Itanium? FBSD has had it for a while, NBSD just introduced it in 6.0, so OBSD too could add that port. They could certainly have more penetration for something like that
"I heard they JUST got ACPI S3/SUSPEND working."
Hopefully Linux will catch up some day.
Yes, including some contributed by vendors. For example, we approved a commit bit a few months ago for another person on Intel's network driver team. That said, being polite to companies doesn't really get drivers written. They don't care about us, they care about their customers. When Yahoo says to Intel 'we're buying 10,000 new machines this month and they're all going to be running FreeBSD, what network interface would you suggest?' then they suddenly start thinking that getting good FreeBSD drivers is worthwhile.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Linux ACPI s3/suspend has worked on most of the system I've run across for several years now, including the system I'm typing on, where I use it extensively. There's bugs, which don't get the priority they should, but in any case, you should expect OpenBSD will have to labor for another decade just to reach parity with the Linux ACPI support of TODAY... Not an exciting prospect.
Missing suspend/resume was one of several major reasons I switched from several years of OpenBSD usage, to FreeBSD, and then several more years later, from FreeBSD to Linux, though I'm really not sure if I gained much in that last step...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Ext2 (Write) support was absolutely piss-poor the last time I tried it (a couple years ago), and unsuitable for writing backups to.
In generally, it's all UFS with softupdates, or tar.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
If you look at open source operating systems which have stagnated or failed it's invariably because leadership or politics have stifled innovation.
decades ago, i worked with sunos, vms and a very early freebsd. i liked it. after that i spent a long time away from computers. late 90's i got back in and needed a good platform for complex home environments (routing, firewalling, backups, desktops, ...):
i looked into freebsd, which had become a little bit of a mess. i looked at linux, which was still a gigantic insecure sloppy mess. i looked at netbsd and i liked it. but then i found openbsd... ...and i never looked back.
it had everything: clear and concise documentation, a stable kernel which doesn't crap out, enough supported hardware platforms, decent implementation of crypto including hardware support, a distributed trust-management system built into the default install, plenty of neat security features (at the time, compared to other unices), and ongoing audit of all code, ... and the best part: everything worked out-of-the-box, no configuration needed, no finetuning needed, intelligent default configurations everywhere (only X11 at the time, could use a little tweaking in it's configuration file).
it still has everything, but hardware support is of course not like netbsd or linux; and the ported applications aren't always the latest releases. but what you get, actually works extremely well without any hiccup or unexpected failures. if something doesn't work as you expected or isn't exactly working the way you like, you can easily solve it without resorting to a search engine and obscure how-to's.
anyone complaining about something not working on openbsd, is either incompetent or trying something he shouldn't be trying.
openbsd still is forefronting all kinds of new implementations, and streamlining their existing ones. they just don't swim along the mainstream, like every other operating system that starts porting each and every new technologic toy - only to replace it with something else before the port gets actually finished.
(to be honest: i have linux boxes for the kids and the wife - they need to run wine and they like eyecandy)
Abusive asshole creates (copies?) a closed system, expensive, mobile phone - world wide hero
http://www.awfullybigmoustache.com
...if only ACPI suspend/resume worked well.
Linux gets it right, why can't the BSDs? Actually, I haven't tried it with NetBSD, maybe I will.
Knowledge is power; knowledge shared is power lost.
I use an old SGI O2 as light www duty. Its a small secure OS that comes with a bare minimum of bloat. Whats not to like about that?
So, no buttonfly then?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
...film at 11.
We all know that. But do not confuse "the man" with "the OS". Theo probably maintains less control over OpenBSD than Linus does over Linux (a lot of what he does involves maintaining the project's resources and logistics so that the developers can get on with their work rather than dealing with hardware and sysadmin stuff). Yes, he's the founder & leader of the project, but OpenBSD developers are amazing and could easily continue the project without him if required (not that that's at all likely to happen any time soon). Corporations would kill to have this consistent level of developer talent.
Which is why I've been using OpenBSD for 15 years for critical systems, and have no plans to change that.
Do you know whether Yahoo! is still largely hosted on FreeBSD? I worked there at the very end of the 90's, and it was all FreeBSD - even the developer desktop machines ran it. It was my first exposure to FreeBSD, having used NetBSD and Linux before that.
RMS is very logical, instead.
Most of the people prefer short term convenience, or the de facto situation, or feel safer in the herd, and so they don't accept stallman premises, so they refuse everything that logically follows from them. Labeling that as crazy is plain wrong.
If you want to see truly hallucinating guys, there is that elop guy and his let's bet everything on a beta OS whose market penetration is entirely dependent on our sales. Or that other guy who deemed that Vista was mature enough to be preinstalled.
Ok either hallucinating or in bad faith, sociopathy is a mental disease too.
Yes. And they still employ quite a few FreeBSD developers. Apparently they just finished another failed attempt to migrate to Linux.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Primarily price and/or personal experience. I'm unsure what products you are buying, but with a true Cisco/iOS product your typically going to have to buy used to get anywhere near the price point of rolling your own. So if you don't have the funds or, for whatever reason, you are already familiar with *BSD/PF, rolling your own router can be a very attractive option. That being said, very few people regret buying a Cisco product.
Any modern car you will buy will get better milage than a '57 Chevy. I'd still love to own and drive a '57 Chevy.
Or that other guy who deemed that Vista was mature enough to be preinstalled.
And yet Vista still has a magnitude more marketshare than desktop Linux. It also had around 20% marketshare before Windows 7 came. So if it was a "total flop" as you freetards and the tech press like to claim, than desktop Linux is an even bigger failure than Windows ME ever was.
Call me user #5 then.
I have an old Athlon beige box I use as whatever I need. It's my backup desktop (in case both my laptop and primary desktop fail), so it's got a light WM (WindowMaker), OpenOffice (plus Abiword for *most* word processing), and so on. It's a Samba file share, storing backups of my more important files (and my porn). It's a retrogaming system, with ZSNES and a metric fuckton of ROMs.
Most importantly, it's a disposable server for whatever I feel like messing around with. I want to learn how to use PostgreSQL? Install it. Mess with it. Learn it. Repeat for pretty much whatever I want - there are surprisingly few server applications that haven't been ported to BSD.
Yeah, there's nothing it does that Linux doesn't, or couldn't. But I've taken a liking to OpenBSD, for some reason.
I think it's because the default installation has NOTHING. If you install from CD and pick every module, you get ksh, X11 with FVWM, and gcc. That's really it. Having to pick nearly every user-level program you install may be a bit tedious, but it gives me a feeling of more control.
One of the reasons I like OpenBSD is the developers are very forthright about why things can't or won't work. Reading the misc@ mail list is a great way to learn about the issues they face trying to get documentation. There are non-trivial issues with both acpi and efi. The developers reverse engineer what they can.
Instead of asking "Why doesn't OpenBSD have better support for $hardware?" we should be asking "Why don't vendors post more public information about their hardware?"
Anyone who grew up in the 70s and 80s buying electronics probably has very distinct memories of getting schematics and diagrams with their new products (or could order them cheaply). My first cw-band radio came with a full electrical schematic. Now, it's a crap shoot. Some of the blame lies with the industry as a whole. Much lies with the USPTO, or more precisely, the laws governing patentability and duration of patents.
The industry is to blame because it's easier to not to. Even if a retail vendor wanted to release good doc sub-component vendors may refuse to allow them. Why? In part to protect themselves from copycats. In part to protect themselves from patent lawsuits.
Patents are the another aspect of the not-so-secret problem. They're all violating somebody's patent on something (at least in the eyes of the patent holder). Whether it's in the fabrication process, a "method" of calculating or who knows what, someone has a claim. The more a company expose about the inner workings of their devices the more information patent trolls and competitors have for pursuing license (revenue), agreements. The smartphone patent war we're seeing played out in the courts is one example of the problem.
Yet another aspect of the problem is self-serving vendor "standards". EFI began as an Intel initiative. Intel later handed control of the spec over to the UEFI Forum, a non-profit corporation. The goal of EFI isn't so much to fix BIOS as to further vendor interests, whether to protect their "IP" or lock customers into using their devices in vendor "approved" ways.
Contrast that to Open Firmware (OpenBoot) which began as a Sun initiative and later became an IEEE standard. Or LinuxBios (now coreboot) which is an open source replacement replacement for both BIOS and EFI. Coreboot has made some progress but it requires vendor participation to make critical details available for implementation. You can guess how well that's going.
If the OpenBSD project were willing to sign NDAs and/or accept binary blobs there would be better support of technologies like suspend/sleep. But they're not willing to do so. Rather they work with vendors who are willing to share details, reverse engineer where possible and do without when neither option is available.
Predictable behavior and high-quality manufacturing, too.
If Theo hadn't systematically pissed off everyone in large corporations that he's come in contact with, they might have written some drivers.
But he doesn't even want those corporations to write those drivers, he just wants the documentations so he (and other devs) can do it themselves.
False.
Even the V8 was only 283 cubic inches, and was capable of mid-20's MPG. That's better than the current crop of mid-size (Camry, Accord, Fusion, etc) V6s.
Why would they need to migrate to Linux when their developers and admins know FreeBSD? Do you have any sources for this, or are you just making it up to make Linux seem difficult to migrate to from FreeBSD?
Suspend has worked find on my amd64 machine for a long time, I think you're referring to hibernation.
They tried the migrations because management has heard about this Linux thing and thinks it's cool. They failed, because they have invested a lot in customising FreeBSD (including a lot of stuff they upstream, and some that they don't) and unless management is willing to spend at least as much on Linux the switch is going to fail. The only sources I have are conversations with Yahoo employees.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Yes, yes and yes. Oh, how I wish I had mod points today (even though they'd be sort of wasted)!
True about the cisco thing. though I do find the ACL/NAT thing tiresome as some mentioned.
As for BSD based firewall products, all are not equal-I've had the experience working on a secure computing/mcafee sidewinder and unequivocally despise this "firewall" product.
The difference is that Theo has acted in a way in the past that has caused us to route all communications from him directly to the lawyers. It's not to do with divulging secrets. It's to do with past behavior.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
That was not the nature of the exchange as I remember it.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Hey, at least Steve-o paid people to put up with his bullshit. Open source necessarily entails community; corporations do not.
Thanks for the info, I did indeed mis-recall the story, perhaps because S3 was one of the things I switched to FreeBSD for, several years ago.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Maybe if you were still running Irix on the box or using SGI-specific multimedia software, I could follow your metaphor. Running Apache & OpenBSD on the machine is more like taking the body of a '57 Chevy and replacing the interior with that of a 1992 Honda Civic and putting a trailer hitch on it.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
The Best Practice(TM) in the business world is to use the worst crapola and let all your hard-won R&D data be pwned by Chicom Ltd. And Best Practice is also to ignore all and any security issues in your corporate environment, because you could piss off Pointy H., the evil boss who thinks he can double as a software architect.
"Let's all be nice to each other and never say the truth. That way we all feel better and suck our way up the corporate power chain". "we all know the worst issue of the west are those who can't keep their nasty opinions to themselves. Trust me, I am a psychologist-whore paid by Mr Pointy and I am telling you - keep all your opinions about security in your little dark heart. Negative vibes destroy coporate value !".
In the corporate world we had armies of money-hungry social-science fuckers (including psychologists) telling people that they should first think about the "social level of problems" instead of thinking about rational solutions to problems. They argued that "human conflict produces friction and reduces team performance".
So they trained everybody to gloss over shitty processes, shitty technology architectures, shitty production quality, untrained coworkers, shitty software and half-arsed project conceptions.
Steve Jobs did not follow this advice. If he saw a shitty piece of software he rightly insulted the source of the shit. We all know the results - the most valuable company on earth measured by market cap. His successor apparently already screws up - see maps.
Theo de Raadt names and shames unsound practices of fellow BSD contributors ? These little souls feel offended ? I suggest they become Windows developers, where everybody is submerged in shit and nobody mentions even a brown spot. BSD is an excellent operating system and that is all that matters. Very good to have an alternative to Linux, which is already heavily driven by corporate interest, which does not contribute to security. What will we do if somebody pwns Linux machines on a large scale in a week ? We'll quickly switch to some BSD variant !
...then your moral spine is already broken.
World-class money-makers need world-class Faithful Followers who buy their overpriced crap on a regular basis. See Apple. Religion is the most powerful sales tool and most of the time it is accompanied by a large community of Believers.
I doubt though, that all those reading St Steve Bios really have the guts and intelligence to emulate him. Ass-diving and Glossing Over is deeply entrenched in most corpos. Good Feeling is much more important than Good Product in 99% of corpos.
BSD does not involve millions of dollars, which means that there is no money to be kicked back to a corrupt corpo drone. That is why Checkpoint exists - to make Linux expensive and then kick back lots of money to corrupt corpo drones. iptables is a bit twisted, but not more than CP. But hell - there is NO MONEY involved !! Horribilis !
..Wally The Drone got a new Bathroom after approving of the Cisco FW deal ? Yeah, Wally does not regret.
..you tricked millions of people into buying computers which would never properly run. Very good. That ingrained the bad feeling about Windows into people.
Capable of mid-20's, yes, if your driving style is somewhere between that of a grandma and a hypermiler.
Normal driving gets most folks in the 14 MPG area for most versions of engine/transmission.
Theo and the OpenBSD developers and users don't want your crappy binary blob. They want documentation so they can write an open, secure, stable driver.
They tried the migrations because management has heard about this Linux thing and thinks it's cool. They failed, because they have invested a lot in customising FreeBSD
And probably because their staff has a great FreeBSD expertise, but just standard Linux expertise.
Hell I've been dissed by Theo a couple of times. They were entirely justified. I picked myself up and didn't fuck up again. If you can't take it, don't go to the fight.
Ha ha! Jobs was an amateur on that front...he could "do" asshole. Theo has asshole-capabilities burned into his molecular formation. If you took it away, there'd be nothing left.
Ok, well on this occasion, Theo invited himself to the fight and was a total twat - basically a shithead of the first magnitude. It was not *remotely* justified. The guy in question had NOT fucked up. Theo just thought he had because he had a head full of shit and the shit just seemed to ...you know ... pour out....
My advice at the time was: TdR is a world-class asshole, and you must not respond, or feed the troll, or do business with him. And that's what happened. The SSH thing got sorted quietly, and we all learned a little more about Theo.
Having seen his viciously childlike posts, I would never - ever - put him or his product in a place where something that mattered might depend on him. I happily use OpenSSH, but I don't thank him for it. He's very clearly not doing it for me or anyone out there. Theo's doing it for Theo, and if the by-product is great software, then fine. Maybe that's the price for paranoia and good security - but I think there's some broken parts in that guy.
I like your advice - don't go to the fight. I tend to adapt it to: stay away, don't get involved.
They want their SMT back.
The classic hardware is being useful by running a modern OS and doing work, while it sits most of the time. Since the owner can shove in a disc, click a few keys, and get it back to factory specs in about twenty minutes with almost zero work anytime he wants, I don't think your analogy is that great either.