As a longtime advocate of the free BSD's I have a few views I'd like to express.
If Jordan thinks this is a good thing, I've know jkh long enough to know, that while he is human, generally he considers long term implications of things. the BSD's now have a commercial backing. Walnut Creek, while having funded FreeBSD developnment for a while, did not have the commercial power of BSDi.
Also, this signals the change in strategy for BSDi, instead of keeping things relatively closed, most things being distibuted by BSD Inc. will be Open Source. However I wonder about the funding of Slackware development, but I'm sure provisions have been made.
This was bound to happen, Kirk Mc. has been involved with both FreeBSD and BSDi, and it was just a matter of time before something like this happened.
I personally will wait to see what happens. while I trust jkh's judgement, I also reserve the right to be cautious;)
lets hope this *does* turn out to be for the best.
Yes, you are correct sir! (in my best Ed McMahon voice)
However, there is work being done on finer grained SMP support. All SMP usually starts out at the gigantic kernel lock. Look for the future. However if its processor scalability you look for, Linux isn't even the way to go (although if you need Open Source, well it *is*), but SYSV based OS's like SCO UnixWare or Solaris. BSD's strength is in networking.
The real reason Lucent chose FreeBSD was probably licensing, and the fact that FreeBSD is generally used more commercially then Net or Open BSD's anyway. OpenBSD is getting there though =)
Its EXTREMELY BSD. the BSDL essentially says "you can take this source code, modify it, and relicense it, as long as you indemnify the original authors and give due credit"
This is prefectly within anyone's rights, in fact, the BSD community ENCOURAGES this type of thing.
Remember, us as BSD developers want to make money off our code, and be compensated for time spent. The Bell Labs/Lucent people have spent alot of time and money into these modifications. If you don't like the licensing terms, you can take the FreeBSD 3.4 code and modify it yourself, OR just simply not use it.
The GPL has nothing to do with this. the GPL is a completely different license, that does not allow for this type of thing. Had it allowed for modification and sale of Linux source, then Lucent *might* have used that instead.
Remember, each license has a different goal in mind. the GPL is "Viral" and is inherited by its children. The BSDL only effects one generation unless the person modifying also applies the BSDL.
I fail to see how Northwood would be a direct competitor to a "chameleon" such as Crusoe. When I read the information on Crusoe, I was astounded.
Intel is making this type of announcement, frankly because they see the death of thier mobile processors. And evidently with the unvieling of actual working IA64 machines...why would they even bother with more IA32 stuff?
I'd like to know what Intel is thinking. Are they truly worried, or does it just look like it?
About the only newgroup I read anymore is the occasional visit to the Monastery (for those who don't know which newsgroup I'm talking about, good;))
I've found that even there, the signal has dropped, although I still get my laugh and my recovery when I do.
However, not to sound snobbish, but I completely agree, USENET should be the last holdout for us "midtimers" and "oldtimers"
-Pat
Re:This pisses me off a lot.
on
BSD Quickies
·
· Score: 2
You'll find that the majority of Free/Net/OpenBSDers are not anti-linux, we have our preferences. Just because of a few vocal people, that are anti-linux/GNU you make the generality that all of us are.
theres alot of Linux/GNU people that are anti-BSD but we don't use that to cloud our judgement, we're all on the same team, just different methods of going about it.
Next time you are at a conference, come on over and talk to a BSD person. You'll find its a pleasant experience.
The only thing we get annoyed about is the fact that we sometimes get left out of the large Open Source gatehring type things, and well...we're still large enough (and growing) to have a vocal contingent about it. However most of us are too busy hacking code to complain most of the time.
I agree it was sexist, but obviously the target audience was reached. One of those "Daemon Babes" is actually rather technical (and a friend of Mike Smith's) As far as attractive, I dunno, you gotta talk to the little linux geeks that were ogling them the whole time. I wasn;t really paying attention, I was too busy to promoting around the conference. As far as Kirk's sexuality, that personally is not the business of Slashdot, or anyone else, and personally I'm appalled at the fact someone brought it up. While its common knowledge, So The F*** What? Lets keep to the topics at hand. BSD did very well at the conference, I wasn't there for Linus' keynote, as I was at work, but people had a lot of good things to say about our presence. Yes, the booth was an obvious marketing tactic, did it work, yes, did I approve, not totally, not my decision though. I still stand behind all three Open Source BSD projects out there -Pat
Who's to say Slashdot does not have integrity? I mean we may disagree with alot of people who post articles, but to say they have no integrity because VA Linux bought them?
I really don't think they are even going to touch Slashdot, or change how it works. They would be fools. They bought a money maker, they didn't buy a failing business. TOomake editorial decisions on a journalistic site like Slashdot would kill it.
My guess is that when VA needs criticizing, Rob, Jeff and others will be around to criticize. When they deserve praise, they'll get it as well. and that includes every other company and organization in the Open Source community.
Lets grow up people, people wanted Open Source to be viable in business situations, and it now is, now people complain that people are selling out.
I know some of the Slashdot people, and the ones I know have integrity, why not wait and see what actually happens before deciding they have no credibility.
While I understand the reasoning, I don;t particularly agree. This is probably about the only forum the BSD's will get at this conference, as its LinuxWorld. However, I wouldn't publicize it at USENIX or anywhere else.
and Yes, its BSD news, Nik posts what he thinks is BSD news, and a BoF at a Linux dominated conference is definitely it.
As one of the sponsors of this BoF (I am the founder of the BSD Users of New York), I don't understand why it always has to be BSD vs. Linux.
Approximately a week ago, there was an interview with Larry Augustin posted to/. In the comments, several StarMedia employees, including myself, made reference to BSD's high perfomance under network load. None of us here are against linux.
In fact, BUNY has cooperated with LUNY, LXNY, and NYLUG on a number of occasions here in NY. There seems to be no rivalry here. We have *preferences*.
So people, lets stop the BSD/Linux Flamewar, lets stop the mockery, lets stop criticizing. Its all about tools. I prefer BSD tools, you may prefer GNU/Linux tools.
My dad prefers Makita, and his friend prefers Craftsman...so what?
So anyone who wants to know what its really about, I invite you to show up.
If you are that closeminded as to not learn something, thats *your* problem, not mine.
here, here! As one of Ryan's colleagues I can attest to that, VA hardware rocks, but FreeBSD is what we use. Its not that we're OS bigots. Its the fact that FreeBSD handles the job we need it to do, where linux doesn't and wouldn't.
While I understand your reasons for not liking the GPL, I cannot understand where out of this clause you got that idea. it says and I quote, "not subject to an express agreement for the payment of a licensing fee or royalty for commercial production *or* sale of any product developed using the source code" (anything that is derived from this, I would assume even some commercial products such as RedHat or IBM's Interjet, fall under this category) would be allowed to be released and exported without review, and be released from export control.
BSD vs GPL aside, I see this as a great advantage now to Open Source'd software within the US, this opens the playing field a bit more and gives companies a reason to use this type of software. Coupled with the advantages of BSD licensed software in general, I think that this might even give an edge to BSDL software over GPL, but your assumptions about GPL'd software not being exportable under these new "rules" is not correct. -Pat
This is a great idea. I'm not even one with a DVD player, just a vested interest in what this case represents. Open Source and innovation should not be stifled. In this particular case, the DVD CCA was shooting themselves in the foot. BSD and Linux users (as well as other unix-like OS's) deserve to watch DVD's too. This is another example that ignoring a signifigant part of the market has brought pain on a consortium or commercial entity. I have decided to mirror DeCSS and related programs on principle. I hope others will follow suit.
Trust someone who is not an accountant to write Tax Software? the big problem here is that accountants and the consultants that help these companies write these products are Windows creatures. I would however think that one of these companies would write a linux/bsd version (maybe use Twine to compile it? make it easy for them?) just to capture this part of the market. But I'm sure it wouldn't be free, or even close to GPL'd =)
I think its all a matter of tuning. out of the box, pretty much all kernels have "shitty" performance. The other thing to keep in mind is that SMP on FreeBSd is still young, remember , Linux SMP pretty much sucked until they got all the bugs worked out (and its still not like the SYSV SMP stuff). FreeBSD is a long way behind that. Just because an implemetation is young, doesn't mean its gonna suck forever. and yes, even by the Linux people's admission (at least people I've talked to , BSD has a more stable networking implementation, but again, compared to BSD, Linux is *young* -P
But given that the NetBSD folks are geniuses at these sort of things, I'm sure it will be along soon;) Evidently theres rumours of a Dreamcast port of NetBSD as well, whee!#@$!
Slashdot Mirror
As a longtime advocate of the free BSD's I have a few views I'd like to express.
;)
If Jordan thinks this is a good thing, I've know jkh long enough to know, that while he is human, generally he considers long term implications of things. the BSD's now have a commercial backing. Walnut Creek, while having funded FreeBSD developnment for a while, did not have the commercial power of BSDi.
Also, this signals the change in strategy for BSDi, instead of keeping things relatively closed, most things being distibuted by BSD Inc. will be Open Source. However I wonder about the funding of Slackware development, but I'm sure provisions have been made.
This was bound to happen, Kirk Mc. has been involved with both FreeBSD and BSDi, and it was just a matter of time before something like this happened.
I personally will wait to see what happens. while I trust jkh's judgement, I also reserve the right to be cautious
lets hope this *does* turn out to be for the best.
-Pat
Yes, you are correct sir! (in my best Ed McMahon voice)
However, there is work being done on finer grained SMP support. All SMP usually starts out at the gigantic kernel lock. Look for the future. However if its processor scalability you look for, Linux isn't even the way to go (although if you need Open Source, well it *is*), but SYSV based OS's like SCO UnixWare or Solaris. BSD's strength is in networking.
The real reason Lucent chose FreeBSD was probably licensing, and the fact that FreeBSD is generally used more commercially then Net or Open BSD's anyway. OpenBSD is getting there though =)
-Pat
Its EXTREMELY BSD. the BSDL essentially says "you can take this source code, modify it, and relicense it, as long as you indemnify the original authors and give due credit"
This is prefectly within anyone's rights, in fact, the BSD community ENCOURAGES this type of thing.
Remember, us as BSD developers want to make money off our code, and be compensated for time spent. The Bell Labs/Lucent people have spent alot of time and money into these modifications. If you don't like the licensing terms, you can take the FreeBSD 3.4 code and modify it yourself, OR just simply not use it.
The GPL has nothing to do with this. the GPL is a completely different license, that does not allow for this type of thing. Had it allowed for modification and sale of Linux source, then Lucent *might* have used that instead.
Remember, each license has a different goal in mind. the GPL is "Viral" and is inherited by its children. The BSDL only effects one generation unless the person modifying also applies the BSDL.
-Pat
I fail to see how Northwood would be a direct competitor to a "chameleon" such as Crusoe. When I read the information on Crusoe, I was astounded.
Intel is making this type of announcement, frankly because they see the death of thier mobile processors. And evidently with the unvieling of actual working IA64 machines...why would they even bother with more IA32 stuff?
I'd like to know what Intel is thinking. Are they truly worried, or does it just look like it?
-Pat
About the only newgroup I read anymore is the occasional visit to the Monastery (for those who don't know which newsgroup I'm talking about, good ;))
I've found that even there, the signal has dropped, although I still get my laugh and my recovery when I do.
However, not to sound snobbish, but I completely agree, USENET should be the last holdout for us "midtimers" and "oldtimers"
-Pat
You'll find that the majority of Free/Net/OpenBSDers are not anti-linux, we have our preferences. Just because of a few vocal people, that are anti-linux/GNU you make the generality that all of us are.
theres alot of Linux/GNU people that are anti-BSD but we don't use that to cloud our judgement, we're all on the same team, just different methods of going about it.
Next time you are at a conference, come on over and talk to a BSD person. You'll find its a pleasant experience.
The only thing we get annoyed about is the fact that we sometimes get left out of the large Open Source gatehring type things, and well...we're still large enough (and growing) to have a vocal contingent about it. However most of us are too busy hacking code to complain most of the time.
-Pat
I agree it was sexist, but obviously the target audience was reached. One of those "Daemon Babes" is actually rather technical (and a friend of Mike Smith's) As far as attractive, I dunno, you gotta talk to the little linux geeks that were ogling them the whole time. I wasn;t really paying attention, I was too busy to promoting around the conference. As far as Kirk's sexuality, that personally is not the business of Slashdot, or anyone else, and personally I'm appalled at the fact someone brought it up. While its common knowledge, So The F*** What? Lets keep to the topics at hand. BSD did very well at the conference, I wasn't there for Linus' keynote, as I was at work, but people had a lot of good things to say about our presence. Yes, the booth was an obvious marketing tactic, did it work, yes, did I approve, not totally, not my decision though. I still stand behind all three Open Source BSD projects out there -Pat
Who's to say Slashdot does not have integrity? I mean we may disagree with alot of people who post articles, but to say they have no integrity because VA Linux bought them?
I really don't think they are even going to touch Slashdot, or change how it works. They would be fools. They bought a money maker, they didn't buy a failing business. TOomake editorial decisions on a journalistic site like Slashdot would kill it.
My guess is that when VA needs criticizing, Rob, Jeff and others will be around to criticize. When they deserve praise, they'll get it as well. and that includes every other company and organization in the Open Source community.
Lets grow up people, people wanted Open Source to be viable in business situations, and it now is, now people complain that people are selling out.
I know some of the Slashdot people, and the ones I know have integrity, why not wait and see what actually happens before deciding they have no credibility.
-Pat
While I understand the reasoning, I don;t particularly agree. This is probably about the only forum the BSD's will get at this conference, as its LinuxWorld. However, I wouldn't publicize it at USENIX or anywhere else.
and Yes, its BSD news, Nik posts what he thinks is BSD news, and a BoF at a Linux dominated conference is definitely it.
-Pat
As one of the sponsors of this BoF (I am the founder of the BSD Users of New York), I don't understand why it always has to be BSD vs. Linux.
/. In the comments, several StarMedia employees, including myself, made reference to BSD's high perfomance under network load. None of us here are against linux.
Approximately a week ago, there was an interview with Larry Augustin posted to
In fact, BUNY has cooperated with LUNY, LXNY, and NYLUG on a number of occasions here in NY. There seems to be no rivalry here. We have *preferences*.
So people, lets stop the BSD/Linux Flamewar, lets stop the mockery, lets stop criticizing. Its all about tools. I prefer BSD tools, you may prefer GNU/Linux tools.
My dad prefers Makita, and his friend prefers Craftsman...so what?
So anyone who wants to know what its really about, I invite you to show up.
If you are that closeminded as to not learn something, thats *your* problem, not mine.
-Pat
BOF stands for "Birds of a Feather" its essentially a "special interest meeting"
anyone who's been involved in USENIX related activities would know.
wow, I've been slashdotted!!
here, here! As one of Ryan's colleagues I can attest to that, VA hardware rocks, but FreeBSD is what we use. Its not that we're OS bigots. Its the fact that FreeBSD handles the job we need it to do, where linux doesn't and wouldn't.
Long Live Chuck!
Brett,
While I understand your reasons for not liking the GPL, I cannot understand where out of this clause you got that idea. it says and I quote, "not subject to an express agreement for the payment of a licensing fee or royalty for commercial production *or* sale of any product developed using the source code" (anything that is derived from this, I would assume even some commercial products such as RedHat or IBM's Interjet, fall under this category) would be allowed to be released and exported without review, and be released from export control.
BSD vs GPL aside, I see this as a great advantage now to Open Source'd software within the US, this opens the playing field a bit more and gives companies a reason to use this type of software. Coupled with the advantages of BSD licensed software in general, I think that this might even give an edge to BSDL software over GPL, but your assumptions about GPL'd software not being exportable under these new "rules" is not correct. -Pat
This is a great idea. I'm not even one with a DVD player, just a vested interest in what this case represents. Open Source and innovation should not be stifled. In this particular case, the DVD CCA was shooting themselves in the foot. BSD and Linux users (as well as other unix-like OS's) deserve to watch DVD's too. This is another example that ignoring a signifigant part of the market has brought pain on a consortium or commercial entity. I have decided to mirror DeCSS and related programs on principle. I hope others will follow suit.
Trust someone who is not an accountant to write Tax Software? the big problem here is that accountants and the consultants that help these companies write these products are Windows creatures. I would however think that one of these companies would write a linux/bsd version (maybe use Twine to compile it? make it easy for them?) just to capture this part of the market. But I'm sure it wouldn't be free, or even close to GPL'd =)
I think its all a matter of tuning. out of the box, pretty much all kernels have "shitty" performance. The other thing to keep in mind is that SMP on FreeBSd is still young, remember , Linux SMP pretty much sucked until they got all the bugs worked out (and its still not like the SYSV SMP stuff). FreeBSD is a long way behind that. Just because an implemetation is young, doesn't mean its gonna suck forever. and yes, even by the Linux people's admission (at least people I've talked to , BSD has a more stable networking implementation, but again, compared to BSD, Linux is *young* -P
But given that the NetBSD folks are geniuses at these sort of things, I'm sure it will be along soon ;) Evidently theres rumours of a Dreamcast port of NetBSD as well, whee!#@$!