[nycbug-talk] "every bit as good as Linux"
O_Sleep
o_sleep
Tue Sep 28 13:02:45 EDT 2004
If more publicity means I can use oracle on freebsd, then I am for more
publicity.
-Bjorn
On Sep 28, 2004, at 11:26 AM, Matt Juszczak wrote:
> Do we really _want_ all this publicity though? My idea of the BSD's
> is this: a *NIX for people where Linux doesn't work for them. If
> people use linux and it just doesn't work for them, they'll look for
> something else. Until then, my personal opinion is, as much as I don't
> prefer linux myself, for the average Windows 2000 net admin who wants
> a bit more security, linux can provide them with a stable *NIX, with a
> lot more user-friendly atmosphere. I don't have a single linux box
> (like I said, it drives me crazy and I don't like it)... FreeBSD is
> definitely my favorite. But if people use Linux and really want
> something different, then they will learn about the BSD's, just like
> the rest of us did...
>
>
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Dru wrote:
>
>>
>> Okay, I finally have a few minutes to put in my 2 cents regarding
>> this article.
>>
>> We all know the premise of the article is ridiculous. Heck, I'm not
>> even a programmer yet I can recognize the argument is technically
>> flawed. However, the writer knows something which the BSD community
>> isn't capitalizing on: FUD works, readers aren't necessarily
>> technically minded or even interested in technical accuracy, and
>> people remember what they see and hear, even if it's incorrect.
>>
>> I'm not advocating the use of FUD. (frankly, BSD doesn't need to
>> resort to it). However, the BSD community is missing the boat on
>> exposure. This article, even though poorly written, is in a major
>> publication. It's been read and retained by 1000s of readers who
>> don't have the technical savvy to realize how poorly it is written.
>>
>> What can we do about it? I see 3 things, 2 of which aren't effective:
>>
>> 1. Talk about it amongst ourselves. While it feels good to vent, we're
>> preaching to the choir.
>>
>> 2. Put in a rebuttal. If you're lucky, you'll get a one-liner buried
>> somewhere in the publication. Newspapers have been using this
>> technique
>> forever: publish something excitingly inaccurate on the first half
>> of
>> the front page and disclaim it the next day in a close to the back
>> page
>> one-liner. Guess which one people remember? Worse, the
>> rebuttal/disclaimer
>> is a _negative_ which puts the person who wrote it on the defensive.
>>
>> 3. Take a more indirect, offensive approach. Rather than deal directly
>> with _this_ article, write an article that showcases what you want
>> and
>> get it published in a major magazine. Something like the Brett
>> Glass one
>> referred to by Ike. Great article, great venue, but how many of
>> these
>> have we had since 2002? We'd be lucky to count them on one hand! And
>> Daemonnews, while a great resource for us BSDers, doesn't count
>> here.
>>
>> Do you guys see my point? We're outstanding when it comes to quality
>> software and quality technical documentation. We suck when it comes
>> to marketing. Where are the BSD case studies? How many major mags
>> have at least one BSD related article per month? And I'm not talking
>> just techno mags. What about mags read by CIOs, CSOs, accountants,
>> bankers, government, gamers, arts people, etc. We have a huge
>> potential audience who has never even _heard_ of BSD. Betcha they've
>> heard of Linux, though, even if they never have the intention of
>> using it.
>>
>> As an example, Ike's email is an article begging to be published in
>> say, Sysadmin or Software Development magazine. Most of us have day
>> to day dealings with non-techies. What magazines do these people
>> read? Have you been banging your head against the wall convincing,
>> say, an accountant client to switch to BSD? What mags does your
>> accountant read? Have those mags _ever_ had a BSD related article in
>> them? Guaranteed those mags have nice glossy ads from major software
>> vendors and the occasional article on the advantages of using a
>> particular non-open source accounting application.
>>
>> Dru
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Isaac Levy wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> Can someone say POSIX? Or um, Berkeley Software Distribution?
>>> It seems to me, ironically, that this 'Linux Base Standard' feels a
>>> lot like what BSD was before it was a full-blown OS... folks, this
>>> has all happened before. Too bad this tech-writer printed nearly
>>> slanderous misinformation about the OS family that was at the
>>> ancient root of interoperability in computing.
>>> "BSD stands for "Berkeley Software Distribution," the name first
>>> given to the University of California at Berkeley's own toolkit of
>>> enhancements for the UNIX operating system. Created by the students
>>> and faculty, BSD was not part of UNIX itself, which was created by
>>> Bell Labs. Rather, it was a widely distributed package of software
>>> enhancements for UNIX -- a supplement that made the operating
>>> system, which was originally strictly a research vehicle, useful in
>>> the real world."
>>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C1558%2C555398%2C00.asp
>>> On Sep 16, 2004, at 4:30 PM, michael wrote:
>>>> Linux Standard Base Is Exactly What Platform Needs
>>>> By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
>>>> September 15, 2004
>>>> "Take, for example, the open-source BSD operating systems: FreeBSD,
>>>> OpenBSD and NetBSD. They're all good. You can argue, as I have,
>>>> that in
>>>> some ways they're every bit as good as Linux, if not better.
>>>> Then why aren't more people running them? Why do we have a Linux
>>>> Magazine but not a BSD Magazine? Well, it's simple, there are three
>>>> of
>>>> them. "
>>> It goes on right after that to state something I can seriously
>>> dispute below:
>>> "There are some open-source applications, such as Apache and Samba,
>>> that will run on all of them. But if you want to make the most of
>>> each one, you need to write an application that will take advantage
>>> of their unique virtues. For most software development companies, or
>>> even most open-source programmers, that's just too much trouble for
>>> too small a potential market."
>>>> Say What!?! Yea, really... read the rest:
>>>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1646495,00.asp
>>> WTF? Write an application to take advantage of their unique
>>> virtues? I just don't understand where this guy is coming from.
>>> --
>>> OK, I really just wanted to get it up somewhere online here, that
>>> this writer is simply foolish, and here's why:
>>> I'm a web application developer who works with Zope. For those who
>>> don't know it, it's a huge open source application server, with
>>> nearly the complexity of a small operating system, that lives often
>>> in the realm of large enterprise software. In my life as a Zope
>>> developer, I invariably compile tens of dozens of other softwares on
>>> a regular basis, and plug them into Zope in one way or another.
>>> Now also, my work often takes me onto a UNIX which my client has
>>> selected for one reason or another, though I prefer to use the BSD's
>>> when it's my call, BECAUSE, all the software I use and write
>>> compiles the same from one BSD to another, period- and I can't say
>>> the same at all for Linux.
>>> With that said, I install a LOT of apps, all the time, on lots of
>>> Open *NIX's. Portability is very important to me.
>>> For example, in the last 9 months I've built full-blown
>>> Zope-centered systems, with dozens of other supporting apps, on the
>>> following OS's,
>>> For Clients:
>>> - FreeBSD
>>> - OpenBSD
>>> - MacOSX Server
>>> - Red Hat Linux
>>> - Debian Linux
>>> - Mandrake Linux
>>> - SuSe Linux
>>> For Dev/Personal/Fun uses:
>>> - NetBSD
>>> - OpenDarwin (straight)
>>> - Dragonfly (recent release)
>>> With that stated, I'm not trying to puff out my chest or start any
>>> flame wars, but I'm trying to illustrate that I know what the heck
>>> I'm talking about here with a handful of apps portability- and BSD
>>> wins, hands down. Everything just compiles, and works together as it
>>> should- because of the ANCIENT adherence to POSIX guidelines, (yes,
>>> even when it hurts sometimes).
>>> Lets talk Developer time and ROI- the reason behind this article:
>>> On average, off the top of my head, I'd say that my work on BSD
>>> platforms took less than 1/2 the time for the same level of
>>> complexity on Linux- due to portability and compatibility issues. I
>>> deal with too much software to remember tweaks and tricks for a
>>> given OS, and usually never build the same thing, therefore I
>>> encounter new problems with each project.
>>> Most of the rest of that time on Linux is tracking down a missing
>>> library in userland for a given distro, installing things which are
>>> common to one Linux- and not another, and the joys of de-activating
>>> or de-installing daemons, which are often hacked beyond sane
>>> configurability, conflicting with something I'm needing to install.
>>> All of this, with some of the most poorly maintained and most
>>> inconsistent man pages in the UNIX world.
>>> All of that is a waste of time I could spend making interesting or
>>> useful things, while eating away at my client's ROI. In english, my
>>> client pays more and gets less- and I'm bored off my rocker with the
>>> tedium.
>>> I'm not trying to outwardly slam Linux here, as there are some
>>> really amazing ideas and code in there, but portability definitely
>>> isn't one of it's strong points.
>>> This article is a foolish attempt to create buzz about an an idea
>>> from the Linux world, which is an ancient idea in BSD manifest in a
>>> thriving codebase in the BSD derived OS's. BS like this is expected
>>> from the folks who write all that buzz-pulp to confuse and befuddle
>>> IT managers into buying crud they don't need- BUT, when a writer
>>> like this, lazily and rudely prints misinformation that is incorrect
>>> and negative towards the BSD's, the hair on my back stands up, and
>>> my claws come out.
>>> --
>>> If someone wants to flame, I'll simply be sending those to /dev/null
>>> If you have something constructive to say about this, or if someone
>>> can shed some non-bs light on what the 'Linux Base Standard'
>>> actually is, I'm all ears- but this writer sure just did it some
>>> damage- and came off quite historically un-informed while doing so.
>>> --
>>> For anyone interested in more historical information about BSD and
>>> portability:
>>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/html/ch02s01.html#id2886020
>>> It's a fun read about history and process- with a lot of insight
>>> into how open standards evolved. :)
>>> Rocket,
>>> .ike
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk at lists.nycbug.org
>>> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>> % Be sure to check out our Jobs and NYCBUG-announce lists
>>> % We meet the first Wednesday of the month
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at lists.nycbug.org
>> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>> % Be sure to check out our Jobs and NYCBUG-announce lists
>> % We meet the first Wednesday of the month
>>
>>
>> !DSPAM:4156cbb5512388171610842!
>>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at lists.nycbug.org
> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
> % Be sure to check out our Jobs and NYCBUG-announce lists
> % We meet the first Wednesday of the month
More information about the talk
mailing list