FreeBSD 5.0, GPL vs BSD license (was) Re: [Sussex] From Ball To L inux.

[Geoff Teale]

Neil wrote:
-----------
> I just can't resist...
> 
> apt-get remove gpl
> apt-get remove linux
> apt-get install freebsd

:) 

Happy to see FreeBSD 5.0 was finally released over the weekend, I will be
taking a little look at that at some point in the next few weeks.  FreeBSD
5.0 has been "coming soon" for as long as I can remember - more than three
years after it was announced it's finally here.

I have always been a big FreeBSD fan, one of the reasons I like Gentoo so
much is that it is as close as LINUX gets to the FreeBSD structure - it's
just clean and works.  What stops me from running FreeBSD all the time?  The
problems with FreeBSD for non-server computing are as follows:

1/ Lack of hardware support - this is still limited and will not improve any
time soon, the simple truth is FreeBSD does _not_ have enough developers to
keep up.  The kernel may be very good and be an excellent server platform
once again (now FreeBSD has a solid foundation for SMP at last!), but on
desktops drivers count.

2/ BSD support is low priority for most major applications developed in Open
Source community. LINUX is to FreeBSD what FreeBSD is to OpenBSD and NetBSD
- it sucks the air supply away from them.

3/ FreeBSD falls behind quite quickly - it's the only project I can think of
with a slower upgrade cycle than the Debian project :)  For businesses who
need stability that slow upgrade cycle can be a benefit, but when desktop
development is happening so quickly and businesses looking for the very best
from X-Windows applications just top compete with the established Windows
software, FreeBSD is beginning to look irrelevant on the desktop.  I know, I
know, Mac OSX, but that desktop is proprietary, expensive and probably more
alien to your average Windows user than KDE or Gnome (I'm not saying it's
not good, it _is_ good, but it's not a route a lot of businesses are going
to go down).


Anyhow, all that aside.  Here's a question for Neil.  What I want to know,
is what is the problem with the GPL?  Why do you want to remove it?   Much
as the BSD license that covers the kernel of FreeBSD is less restrictive
(to people who want to profit from others effort) it's worth noting that
FreeBSD cannot exist without GPL'd software just as surely as LINUX cannot.

WHat major benefit could any of us gain from using a system licensed under
the BSD license rather than the GPL? (Discuss).

I wonder how much Microsofts rise to domination would have differed if they
had been forced to spend 12 months developing their own TCP/IP stack instead
of just bolting the BSD one into their OS.  In reality Microsoft missed the
boar on TCP/IP - BIlly G saw no reason to implement it, because, as ever, he
felt he could dictate to his market that NetBEUI was the way to go - when he
realised he was utterly wrong TCP/IP was implemented in a hurry (because
Microsoft could legally use FreeBSD code without any further recompense than
mentioning the fact in the small print of their license) and thus were able
to compete in a market where they had no right to.  It's worth noting that
most of the proprietary UNIX vendors also used BSD code, but at least they
had been onto TCP/IP all the time - if needs be they could have developed
their own TCP/IP stacks, and have them in use around the world, before
Microsoft had even acknowledged the need to do so.  Potentially BSD could
have benefited from it's technical lead in this area, it _could_ have become
the dominant server platform of the 1990's - instead it's become a niche
player with a small fanatical following.  Meanwhile LINUX has grown from
nothing to the biggest threat to Microsoft that has ever existed.

Thoughts?

-- 
geoff.teale at claybrook.co.uk
tealeg at member.fsf.org

"and the mighty multinationals
have monopolized the oxygen
so it's as easy as breathing
for us all to participate"
- Ani DiFranco "Your next bold move"



The above information is confidential to the addressee and may be privileged.  Unauthorised access and use is prohibited.
 
Internet communications are not secure and therefore this Company does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.
 
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
 
Claybrook Computing Limited is a subsidiary of Claybrook Computing (Holdings) Limited
Registered Office: Abbey House. 282 Farnborough Road, Farnborough, Hampshire GU14 7NJ
Registered in England and Wales No 1287205
 
A Hogg Robinson plc company