Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Wind River lays off FreeBSD developers; Q&A

Nik posted more than 12 years ago | from the been-here-before dept.

BSD 397

SidVicious and Intosi both wrote in with news that Wind River Systems (WRS), who had acquired BSDi's software assets earlier this year, including a team of FreeBSD developers, has laid off those developers. This has also been reported in other places, such as DaemonNews. This raises some interesting questions; for example, what happens to the "FreeBSD" trademark, which Wind River currently own. Read on for Wind River's answers to this and other questions.

In the interests of full disclosure. I'm also nik@freebsd.org, although not a WRS employee. I was employed by BSDi in Europe, before the European team were laid off as part of the WRS acquisition. These questions were answered by WindRiver's PR department.

Q: WRS has already been through two rounds of layoffs in the recent past. Why this third set of lay offs now? Are the FreeBSD developers the only ones affected?

Wind River has only had two rounds of layoffs. During the second round Wind River decided to divest itself of the FreeBSD project. We spent several weeks looking for a suitable corporate sponsor but did not find any company with sufficient interest and financial capability in this challenging economy. This week's layoff of the FreeBSD employees is therefore Wind River's "final option" in executing the plans set in motion by the second round of layoffs.

Q: WRS currently own the trademark "FreeBSD". Do WRS plan to retain the trademark? If so, why? If not, will WRS let the trademark lapse? Or are there plans to transfer it to a third party, such as the FreeBSD Foundation?

Wind River plans to ensure continuation of the altruistic, open stewardship of the FreeBSD trademark. We feel strongly that the FreeBSD project must be protected and encouraged and that a FreeBSD trademark in the wrong hands could be very detrimental. We continue to search for the best solution. No specific third-party has yet been determined, but transfer to a suitable third-party is the leading option being considered.

Q: WRS own the "bsd.com" domain. Will that be retained?

Possibly. Wind River will continue to invest in BSD/OS and participate as a highly interested member of the *BSD community. As such, the bsd.com domain may be important for Wind River. We are weighing this against the needs of the *BSD community and hope to resolve the issue later this month.

Q: What's happening to the "FreeBSD Mall", at freebsdmall.com?

freebsdmall.com continues to operate and take orders, and all new and existing orders from customers for FreeBSD 4.4 or other products will continue to be fulfilled. Wind River is still evaluating its long term options and strategy for the FreeBSD Mall, but plans to maintain its presence and service either internally or externally.

Q: As part of the BSDi acquisition, WRS will (presumably) have picked up customers who had subscribed to the BSDi CD sets of FreeBSD. Will WRS continue to service those customers, or are their subscriptions now cancelled?

Like all customer contracts, subscription orders will continue to be fulfilled.

Q: BSDi (and, it seemed, WRS) had made some headway in producing additional FreeBSD boxed products to go in to the retail channel. Will WRS continue to do this?

Wind River is currently continuing activities to promote FreeBSD 4.4 through the retail channel. Future FreeBSD releases will probably not be produced or distributed by Wind River.

Q: Will WRS continue to produce the usual 4 disc CD sets of FreeBSD, including one for the recently released FreeBSD 4.4?

Yes, for FreeBSD 4.4.

Q: WRS had been funding work on the FreeBSD Handbook, in order to print the second edition in the near future. [ Disclaimer, I'm co-editor of this work, along with your employee, Murray Stokely ] Will WRS continue with plans to print the second edition of the FreeBSD Handbook?

Wind River will encourage any stewards that emerge to take on FreeBSD publication to complete and publish this work.

Q: WRS houses the "FreeBSD Test Lab" at its Alameda campus. Will WRS continue to host this facility?

No. Some equipment from this lab will be transferred to Yahoo! which hosts much of the build structure equipment for FreeBSD, as well as the primary CVS source repository and main FreeBSD mail server. Wind River does not plan to maintain the FreeBSD test lab at its Alameda, CA headquarters.

cancel ×

397 comments

fp? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391235)

for the captain?

Re:fp? (-1)

mackga (990) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391325)

who cares? liz claman will suck my cock on national tv today at 9 am est. she's such a slut, but she's worthy of a
  • troll.

Re:fp? (-1)

(c) Penis (525494) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391401)

For me to poop on!

*BSD is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391472)

Netcraft Confirms: *BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

preface.. (4, Funny)

terpia (28218) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391236)

I would like to preface this by saying that *BSD is NOT dying.
Thank you.

Re:preface.. (1)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391301)

Agreed.

I already saw troll postings saying BSD is dying.

*sigh*

When will people realise the importance of volunteer based in these projects?

ObSidenote: I wouldn't label OP's post as funny.

Re:preface.. (2, Interesting)

draxil (198788) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391337)

Well it's, very hard for these well loved platforms to actually die die. Look at the Amiga nuts, there are STILL releases coming out (believe amiga classic os 3.9 or somesuch) even though the corpse is nearly a decade old, and who knows one day it may even come back to life in the form of this amiga one milarky (given some lightning perhaps)..

And look at BSD in comparison and it's absolutly nowhere near death (strong (fanatical) user base, fairly open etc.). BSD will pull through, becuase there are still shed loads of people using it (and unlike those dedicated amigans you dont need any exotic hardward to run it). Ok you don't have the media honey status of linux but I really don't think that is going to stop the platform riding this out. Ok so a bunch of the developers need new jobs (I see this as the main problem, trademarks and getting people to press the CDs are really secondary concerns..) but with the likes of apple taking an interest in the BSD codebase I can't see that these coders arn't going to be of interest to someone..

And I AM a linux person.. I have only ever installed it once exclaimed "oh thats nice" and then blatted it to make room for mp3s :). See we are not all that non-understanding.. Although to be quite honest what you guys really need is Debian BSD, see no corperate whoring no getting ripped off...

Re:preface.. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391363)

Meanwhile, in television news today it was announced that Osama bin Laden is to have his own cookery program, first up he's going to make the Big apple crumble...

Layoffs. (1)

Neck_of_the_Woods (305788) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391246)

Just wondering but after leaving a project like the ones these developers where do you guys think they will land. Gnome? IBM? RedHat? Some other branch of *BSD?

Seems a waste of some talent, someone here has to have an idea where this level of development team would be headed.

Re:Layoffs. (4, Insightful)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391261)

Your question is kind of irrelevant in a way.

They will not land with gnome, ibm, redhat, or some other branch of BSD. They remain FreeBSD developers, do you really think they will change their aims and goals because they got laid off? They merely had a chance to work on it fulltime compared to the part-time contributions of the majority of us (yes I am a FreeBSD developer too).

They will surely wind up in companies who can use their extensive skills and probably will still be heavily involved in BSD related issues at their next employer.

And then again they may not.

Re:Layoffs. (1)

speedbump (11624) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391459)

Where do the layed off developers go?

BurgerKing

Re:Layoffs. (2)

well_jung (462688) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391535)

It makes sense to me that Yahoo! [yahoo.com] should hire/sponsor them. Y! is built on FreeBSD. Surely Jerry has enough cash laying around to justify a few extra delopment positions. There is not a bigger company that depends on FreeBSD more. I'm actually suprised they haven't yet.

Serious. :)

waaaah! (-1)

trollapprentice (183409) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391250)

How come I have this bad karma? Am I a bad person? If one wants to troll, one should be able to troll.

Cherish my balls! (-1)

(c) Penis (525494) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391409)

I am the pr0stering terrorist. Phear my t3rrorizt skillz! Cherish my balls, cherish my balls!!

Too bad. (-1, Offtopic)

satanami69 (209636) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391252)

Did they remember to get the stock options?

What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (2, Interesting)

Agent Green (231202) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391260)

I'd like to know.

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (4, Funny)

kkenn (83190) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391268)

FreeBSD 4.5

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (1)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391269)

Websites likes DaemonNews and other initiatives will offer CD-ROM sets and merchandise.

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (0, Flamebait)

media.darling (411398) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391285)

Well, according to the news, nothing. I'm assuming 5.x is mostly toast for now, 4.x is supported but not officially developed from now on. I'd hate to say that FreeBSD is dead, but (and this is as a FreeBSD user since 4.0) it appears that the appelation, at least, is dead. Locked up in the hands of WR and not going anywhere. Hopefully, something nice will happen and it will get bought by or transferred to someone of a wholesome and *BSD-tropic nature. Nice to see that BSD/OS is ostensibly going to continue, but what innovations have ever come OUT of BSD/OS? I have been under the impression that BSD/OS is the glue factory for our doddering developments over on the Free side of things.

Anywhoo, WR is gone, long live King Hubbard!

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (4, Informative)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391286)

Do remember that there never WAS nor HAS BEEN any official development of FreeBSD.

It is and will remain a volunteer project.

The matter that corporations decide(d) to employ certain developers full-time to work on FreeBSD was only for the corporation's own benefit.

For god's sake people, it is not like the people they laid off now cease to exist.

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (5, Informative)

reg (5428) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391313)

Hmm, no.

FreeBSD is still very much alive, and development of both 4-STABLE and -CURRENT continue as ever. AFAIK, none of the people being laid off are core team members or even really active source developers. Most of them work(ed) on documentation and improving the FreeBSD product line (CD box sets, etc.).

At the moment the release date for 5.x has been pushed out until late next year, partly because we've lost a few developers to real work, but also because we bit off more than we could chew... Rewriting the kernel for preemptive fine grain threading is a big task.

Other aspects of the project continue to be very actively developed. The Ports collection [freebsd.org] is almost at 6000 ports.

It is really sad to see people laid off, but this is just a side effect of the dotcom crash.

Regards,
-Jeremy

Mod this guy up! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391478)

Mod this guy up!

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391513)

Who's the clueless moderator who moderated that as insightful ?

This guy obviously knows nothing about what's going on in BSDs developments. There are fairly large advances being done outside of any formal infrastructure, and FreeBSD is definitely not the only player out there.

Where does the new dirpref scheme come from ? Not FreeBSD (OpenBSD).

Where does the ftp command come from ? Not FreeBSD (NetBSD).

And so on, and so forth... having WRS stop sponsoring FreeBSD does not mean anything.

The only relevance it has is that some developers are going to only be able to write FreeBSD code part-time instead of full-time. Things are probably going to get a bit slower on that front...

On the other front, the Linux hype has finally made the *BSDs more visible either. I know that, from an OpenBSD perspective, for instance, our team is growing, and the development is speeding up slightly.

No sir, does not look like it's going to be dying anytime soon. In fact, it's MORE ALIVE NOW than IT EVER WAS !

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (1)

dinivin (444905) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391583)


How in the world did you get modded up?

Dinivin

Re:What happens after FreeBSD 4.4 then? (3, Interesting)

b0r1s (170449) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391314)

FreeBSD 5.0 is well into development, and will most likely be finished ...

It seems relatively decent, with no obvious problems...

It's somewhat disheartening to see this the same night I upped my box to 5.0...

jeff@boris [2:53am] ~: uname -a
FreeBSD boris.st.hmc.edu 5.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #0: Thu Oct 4 17:49:06 PDT 2001 root@boris.st.hmc.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BORIS.5 .0.1 i386

Their fault for kicking Slackware to the curb! (0, Troll)

SyniK (11922) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391273)

<TROLL>
I'm a troll. I like Slackware. Slackware rocks my world.
Wind River didn't treat Slackware nicely.
After Walnut Creek CDROM become BSDi and then became Wind River, Slackware got the short end of the stick.
Luckily, Slackware found other means of support (distribution channels, CD pressing, order processing, FTP space and bandwidth) quickly enough to survive.
</TROLL>

No I'm not bitter. I just like Slackware!

Re:Their fault for kicking Slackware to the curb! (0, Troll)

SyniK (11922) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391277)

And another thing!
Doesn't diversification just make good business since? Putting all your eggs in BSD's basket isn't always wise...
Slackware is very similar to BSD (the rumor is Patrick is a BSD lover), they could have hyped Slackware as the BSD user's Linux. But noooooo! They had to tell them to go fly a kite!

Ok, I'll stop now.

Told you so! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391282)

What's that I've been telling you for forever?

BSD is dying.

Oh right, that's what it was.

The bigger question... (2, Flamebait)

The Original Bobski (52567) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391284)

What happens to "free" OS's when corporate greed^H^H^H^H^H financing (the so-called saviour) takes over? Corporations traditionally gut anything not making money - what's to become of the carcass?

The future (1)

Masa (74401) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391287)

This is sad...

But how does this affect to the future of FreeBSD? The FreeBSD is, after all, an open source project and will continue to evolve with or without commercial support. Right?

Re:The future (4, Informative)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391296)

Correct.

We have 5.0 standing for November 2002 [this was changed from November 2001 due to the fact that we weren't quite satisfied with the current state and thought things were missing].

Until we release 5.0 in 2002 we continue to work on 4.x, so we will most likely see 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and possible 4.8.

Releases will very probably be going through DaemonNews, since it looked like WRS shows no interest of doing so after 4.4.

So possibly all of you subscribers might want to look for a new distributor.

fsck (5, Interesting)

Noryungi (70322) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391289)

OK, so it's bad news for FreeBSD.

What I'd like WRS to do is this:
  • Transfer the trademark to the FreeBSD Foundation.
  • Let Walnut Creek become an independent CD-ROM reseller again (I think that small company was profitable before, but I may be mistaken) to ensure the independence of FreeBSD.
  • If they are really serious about FreeBSD, give some funding and bandwidth to the FreeBSD Foundation, and call for other large companies (Yahoo and Apple come to mind) to match their donation.


In short, if they are *not* interested in FreeBSD, which seems to be the case, they should just let it be. As others have pointed out, Wind River was mainly interested in BSD/OS, the closed-source BSD. They have got what they wanted, so firing people makes sense... Unfortunately.

Re:fsck (0)

nvrrobx (71970) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391318)

I would imagine that Apple will be courting those FreeBSD developers now. I think it would be in Apple's best interest, since OS-X uses a BSD kernel.

While I believe this is certainly unfortunate, I seriously doubt it's the end of FreeBSD.

Yahoo is moving over to Netware 6 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391341)

(Unconfirmed report). Does anyone know anything about this ?

Re:fsck (1)

TangoCharlie (113383) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391369)

Apple as a sponsor would be a very interesting idea. It is common knowledge that much of the BSD in MacOS X is FreeBSD, so it would seem to be in Apple's favour to keep FreeBSD going. I would bet that most of the FreeBSD development in the past has been on the x86 platform, and these developers are not going to go out and buy Macs... the only way to keep the input comming into FreeBSD (and therefore MacOS) is to support FreeBSD (I Guess they could be using Darwin on x86???) How about closer links between FreeBSD and Darwin? Let's hope that FreeBSD keeps on moving forward somehow!

Re:fsck (1)

pecka (31619) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391397)

that's true, but the BSD in X is based on release 3.x with HUGE ammount of work done in NeXT. so i don't think that they're so much interested....maybe ripping few pieces here and there. but i think that the main concern in Apple right now is to polish the UI and add none-core features

Re:fsck (1)

pecka (31619) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391370)

...i would like to see FreeBSD on MarsWRS is doing the RT computing stuff for NASA, you know.

I have a very good suggestion! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391297)

Why don't you all suck my dick and lick my sphinctore. Go on, I'm lonely. And sad. Pretty please?

Will FreeBSD become the new Amiga? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391304)

For FreeBSD's sake let's hope not......

No, it won't. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391423)

Since FreeBSD is not hardware, it cannot become the new Amiga.

(Excuse me while I wait 20 seconds to post...)

Re:Will FreeBSD become the new Amiga? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391529)

Become the new Amiga? If you want to be honest, there are more active Amiga users worldwide than there are FreeBSD users. If FreeBSD aspires to be the new Amiga, it has some catching up to do.

Point proven, GPL wins (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391305)

This is a great example of why you should never release your code under the Free Corporate Theft Licencse (Otherwise known as the BSDL). All of the FreeBSD developers have completely wasted their time and effort, as their code has been completely stolen from them, copyrights and all, and locked up and hiden by a corporation.

Hopefully know the BSDL advocates will realise that RMS has been correct all along, and that the GPL & LGPL licencses are far superiour. Something like this could never have happened to Linux. So while the Linux kernel developers are free to continue their work, and Linux users are free to continue using their work, those who were easily lured to FreeBSD have been left dangling.

I should imagine that after this, we'll see all those people who abandoned Linux because they thought FreeBSD was "l33t" come crawling back. Of course if I had it my way I'd deny these leeches access to any form of Linux. Minix is too good for them, these people who bounce about from one "l33t" project to another and have no clue. These easily lead fools who were suckered into allowing their source code to be stolen. The idiots. Well know they've learnt.

well... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391307)

I guess all our *BSD is not belong to wind river..

PR Blabber (5, Funny)

rjamestaylor (117847) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391327)

Q: WRS had been funding work on the FreeBSD Handbook, in order to print the second edition in the near future. [ Disclaimer, I'm co-editor of this work, along with your employee, Murray Stokely ] Will WRS continue with plans to print the second edition of the FreeBSD Handbook?

Wind River will encourage any stewards that emerge to take on FreeBSD publication to complete and publish this work.

Typical PR blather in the answer to this question, which properly should have been, "No." Here's a translation/exposition:
  • Encourage
    Morally, not financially, support. As in, "Go for it! [aside: on your own dime]."
  • Stewards
    An unpaid volunteer; this term is used to appeal to ones altruism; see
    Sucker
  • that emerge
    The current arrangement is finished, something else will have to be arranged without our intervention (thus, "emerge" as if spontaneous)
  • complete and publish
    As far as we're concerned, this project is aborted. Have a nice day.

Wind River: a fitting moniker for a company whose committment has dried up and blown away.

merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (3, Interesting)

Ami Ganguli (921) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391333)

Ok, a silly question from somebody who doesn't really follow *BSD:

Is there any chance of some consolidation in the *BSDs? I always thought it strange that there were three of them, but then I don't really know the history behind it.

I'm all in favour of competition, but four free Unix-like OSs (Linux + 3 * BSD) does some a little much to me.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (5, Informative)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391359)

Please make sure you check your facts.

FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD are operating systems and split off for various reasons and now serve their own niches.

Linux is only a kernel. It becomes an operating system only due to the fact that people created their own distributions.

And if we look at the distributions, there are over 100 distributions (at least).

So ask yourself, which part is more ripe for consolidation then?

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (2)

jgerman (106518) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391417)

Linux is only a kernel


Yeah and a hacker is only a skillful coder. Maybe in the strictest sense that's true, but do to popular use Linux is now an operating system. Although I agree with your point, there's no reason for consolidation, choice is the operative word, the more OS's that are available the better. And IMHO the more *nix OS's the better, 'specially since they're, for the most part, compatible with one another.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (0, Redundant)

Digitalia (127982) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391429)

No. As the prior poster said, the distributions are the operating systems.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (3, Insightful)

jgerman (106518) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391553)

No, as I said he's only technically correct. Linux has become the term for all GNU/Linux OS's, regardless of the fact that it technically only describes the kernel. If/when HURD is ever released it will be the HURD OS regardless of who distributes it. A car doesn't cease to be a Ford just because it was bought froma distributor called AAA Car Sales.


Linux is an operating system, the word has passed into the language with that definition due to use.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (1)

dinivin (444905) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391572)

Linux is an operating system, the word has passed into the language with that definition due to use.

Maybe in your opinion. To those of us who can distinguish a kernel from the rest of the operating system, linux is only the kernel. Mandrake is an OS. RedHat is an OS. GNU/Debian is an OS. Slackware is an OS. But, once again, linux is just the kernel.

Dinivin

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391431)

Yup, and they all still have shite SMP implementations (If they have any at all) and no users.

The real reason we would never see Open, Net & Free consolidate is because their developers are all Holier-Than-Thou fuckheads who would refuse to agree on anything just for the shear hell of it. Especially that De Radt, now theres a fuckhead with an ego bigger than it deserves to be!

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (1)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391578)

Bzzzt.

Wrong.

There's very active communication between FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD on issues pertaining to issues which might benefit all three (such as APIs).

I doubt you ever looked very carefully at the SMP work which is underway, plus I honestly doubt you know the significance of careful coding when moving to finegrained locking under SMP. This task is more tedious than you might imagine.

Of course, if I underestimated your skills, feel free to correct me.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (1)

stefanjo (193215) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391364)

3 BSD's isnt much if you compare to all the Linux "distributions" out there.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (4, Informative)

sql*kitten (1359) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391404)

I always thought it strange that there were three of them

Well, the most basic reason is that there are three different objectives, which aren't easily met in a single operating system:
  • FreeBSD is about the best possible performance on the x86, cross-platform capability is not very important.
  • NetBSD is about being able to compile on as many platforms as possible. This is more important than feature set or performance on a single platform.
  • OpenBSD is about correctness and hence security. I believe they are an offshoot of FreeBSD, but I could be mistaken. They might like cross-platform compatibility and performance, but these aren't the priority.


BSD/OS is a proprietary implementation of BSD by Berkeley Software Design, who's name coincidentally enough has the same initials as Berkeley Standard Distribution. They're a commercial organization, so you get support etc. from them, whereas the others are ad-hoc. This doesn't mean there's no support and no product upgrading of course, just that they tend to proceed according to the developer's wishes rather than contractual obligations.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? + emBSD (3, Informative)

RazzleDazzle (442937) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391436)

OpenBSD is an offshoot of NetBSD. Theo (lead developer for OBSD) had philosophical differences with the rest of NetBSD and thus started OpenBSD. OpenBSD being the most code-audited BSD with some good cross platform support as well.

There is another small BSD offshoot in the name of emBSD [embsd.org] . It is a stripped down version of OpenBSD and its primary objective is to create a firewall and/or router using as little hardware as possible (ideally with not moving parts like a hard drive).

In which case the chosen names are inappropriate (1)

S. Allen (5756) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391461)

This has always confused me as well. If these are the real goals of the divergent branches, why not call them FastBSD, XBSD and SecureBSD respectively... or something to that effect. The current naming system seems like every other abusive overuse of popular catch words: they sound good but they lack meaning and in the end are generally confusing to the public.

Re:In which case the chosen names are inappropriat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391527)

Sure, like you have written enough code to have your say in how *our* projects should be called...

Re:In which case the chosen names are inappropriat (2)

sql*kitten (1359) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391548)

The current naming system seems like every other abusive overuse of popular catch words: they sound good but they lack meaning and in the end are generally confusing to the public.

I think the names were chosen long before anyone considered what the public might find confusing, and long before they were catchwords :0)

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (1)

LatJoor (464031) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391502)

Although the code bases will never be merged, there is code sharing between them. For example, the other BSD platforms borrow from NetBSD when they want to port to a new platform. I don't know much more than that; most of what I know about the BSDs is from their websites, because I've never installed them and I've only used FreeBSD.

Re:merge back to NetBSD or OpenBSD? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391496)

*BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshll hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

FreeBSD will survive (1)

Xiphius (163630) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391334)

FreeBSD has met far greater challenges than this one (check out the history between 1.0 and 2.0 :)) and will continue to leverage a superior operating system.
As i look through the commits, it seems development is even going faster than ever :D
Cheer up guys, FreeBSD will overcome ;)

Hmm, this again. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391387)

It seems to me like most of the things i've seen in the last couple years, especially in the game industry, have sounded like the following pattern:
  • Company of bright people gets bought by larger company.
  • Larger company fires everyone from smaller company.
  • Smaller company no longer exists, nor does their product nor whatever research they were doing.
This just seems awfully wierd to me. It seems to me like you still have the same bunch of people open, aand they collectively have whatever money was used to buy them out; Why don't they just immediately reform back into the company they were? Sometimes there are intellectual property concerns, true, but not if the company subsisted primarily on research or if (like dynamix) they just got completely finished with a product and it was time to start on something else, or if their product is *cough* available under the BSD license. (Except it looks like what happened here was that there was a company that existed to create funding for FreeBSD, and a larger company bought it, took the bits that created funding, and stranded FreeBSD without either funding from them or funding from the funding mechanisms FreeBSD had created.. is this accurate?)

I'm not sure what my question was. I'm just looking for comments on what seems like an odd issue to me, and wondering if anyone could try to show me why that if you're a small company with something actually sellable, it wouldn't at this point be a really foolish idea to trust another company enough to let them buy you. Given that you seem to have little proof that you're doing anything other than quietly signing your company out of existence after a three month grace period. I mean, if you just want to get rid of your products and logo, you could sell those things independently of the company itself.

Unless the reason these companies actually get bought is that some larger company wants to destroy a smaller company before they innovate themselves into being a competitor.

Unless the reason these companies get sold is that the CEO wants to quit, and he can get more money by steering the company into being sold than he can in a severance package.

Someone closer to the industry want to explain to me what is happening here?

Does FreeBSD Foundation get a cut? (3, Interesting)

BMazurek (137285) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391389)

freebsdmall.com continues to operate and take orders, and all new and existing orders from customers for FreeBSD 4.4 or other products will continue to be fulfilled

Like all customer contracts, subscription orders will continue to be fulfilled.

So, WRS has divested the majority of its expenses related to FreeBSD, but will still sell merchandise and profit from it. Anyone know if they plan to contribute financially to the project based upon revenues/profits from the CD sales? Let's Hope...

Re:Does FreeBSD Foundation get a cut? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391408)

Anyone know if they plan to contribute financially to the project based upon revenues/profits from the CD sales?

And likewise, anyone know how on earth they expect to retain any of those customers currently buying CDs if they don't wind up dropping the money from that on the freebsd project?

HP/UX, FreeBSD (1)

aozilla (133143) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391399)

100 or so unix gurus laid of at HP labs in NJ. X developers laid off from Wind River Systems. FreeBSD is dead and/or dying, HP/UX is dying, what is going to happen of the rest? Are these new employees skilled in unix-like OS programming going to move to other unix-likes? Windows? Mac (I guess technically a unix now)? Or will the the tumble merely continue, taking Solaris and linux, leaving Windows and the toy (Macintosh) standing?

As an unemployed unix C programmer, I'm worried.

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (2)

danheskett (178529) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391415)

You should learn Visual Basic for Windows. The market for us is very robust, especially with such
exciting MS techologies in the future.

Oh, wait, nevermind, I am trolling again.

:=]
]

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (1)

Asmodai (13932) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391424)

Get a grip. :)

First of all, BSD is not dying. In contrary it is growing.

Personally having used HP-UX I found it a shame HP is moving to Linux instead of HP-UX [I thought progress was based on technical merit? Seems hype is winning. =( ].

At this telco I work for our back-end systems will never switch to something like Windows. We have major uptimes on the Unix systems which the Windows machines cannot guarantee.

I still foresee a very bright future since a lot of the people around me start to complain more and more about Windows and where we can push Unix by proclaiming its stability and less idiotic licensing costs, we often win the debate...

Don't worry. :)

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391435)

HP/SUX is one of the worst unices I worked with, no wonder it's dying. It's kludge upon kludge.

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391455)

Get a grip. :)

Merely questions. Living in New Jersey and watching the market get flooded with really intelligent people who have the exact same skillset as I is scary.

First of all, BSD is not dying. In contrary it is growing.

My comment was that FreeBSD was dead and dying. It started when the lead programmer and cofounder left to go work for Apple. It continued when 5.0 was pushed back by a year. Now with this news, I think it's impossible to say that FreeBSD is not dying, and personally I consider it dead.

Personally having used HP-UX I found it a shame HP is moving to Linux instead of HP-UX.

Personally having seen the source code and defect lists of HP-UX, I disagree. HP-UX died when they went SMP. They fucked it up big time, and it took years to get it back under control. Years which were wasted as other unixes went ahead. Actually this was largely due to the BSD-style code which was in the kernel (Sys V was much easier to SMPize), but from the little I know about the FreeBSD kernel they didn't have nearly the same problems as HP-UX.

At this telco I work for our back-end systems will never switch to something like Windows.

Your telco could probably use FreeBSD 1.0. I'm talking about the future.

I still foresee a very bright future since a lot of the people around me start to complain more and more about Windows and where we can push Unix by proclaiming its stability and less idiotic licensing costs, we often win the debate...

NT is getting there. I completely agree that unix is a much better product, but so was Beta (vs. VHS). I'm sure that unix will stick around in some form or another. I know nothing about the NT kernel, but I would assume it has a more tightly coupled GUI, for instance, which would pretty much guarantee that unix will always perform better and be more stable. But I don't even know if that assumption is true, and performance at the kernel level is becoming less and less of an issue with these faster and faster machines.

Don't worry. :)

I'm not worried about unix so much as my own personal career. I'm confident that unix will be around for many many many years to come, but how big of a market it will have and how many people will be hired in it. Where are all these laid off people going to go? Let me know at least that so I can put in my application!

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (1)

dinivin (444905) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391598)

My comment was that FreeBSD was dead and dying. It started when the lead programmer and cofounder left to go work for Apple. It continued when 5.0 was pushed back by a year. Now with this news, I think it's impossible to say that FreeBSD is not dying, and personally I consider it dead.

Please take your trolling elsewhere. As long as their are developers working on it (and in case you hadn't noticed, there are still plenty of FreeBSD developers, including the ones that just got laid off), FreeBSD isn't dying.

Dinivin

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (2)

Wdomburg (141264) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391622)

>Actually this was largely due to the BSD-style >code which was in the kernel (Sys V was much
>easier to SMPize), but from the little I know
>about the FreeBSD kernel they didn't have nearly
>the same problems as HP-UX.

Why is it every source I've ever seen are under the impression that HP-UX is (and has been) based on the AT&T codebase (originally SVR2 iirc, currently SVR3.2 with SVR4 extentions)? I would think that the HP/UX instructors and engineers wouldn't lie to me about such things.

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (2, Insightful)

TWX_the_Linux_Zealot (227666) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391457)

If you look at the OSes available right now, you see two basic types, the Microsoft supplied stuff, and the UNIX and UNIX-like types. Yes, there are others, like OS/2, Novell, etc, but the UN*X and Windows OSes have to distinct differences, each with a real strength. Microsoft's is that they've managed to get in the sweet spot as far as licensing and distribution goes, with almost all NEW computers getting their OSes. In turn, people learn to use their OSes first, and those who aren't willing to relearn something, especially something harder, won't change OSes. the UN*X OSes enjoy a different benefit, and one that helps for those who ARE willing to try something new, and that is that many are FREE. I didn't have to go pay $199.99 for my first copy of Slackware, and that gave me something that I could legitimately and legally toy with and not have to worry about cutting a check for each upgrade.

With Apple adopting OSX (which I'm pretty damn sure is pronounced oh-ess-ecks), they've somewhat changed the playing field. One can now have a fairly decent UNIX OS behind the pretty graphics, and never actually have to touch the harder stuff IF one doesn't want to. I had the opportunity to play with the Darwin core for x86 for quite a while at my previous job, and it was not a bad piece of work. There were several things that were a pain, but I never had anything actually crash or die, as well it shouldn't.

I think that the smartest thing that Apple could do would be to release a full version of OSX for the PC. Granted, it would require a lot of work to get it to work with all of the PC hardware that is on the market at the moment, but at the same time, if they could work things out with a large vendor, like Dell or Compaq or HP or something, they could build a standard configuration that would be easily supported, and they could release lists of verified hardware. It would take a lot of work to get that far, but I think it would be worth it, and with the success that I've had with Linux as my desktop, I'd be more than willing to test out another UNIX (functionality-wise) for a different desktop, especially one that was designed for easy to use features. Hopefully, someone will realise this and do it.

Re:HP/UX, FreeBSD (1)

partingshot (156813) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391571)

>Are these new employees skilled in unix-like OS
>programming going to move to other unix-likes?
...
>Or will the the tumble merely continue...

The VAX is dead! Long live the VAX!

hmmm.... VAX.

Stability (2, Insightful)

aozilla (133143) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391421)

This makes little sense to me. The whole beauty of FreeBSD vs. Linux (to me) was the simplicity. I didn't want distros and rpms and a gui install and all the other crap that came with Linux when I was installing a server. How hard would it be to just maintain the current tree and work only on the really important server features, bug fixes, and essential drivers?


I suggest the FreeBSD community forks FreeBSD, GPLs it (possibly with a modified GPL to support the advertising clause, where necessary), and then continues to maintain FreeBSD by porting new Linux drivers, fixing bugs, and if there's enough manpower, adding server-only features/performance enhancements. Yahoo used to run a lot of FreeBSD machines. I assume they still do. Yahoo combining efforts with the FreeBSD community (utilizing the GPL to try to coax a little more sharing) could do it.


I'm going to look into how realistic this (forking and GPLing) would be right after I finish hitting submit.

Re:Stability (1)

LatJoor (464031) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391515)

Well, most of the FreeBSD is very hostile to the GPL (you know, the "GNU Public Virus" folks), so I'm doubtful that they'll fork a GPL'd version any time soon.

Re:Stability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391534)

Most of the BSD community works on BSD systems because of philosophical differences.

We do care about the BSD licence. and we don't like the GPL.

So, what was your question again ?

Re:Stability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391543)

Most of Yahoo runs on Linux now - the whole Yahoo search engine in fact. Hard to admit it, but I think BSD has seen its day.

Re:Stability (3, Insightful)

agshekeloh (67349) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391551)

When I started using FreeBSD in 1995, they were in worse shape than they are now. No commercial support at all, except for one little server donated by Walnut Creek. The FAQ was scary. IIRC, there was no Handbook. And they *still* kicked butt over anything else out there.

And GPLing is not at all necessary. Or desired. Many BSD developers consider the GPL less free than the BSD license. If all your BSD expertise is not interested in GPL'd work, where would you get developers from?

This is a setback, but nothing more. Times have been hard before. They have been good before. They will be both, again and again.

Re:Stability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391592)

Hey, how about fork you and fork your stinkin' GPL license. BSD means freedom and we intend to keep it that way!

BSD Troll, where are you?! (-1)

Trollificus (253741) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391439)

Heh, where's that BSD troll when you need him?

What about APPLE!? (1, Flamebait)

SubtleNuance (184325) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391444)

suitable corporate sponsor but did not find any company with sufficient interest and financial capability in this challenging economy.

Ummm Isnt Apple's OSX built on FreeBSD?

Ahhh the trappings of the BSD license, you do the work - someone else makes money by stealing it.

Think Mach (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391485)

OSX is founded on CMU Mach. That is the core. Layered on top of this are some BSD compatibility libraries which translate Unix system calls to native Mach system calls. On top os this layer is another layer of proprietary GUI libraries which is the real "magic" of OSX.

It is a bit of an exageration to claim that OSX is based on BSD, given its Mach core and its proprietary Apple superstructure.

Re:What about APPLE!? (3)

maggard (5579) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391546)

Ummm Isnt Apple's OSX built on FreeBSD?

Ahhh the trappings of the BSD license, you do the work - someone else makes money by stealing it.

The point of the license is that it *wasn't* stolen.

You many not agree with the author's choices in licenses but please don't accuse others or make up stories. The authors determined what license best fit their needs and goals and Apple used it accordingly.

It's to Apple's credit that they've since maintained an Open Source distribution [apple.com] of this along with paying for engineers to port it to a platform they're not on, hosting the web-site, and keeping it current with their commercial distribution.

Disagreement is a fair thing, misinformation and calumny are not.

Note: You are perfectly free to choose whatever license you like when/if you produce something.

Re:What about APPLE!? (2, Insightful)

jacrawf (691) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391574)

Ahhh the trappings of the BSD license, you do the work - someone else makes money by stealing it.

*shrug* Some people just believe that freedom shouldn't come at the cost of coercion. They believe that their code is as free as it can ever be; and they are right. The code they have written is, indeed, freely available to the entire world. Does that necessarily have to mean that the code someone else writes has to be as well? Should it not be that other person's choice as to whether they want to release their own sweat and blood upon the world in whatever form they choose?

You see, to put it very simply, it boils down to where you want your freedoms to lay. People who choose licenses such as the GNU's General Public License believe that the code should be free, as though it somehow has rights. Or maybe it's just a control issue. "I wrote that code and you have to do what I say if you want to use it! Don't like it? TOUGH! Write you own code then, infidel!"

However, people who choose less restrictive licenses like the BSD license care more about the freedom of the people who write the code. Those folks believe that if you write code, you should get to say what can be done with it, even if that code cannot stand on it's own as part of a separate program. Their code is their gift to the world, and nothing can lessen that gift -- no, not even incorporating their code into a proprietary, closed program. They're glad that that person or company could make good use of what they had written. (And who knows; when the money starts getting thin and the coder needs employment, how much do you want to bet the company who used her code will be a little more eager to give her a job?)

So, is your free software truly free?

Trapping of BSD license (1)

Cormack (526599) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391641)

It is not trappings, it is real freedom. In opposite to strict GPL.

GPL MAKES you to be free. And it is very like to make all people happy (Communism is good example).
Do you like communism? Do you know about ``make all people happy'' attempts in USSR, North Korea and other such countires?

Idiots (3, Funny)

mosch (204) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391445)

Idiots and trolls, please post your 'FreeBSD is dying' messages here, so that they may be summarily ignored.

Hmmmmm, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391487)

wouldn't that be "FreeBSD is dead" now ?

*BSD is dead (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391465)

Netcraft Confirms: `` *BSD is dying''

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

I wish I could say I was surprised.... (2)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391482)

I wish I could say I was surprised by this turn of events, but having the misfortune of dealing with WRS professionally, I cannot. My experience with WRS has been pretty dismal - of the 10 severe problems I've had with their products, their FAEs have solved only 1 for me; all others I have either had to live with or have solved myself. The company I work for has been told "Y'know that version of VxWorks you have licensed? Well, we aren't going to support it anymore, but you still have to pay us for a service contract if you want to continue to ship. Oh, and you will STILL have to pay us a per-unit license fee on top of that. But don't call us with any problems."

When they bought BSD I really wondered what they were thinking, as I was at a loss to see how BSD fit into their corporate strategy. The BSD kernel is much more competent than the VxWorks kernel, but being Free Software there is little value added from WRS - I can just embed BSD and avoid dealing with WRS. If they had a good history of decent board support packages I might see where they would be of value to me, but given how poorly they've supported VxWorks with BSPs, I have little confidence they would really have a benefit for their support.

Now, had WRS been able to buy Cygnus before RedHat, that would have made sense - Tornado (Wind River's VxWorks development package) uses the GCC toolchain, so owning the primary developers for GCC would have made sense. But I cannot see where the advantage to owning BSD is to WRS.

However, this just goes to show the power of Free Software - while WRS may screw up BSD.COM, they can never kill BSD.

#include <std-disclaimer.h>
The views expressed here are mine, not my employer.

Re:I wish I could say I was surprised.... (2)

rtaylor (70602) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391516)

They wanted BSDi which is a commercial and closed source product.

FreeBSD and BSDI (1)

LyNXeD (463123) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391498)

Being a sysadmin, I've run servers on pretty much 3 platforms: Linux, FreeBSD, and BSDI. (Although, even as we speak, our BSDI machines are on their way to being FreeBSD.)

Some of the advantages of BSDI were you could call them for support, they released security patches and fixes (although some required you to have an upgrade contract, and as soon as ours expired they quit even sending us notifications of such updates.) What I didn't like about BSDI is it's closed-source nature, which to me would make it more difficult for developers. Plus, they didn't seem to have very much RAID controller support (at lesat, along the lines of Dell.)

FreeBSD, on the other hand, may not have the "call this number for tech support" (although I am sure someone sells commercial support), but it IS open-sourced and it supports our RAID controller properly. :) I haven't found too many differences between BSDI and it, and actually like FreeBSD better.

We have two servers running our major services (mail, web, ftp, dns, etc.) and both were running BSDI. We recently commissioned a Dell, onto which I installed FreeBSD, and are phasing out one of our BSDI machines. After that, said BSDI machine will be blown away, loaded w/FreeBSD, and will replace the P166 box that is our secondary RADIUS, secondary DNS, and backup MX. (Don't ask - the dual 166 kicked the bucket in June, and the single 166 is what was in the spare parts bucket. We knew it would handle the load, and didn't want to invest in a new box when we'd be getting one in a couple months anyway.) The 166 is running BSDI, and will put back into retirement soon.

But, back to the point. With FreeBSD being open-source, it's open nature is going to allow development to continue. As far as the trademark is concerned, IANAL but they probably only own the trademark to the *name* "FreeBSD" - thus, in a worst case scenario they could probably write a shell script to run sed on all of the files with s/FreeBSD/WhateverBSD/g :)

I will say that I'm much happier now, as on FreeBSD I don't have to have a goofy cron job that checks to see if MySQL is running, and if not, restart it. :) (And, instead of using 80% CPU at peak times, MySQL now only uses about 20%)

Just my $0.04 (still adjusted for inflation)

BSD is dying (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391526)

The point of this post is that BSD is dying. It is important for me to make you understand this. Are you convinced yet?

reflections (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391552)

So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shround over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

Stickers? (1)

helixblue (231601) | more than 12 years ago | (#2391554)

This will probably be moderated as off-topic, but the biggest victim for me to the WRS buyout was that stickers were no longer available..

Does 4.4 come with stickers? Anywhere to buy them individually? My new car is badly in need of them.

Sad day for FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391589)

Makes me sad. I knew things weren't going too well for the last couple years, but there is no end to the bad news.

Oh, well. It isn't healthy to get too wrapped up in operating systems anyway. Other recent events of larger, and more evil scope puts my misplaced sorrow in proper perspective

*BSD is dying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391593)

*BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshll hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

Re:*BSD is dying (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391604)

*BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshll hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

Re:*BSD is dying (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391619)

*BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshll hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

Re:*BSD is dying (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391631)

*BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshll hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

Re:*BSD is dying (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2391644)

*BSD is dying

Yet another crippling bombshll hit the beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] in th recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

*BSD is dying

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...