Re: newbie's comments on SCO court stuff
From: wally (root_at_localhost.localdomain)
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:43:23 -0500
> I am a newbie to FreeBSD. Actually, only successfully installed it on my
> laptop today and got mouse working! I have to say, my first impressions of
> FreeBSD, compared to linux, are very good. I think I will like it a lot.
You will, I was incredibly impressed... unlike Linux it just works. I had
some very flaky experiences wiht Red Hat 7, Mandrake, and Gentoo. You will
find that there isnt as much discussion about it as Linux, but
documentation is concise. The FreeBSD handbook is a great walkthrough the
major features of the OS.
I personaly have wondered myself why it doesnt receive more publicity,
although i think it does enjoy a somewhat prestiege reputation. I would be
glad to see BSD surpass Linux, however becuase there is so little
discussion about it (this is the only newsgroup on freebsd that my ISP
> Anyway, getting to the point, I was wondering why SCO is only targetting
> Linux and not BSD in their legal actions. Is it just because Linux is more
> widely used than BSD and so more profitable to sue Linux end-users instead
> of BSD end-users? Or is BSD in some way different to Linux that SCO
> cannot say BSD incorporates Unix source code?
> Forgive me if i am wrong anywhere, I am new to FreeBSD and know nothing
> about it (been using Red Hat for a while before switching over).
BSD is an actual descendent of UNIX, it is a recognized as genetic Unix,
just like AIX, Solaris, except that its free.
Linux was indepenetly developed in the 90s (by that fella who had a bit of
time on his hands) to be like Unix, while not quite the same in
implementation. Compatibility is acheived through a standardized API
defined in POSTIX. Recently IBM scrapped their AIX (in which there was
licenced code form the AT&T Unix which is now owned by the SCO), and jumped
on the Linux train. IBM has invested a larg sum of money into marketing and
developing the Linux kernel so that it can be implemetned to more
commercial applications. The 2.4 kernel (i think) had some of the code wich
IBM contributed. The SCO is now accusing that the code that IBM contributed
was actually based on AIX code which has some intelectual property of the
SCO, or some bullshit like that. The SCO therefore claims that since IBM's
contribution, Linux now contains their intellectual property. I might be
wrong but i think that BSD branched before the SCO's intellectual property
comes in effect, so it is not affected.
As well, when speaking of BSD popularity, keep in mind that MacOS X is also
a BSD OS (Darwin kernel is supposedly based on FreeBSD), and in my opinion
Apple has alwyas had a knack for creating very advanced and innovative
technologies (but unfortuanately doesnt seem to be able to market the
right). I am bewildered at apple's success at making UNIX usable, most
MacOS X users arent even aware that there is a shell cosnole.
-my two cents worth of a rant anyways-
"Working with Unix is like wrestling a worthy opponent. Working with windows
is like attacking a small whining child who is carrying a .38."