*BSD News Article 56711


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news1!not-for-mail
From: root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson)
Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net
Message-ID: <4akkkj$14b@dyson.iquest.net>
Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin)
Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine
References: <489kuu$rbo@pelican.cs.ucla.edu> <4aa6k2$9et@josie.abo.fi> <4aajus$nd@dyson.iquest.net> <kevinbDJGqtq.Fup@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 19:19:47 GMT
Lines: 39
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.advocacy:30112 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:10317

In article <kevinbDJGqtq.Fup@netcom.com>,
Kevin Brown <kevin@frobozz.sccsi.com> wrote:
>
>End result?  In the free sector, the compiler ends up evolving
>primarily as a result of the needs of individual consumers who
>contract someone to implement the features they need, and therefore it
>acquires the features that the consumer group as a whole desires.
>Otherwise they buy the commercial version and deal with the well-known
>consequences of that.  This is likely to result in a free compiler
>that keeps up well with the commercial versions in terms of truly
>needed features.
>
Except one thing -- assumptions are being made that the GPLed compiler
is "good enough".  It is true that the gcc compiler is pretty good --
but compare it to a Micro$oft compiler on an X86.  It is amazing what
that compiler can do...  I doubt that anyone would want to spend the amount
of research and money required to make gcc do what the Micro$oft stuff
does (if they need to make it public.)  For example, look at the intel
Pentium patches -- they help a bit, but don't really do that much good.

It is my position that GPL hinders in many ways as much as it helps.  In
fact, if I was creating a start-up company -- I would like to keep
things private as long as I could, if I really had something to sell.
It is just good business.  In fact, I could release the source under
contract (or put it in escrow) so that my customer is not left hanging
if I go out of business, but it protects me from another startup.  I see that
GPL can hinder startup businesses significantly.  Yes, there are companies
that make their business supporting GPLed software.  But again,
compare gcc vs Micro$oft C V4.0...  For being proprietary and costing about
$200-400 (I forget how much), it isn't all that bad...  If I had a
revolutionary idea (fat chance :-)), it would *very* unlikely be embodied
in a GPLed document.   And if the software had to be GPLed, I probably would
not waste the effort to do it (If it was complex or expensive in time to
do.)

John
dyson@freebsd.org