Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

i just ask.

Jun 26, 2005 8:45AM PDT

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
De Raadt is ?difficult? and declined to comment further.
Jun 26, 2005 9:34AM PDT

BSD is an option. You can try it and decide.

Bob

- Collapse -
I agree with Bob...
Jun 26, 2005 10:53AM PDT

If you wish, try BSD and see. There are some dedicated BSD fans on the Web.

However, I am going to add the comment that this guy has a strong bias, based on his own competing project.

His description would make one think Linux doesn't work very well, right? And, reality is far different.

- Collapse -
i'm curious
Jun 26, 2005 2:58PM PDT

what part of his statement is wrong about linux? i know he is biased. but that doesn't cut it.

- Collapse -
biased does not make it wrong.
Jun 26, 2005 9:37PM PDT

Keep reading about the Dr. and Linus and it will become clearer what's up.

You are seeing the war of two camps on the subject of BSD, Linux and nothing more than that.

-> Years ago the same debate was about BSD and ATT Unix. But you'd have to remember it.

Bob

- Collapse -
reading.
Jun 28, 2005 1:12PM PDT

i am a reader. but if i wanted to read i wouldn't ask here.

deimos thanks you.

- Collapse -
robert
Jun 26, 2005 2:59PM PDT

what is your opinion? you don't have to come back with very technical information, but just your opinion about it. is de raadt wrong?

- Collapse -
Some false information...
Jul 30, 2005 6:24PM PDT

Obviously, the guy's very biased. Of course, so am I, being that I'm running Linux rather than BSD lol. Anyway, the article has quite a bit not quite "false" information but spin- misleading. Such as "don't they see how bad it is?" He doesn't list reasons. Also, he doesn't acnowledge that he just credited the whole Linux spirit: if it's broken, fix it, rather than ditching it. They keep working if there's problems, which really benefits all its users.

There are other parts, such as "I think our code quality is higher, just because that's really a big focus for us." "Linux has never been about quality." ROFLMAO! If software development isn't about code quality, I'm really wondering what it IS about. Obviously everyone, even in many cases Microsoft, try for code quality. As for "There's also a difference in motivation. "Linux people do what they do because they hate Microsoft. We do what we do because we love Unix," that's complete bull as well in that SOME Linux users do what they do because of MS hatetred, and some do it out of love for Linux. Often it's part one and part the other. There's a whole very diverse group of people, and what's he's doing is utter stereotyping, and broadcasting his people as angelic.

Last comment:
"You know what I found? Right in the kernel, in the heart of the operating system, I found a developer's comment that said, 'Does this belong here?' "Lok says. "What kind of confidence does that inspire? Right then I knew it was time to switch." Yes, in many millions of lines of code, there's going to be some disagreements. It happens sometimes, Mr. Raadt, and it happens with BSD systems as well lol.

Sour grapes I'd say.