The Lawsuit was a big factor. It was more complex than most people realize and it was unclear for some time where it left the open source BSDs: Were we covere

The Lawsuit was a big factor. It was more complex than most people realize and it was unclear for some time where it left the open source BSDs: Were we covered or not ? One way or the other, we got sent back to "Start" (Do not collect...), and had to spend a number of months to get from Net/2 (once it were ready) to a working system. And it didn't really help either that the 386BSD people felt we stole their thunder, that caused some low-level frictioon and copyright uncertainties. But I think the biggest reason FreeBSD "did not become Linux" is that we didn't want it to. We were all UNIX veterans, we wanted something stable, reliable and fast - hence the tagline "FreeBSD - The power to serve" Linux back then, less so now, was a paradise for hackers and experimenters, people wrote 60% of a device driver for all sorts of crappy hardware and had endless fun with it. I used a car comparison a lot in those days: Linux is an open GTI, FreeBSD is a 18-wheeler truck. The GTI is no good for haulin' - the truck is no fun for cruzin' Amongst other differences, that gave Linux a much bigger mindshare in universities and dorm rooms, but then, as now, people get to a certain age and just want things to work.