4 ms·

You are probably still right but MIT license means that you just won't see what industry uses. Industry has used free BSDs and not contributed in code or money

by dbuder 6y ago

You are probably still right but MIT license means that you just won't see what industry uses. Industry has used free BSDs and not contributed in code or money nearly to the extent that it has for some Linux flavors.

bluGill 6y ago
The license has nothing to do with that. GPL2 doesn't require industry to contribute back either. I decline to speculate on why industry adopts Linux.
- kls 6y ago
  A bit of it had to do with the SCO lawsuits, it had a freezing effect on BSD and it's adoption numbers dropped way behind Linux after that and never really recovered.
  - wbl 6y ago
    That wasn't SCO. It was an earlier set of lawsuits by AT&T because 4.4 BSD had evolved from AT&T unix.
    - kls 6y ago
      Your right, It's been a while and I got the two mixed up. Funny how time can play tricks on memory. It was the AT&T lawsuit. SCO was Linux. Sorry for the misinformation. IIRC Linux had come out a few years before the BSD lawsuit, but I do recall a time when they where neck and neck and BSD started dealing with the legal issues and it just seemed like Linux keep on gaining traction after that.
  - nichohel 6y ago
    The SCO lawsuit targeted Linux vendors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes Earlier a USL (Unix System Lab) lawsuit went after some BSD stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc._v._Berkeley_Software_Design,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc.....