4 ms·

FreeBSD must be pulling a very long con, then.

znpy 1y ago
Uh, yes? Half of the initial mac os x kernel was ripped off freebsd, giving pretty much nothing back. Afaik netapp is also basing their system on bsd. Sony uses freebsd as the OS for their playstation. And many more, giving essentially nothing back.
- hedora 1y ago
  Regarding apple: They support cups and clang, and stuff like swift and webkit. Also, the darwin kernel is open source. I’d be shocked if netapp hard forked bsd and doesn’t upstream fixes.
  - oynqr 1y ago
    They support the version of cups that nobody uses anymore, except themselves.
  - jollyllama 1y ago
    ONTAP is a fork of BSD (dunno if they upstream or not) and NetApp are far from the only ones in the storage sector who have done this.
- voidspark 1y ago
  > Half of the initial mac os x kernel was ripped off freebsd, giving pretty much nothing back. That is open source. https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/distribution-macOS https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/distribution-macO... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU
- spauldo 1y ago
  You'll notice the FreeBSD folks don't seem to be particularly bothered by this. FreeBSD loses nothing to Apple or NetAPP. This attitude of "OMG you're being ripped off" any time a company incorporates code from a BSD/MIT/whatever licensed project baffles me.
hedora 1y ago
Yeah. I think project governance matters more than license, and the BSDs are great examples. Having said that, I’ve soured on the GPL. V3 more-or-less bans companies from selling you hardware that runs free software, but lets Google, Meta, etc use the software to expand their cloud-based monopolies where surveillance capitalism and enshittification have won out. AGPL or BSL seem much better if you want free as in freedom. BSD and Apache at least don’t force your software off of machines that end users control. Yes, BSL is not open (TM) or free (TM) or whatever. It’s still better IMHO, since it at least has some path to revenue for the developers.
- pas 1y ago
  Are there AGPL or BSL success stories? (Ie. projects that started as such and became/remained sustainable?)
  - znpy 1y ago
    The whole Grafana ecosystem afaik. They are thriving as a company and they don’t risk amazon or some other company coming in and selling a forked version of their software (see redis/valkey, elasticsearch/opensearch, etc)
  - TuxSH 1y ago
    A little off-topic but a few companies (e.g. Aerospike) use AGPL in the free versions of their paid products to avoid getting leeched off.

znpy 1y ago

Uh, yes? Half of the initial mac os x kernel was ripped off freebsd, giving pretty much nothing back. Afaik netapp is also basing their system on bsd. Sony uses freebsd as the OS for their playstation. And many more, giving essentially nothing back.

hedora 1y ago
Regarding apple: They support cups and clang, and stuff like swift and webkit. Also, the darwin kernel is open source. I’d be shocked if netapp hard forked bsd and doesn’t upstream fixes.
- oynqr 1y ago
  They support the version of cups that nobody uses anymore, except themselves.
- jollyllama 1y ago
  ONTAP is a fork of BSD (dunno if they upstream or not) and NetApp are far from the only ones in the storage sector who have done this.
voidspark 1y ago
> Half of the initial mac os x kernel was ripped off freebsd, giving pretty much nothing back. That is open source. https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/distribution-macOS https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/distribution-macO... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU
spauldo 1y ago
You'll notice the FreeBSD folks don't seem to be particularly bothered by this. FreeBSD loses nothing to Apple or NetAPP. This attitude of "OMG you're being ripped off" any time a company incorporates code from a BSD/MIT/whatever licensed project baffles me.

hedora 1y ago

Yeah. I think project governance matters more than license, and the BSDs are great examples. Having said that, I’ve soured on the GPL. V3 more-or-less bans companies from selling you hardware that runs free software, but lets Google, Meta, etc use the software to expand their cloud-based monopolies where surveillance capitalism and enshittification have won out. AGPL or BSL seem much better if you want free as in freedom. BSD and Apache at least don’t force your software off of machines that end users control. Yes, BSL is not open (TM) or free (TM) or whatever. It’s still better IMHO, since it at least has some path to revenue for the developers.

pas 1y ago
Are there AGPL or BSL success stories? (Ie. projects that started as such and became/remained sustainable?)
- znpy 1y ago
  The whole Grafana ecosystem afaik. They are thriving as a company and they don’t risk amazon or some other company coming in and selling a forked version of their software (see redis/valkey, elasticsearch/opensearch, etc)
- TuxSH 1y ago
  A little off-topic but a few companies (e.g. Aerospike) use AGPL in the free versions of their paid products to avoid getting leeched off.