3 ms·
>Competition is a good thing, so we should consolidate and have less competition That makes very little sense.
by asdasf 13y ago
>Competition is a good thing, so we should consolidate and have less competition
That makes very little sense.
- simias 13y agoThen re-read my comment within the context of this discussion, which is OpenBSD being on the verge of bankruptcy. If I believed all the BSD forks had a chance to live long and prosper on their own I wouldn't be saying that, but right now it seems to me that none of them have any real long time chance to remain generic OS on par with Linux (except possibly FreeBSD but it's not even certain anymore). Linux just moves too fast these days.
- asdasf 13y agoYour comment doesn't make more sense from reading it more often. Saying "because I don't understand how the BSDs work or their development processes, I think they should stop existing to prevent them from having to stop existing" is still nonsensical, no matter how you slice it.
- vidarh 13y agoIt's nonsensical because you misunderstand it. He is saying he thinks two or more of them ought to combine efforts in order to prevent all of them from failing.
- asdasf 13y agoTwo of them "combining efforts" is removing one. That is no different than one of them "failing". That is the point. Contrary to armchair OS designer belief, you can't just say "hey guys, stop working on your project and go work on someone else's because I don't know what I am talking about and think this will somehow help something". Go tell linus to start working on mercurial because you think he should. What is the result of that conversation going to be?
- sliverstorm 13y agoYou have it wrong; > Competition is a good thing, so we should unite bit-parts that are in danger of being stomped out to ensure the dominant player still has competition in the future.
- asdasf 13y ago"Unite bit-parts" is stomping them out, that's the point. Even if you just magically convinced all the openbsd developers to stop developing openbsd and go start working on an OS they don't like instead, that would just be getting rid of openbsd to try to prevent losing openbsd. That makes absolutely no sense.
- sliverstorm 13y agogetting rid of openbsd to try to prevent losing openbsd No, it would be getting rid of openbsd to try to prevent losing bsd.
- asdasf 13y agoBSD stopped 20 years ago, if you are worried about losing it you are a little late. This weird misconception that because openbsd is begging for money that other projects with the letters "BSD" in them are in some sort of danger is bizarre. Inventing a problem that doesn't exist, then suggesting doing something that wouldn't solve it as a solution is simply insane.
- sliverstorm 13y agoBSD stopped 20 years ago I doubt you were truly unable to determine I was not talking about the Berkeley Software Distribution, but the family it spawned. Which leads me to conclude you are being obtuse. For... pleasure? I don't know.
- asdasf 13y agoNo, I am pointing out something very obvious and important that you seem to have missed. A bunch of totally independent, distinct projects don't all vanish because one of them wants money. The entire premise that "BSD" would vanish makes no sense.