What is it that makes Linux more popular than BSD

[dodle]

I am curious to know, and hear others' options, of why Linux has become more widespread than BSD.

Was it luck, word of mouth? Is there something that Linux does that BSD does not? Was it the GPL that was more protective (restrictive) of free software? Were it not for this, Apple might have used Linux in place of BSD, right? There are the obvious answers like "Linux releases support for newer hardware earlier", but I'm looking more for reasons of how it came to be that way. Why do more developers target Linux than BSD?

I have only dabbled in BSD, so I do not know much about it? I want to install it on a machine for further testing.

[Bandit]

Dont know a solid answer to give you. Personally I think it was initially hardware compatibility (with x86 systems) and a cool mascot! http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/af/Tux.png/220px-Tux.png

[dodle]

...and a cool mascot!

It's actually funny that you say that, because I can remember looking at some of the BSD mascot emblems and kind of being "turned off" by them.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/55/Bsd_daemon.jpg

[ratcheer]

I tried FreeBSD a couple of years ago. I really wanted to make it work, but it was like pulling teeth to get anything to work, for me, anyway. It was much more difficult than Arch, even more difficult than Slackware. Maybe I am a dummy, but that was my experience.

Tim

[Bandit]

It's actually funny that you say that, because I can remember looking at some of the BSD mascot emblems and kind of being "turned off" by them.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/55/Bsd_daemon.jpg

I always liked the little daemon, but not sure some would fill the same like you mentioned.

Could have just used Hellboy though..

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/5/58504/1157432-hellboy_super.jpg

[dodle]

Could have just used Hellboy though..

I'd be sold, sorry Tux.

[JDShu]

I don't know the history very well - initially there were IP issues weren't there?

I do think the GPL resonates with developers more than the BSD license especially at the time. Instead of hoping people contribute back out of the goodness of their hearts, why not make sure they do? Personally, I'm more likely to contribute to GPL'd software, all else equal.

[dodle]

I've recently been releasing my projects under a BSD license. I have my love-hate relationship with the GPL.


----- EDIT -----

I read this article (http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10things/10-differences-between-linux-and-bsd/1709), pretty interesting. I'm actually starting to wonder if I wouldn't like BSD better. Sometimes incompatibilities between Linux kernel versions get on my nerves. Like when the driver for my webcam isn't released with the distribution and the driver developer hasn't updated the software for the new kernel, aaarg! I'm not saying that a problem like this wouldn't occur on BSD, I'm just saying it's a frustrating part of updating the Linux kernel.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

In my opinion, I think that companies influence the adoption of operating systems and software more than home computer users.

I work for a company that uses a lot of servers and software to manage those servers. Linux, UNIX, and Microsoft Windows are supported on servers and software to manage those servers. Very few of the servers and software to manage those servers runs on BSD. Companies drive development more that home computer user's from what I have seen.

Who contributes to Linux or the software that runs on Linux? Large companies; such as, Intel, IBM, HP, BMC, Oracle, etc. They all have something to gain by providing software that runs on Linux for use by companies.

In my opinion, as home computer users we benefit from the influence of companies. Home computer users don't drive the market when it come to software development on a given platform.

[Bachstelze]

Firstly, "BSD" does not exist anymore. There are a lot of descendents of BSD that use some code from the old BSD, but they are completely distinct OSes (they are not different distributions of the same OS like Linux distros are). That said, I guess we can use the term "BSD" here to refer to them collectively, the same arguments apply to all of them.


Was it luck,

There is certainly at least a bit of luck behind any success.


Is there something that Linux does that BSD does not?

Currently yes, Linux certainly has better hardware support than BSD for example, but this is a consequence of its success, not its cause.


Was it the GPL that was more protective (restrictive) of free software?

I don't think so. The GPL only seduces GNU purists, it is not them who made Linux the (relatively) big thing it is today, it is the corporate backers like RH. I don't think the GPL is of major importance to them.


Were it not for this, Apple might have used Linux in place of BSD, right?

No. Apple could very well use Linux today if they wanted to. Also, OS X uses a lot of other GNU stuff (the gcc toolchain, bash, ...).


There are the obvious answers like "Linux releases support for newer hardware earlier", but I'm looking more for reasons of how it came to be that way. Why do more developers target Linux than BSD?

It is often said the the USL v. BSDi lawsuit drew a lot of people away from BSD. That's probably true, but it can't be the whole answer. When something "wins" over something else, it's sometimes for a large number of reasons that aren't evident. Ultimately, I guess "luck" is an appropriate term.

[dodle]

In my opinion, as home computer users we benefit from the influence of companies.

I agree with a lot of what you said. Which, I think, is why I don't agree 100% with GNU. I would love to see more companies providing free drivers for Linux even if the source is closed (though I would appreciate if they opened up the source when they dropped support). I don't care, as long as my stuff works.


In my opinion, I think that companies influence the adoption of operating systems and software more than home computer users.

In some cases, Apple might be an exception to that. Though, maybe not as much as I think since Apple software is used a lot in the movie and graphics industries I think.

One way to greatly increase the adoption of any OS is to get video game companies to build softare for it. I think SDL ("http://libsdl.org) has the best chance at linking video game companies and Linux, and that will probably never happen.

[dodle]

It is often said the the USL v. BSDi lawsuit drew a lot of people away from BSD.

That's interesting because when I read about that I thought that had I been using BSD at the time I may have been worried about the future of the operating system and started looking for something more stable.


----- EDIT -----

Wasn't there a big lawsuit or something between Microsoft and GNU recently? Microsoft claiming they owned part of the Linux code? Wasn't it Novell that gave into them?

[dodle]

It sounds like switching between Linux distros/versions would be more convenient than those of the BSD variety.

----- EDIT -----

I'm also very interested in the HAIKU Project (http://haiku-os.org), though it isn't very far along in development yet.

[Bachstelze]

It sounds like switching between Linux distros/versions would be more convenient than those of the BSD variety.

What do you mean by that? Changing OSes is always a very cumbersome process. But it is true that there is a learning curve when you switch from one BSD to another (since once again they are distinct OSes entirely, they do more things differently than Linux distros which are all fundamentally the same OS).