> GPL - Licensing issues make it very difficult for companies to make enhancements and sell the resulting product.
Amw: Just to be clear, and I created this topic to establish a dialogue on this, but why is this a bad thing? I assume the enhancements that you mean are like the way OS X modified FreeBSD and then sold it? The way its written now, I can picture visitors saying: "I don't care if its difficult for companies to sell it." Webfork
- Good and bad are highly relative anyways. I agree it could be more clear, for example with the example you provided. Or by linking to GPL/Issues instead of using Linux. Because the 'problem' lies in GPL.
- Also, i thought Licensing issues make it very difficult for companies to make enhancements is actually untrue. Because one may. And then keep it for themselves. Without distributing/selling it. Though one may not distribute it, (ask money for it), with only providing the binaries. --dpi
- I see your point, and it is definitely a GPL issue, not a Linux one per se. That said, it is a significant point for companies who wish to use Linux in an embedded device, or (as you say) build on it to create an OS X-type thing. Certainly many companies are cool with the GPL, but there are also quite a few (particularly in the network device industry) that prefer to work with BSD so they can strip down the kernel and add their own enhancements without having to give those enhancements away to their competitors. How would you suggest that be re-worded? -- Amw
- I made a change, see if you like it. I don't think that Linux's lack of presence in network device industry is making it lose to Windows or is really all that necessary, so it was left out. Webfork