🚀 go-pugleaf

adt@netcom.com (Anthony D. Tribelli) wrote:

>Amancio Hasty Jr (hasty@netcom.com) wrote:
>: In article <adtDDqttF.1DL@netcom.com> adt@netcom.com (Anthony D. Tribelli) writes:
>: >Dan Pop (Dan.Pop@mail.cern.ch) wrote:
>: >: ... Without any kind of marketing forces behind it,
>: >: Linux got pretty well spread ...
>: >
>: >If AT&T, Dec, or Sun had come out with a low-cost (<$100) UNIX
>: >implementation for PCs then linux would not have enjoyed much popularity
>: >at all. Very few people care about source code. There was a demand for
>: >UNIX, linux was the first thing that showed up.
>: >

>: Don't forget initially  386bsd  was out there first and now we
>: have FreeBSD and NetBSD.

>A long time ago I bought the CDs for both 386BSD and Linux (they were 
>only $10 each). BSD crashed, Linux installed and worked well. I'm sure 
>386BSD is much better today, but linux is too well entrenched now.

>Perhaps Linux was not the first to exist, but I suspect it was the first
>to enjoy decent hardware compatibility and reliability. 

Linux is of signicant value because others may contribue to it. It is
constantly in development; development undertaken by those who know
best what an OS needs. That said, BSD is very good. I think it's a
matter of taste.