At 07:36 PM 12/25/2000, Wes Peters wrote:

>It would seem that Brett has not learned the lesson "any press is good press
>so long as they spell your name right."

Well, as someone has already pointed out, "O BSD" is not the correct
spelling. ;-)

Seriously: all press is not good press. Look at what happened
to Emulex not long ago!

>Brett, you know they founded LinuxWorld to give Petreley a chance to strut
>his stuff, to become the John Dodge of the Linux community.  What did you 
>expect?  The whole magazine reeks of the Linux kiddy "neener neener"
>philosophy, because that's their target audience.

Agree 100%. (See, I don't disagree with you about EVERYTHING.)

But in InfoWorld Petreley reaches powerful and influential
IT managers. Folks with money to command. He's pushing them to
adopt Linux and stay far away from the BSDs.

Companies such as yours will benefit if the folks that read
InfoWorld adopt the BSDs, because they'll funnel more money and
manpower into the development of all three of the freely
redistributable BSD implementations. What's more, you'll gain
cachet because you can say that your boxes have "BSD inside."

--Brett

P.S. -- By the way, the paper I presented at BSDCon is being 
Slashdotted tonight, which I hope will bring the BSDs some
serious good publicity. The effect on network activity is
quite amazing. But the FreeBSD box that's running the Web 
server -- antique hardware though it is -- is running at a 
low CPU load and handling the onslaught without breaking a
sweat. This has got to be a serious testimonial for BSD.