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

You're right. It's supposed to be "O, Tannenbaum" <g>.

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

Incidents. Look at what happenned to Micro Soft! And I don't mean the
current hoopla, that they did to themselves. When you walk the line
you'd better be stable. (Hey, there's a joke in there somewhere :).

> ...
> 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.

Does not every action have an equally powerful reaction? Let's start
with assuming that the Powers that Be have - think IBM - so far 
strayed from the One True Path that they couldn't recognize an One
True Path if They tripped on, or over, it. Could then not steering
them away from it mean alluring them to it.

Or are you really so cynical as to think that only power-steering
will truly guide them? ;)

> 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."

Only when BSD somehow rings a bell. That means publicity/exposure.
Even bad one. Or in, this case not truly evil one, jus bad as in
Michael Jackson's song "I'm Bad!" ;). And BSD *is* Bad in that
sense.

> ... -- 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.

Only if you shout it from the rooftops. What they don't know
will not illuminate them.

Roelof

-- 
Nisser home -- http://www.Nisser.com/