Questionable statement in article

[Glenn Sieb]

Remko Lodder said the following on 8/8/2004 4:43 PM:

> But this only holds as long as code(bsd) > code(linux) to begin 
> with.... no? Do we know for a fact that code(bsd) > code(linux)? I 
> know I've been hard pressed to find software from vendors that was 
> marketed as being developed for BSD, as opposed to Linux or Solaris, 
> etc....
>
> You dont see the point i think, BSD can execute it's own code, and 
> thus any software written for BSD itself, AND it has the power to 
> execute Linux code, so that makes
>
> BSD (BSD+Linux) vs Linux (Linux)
>
> And since there is at least one product more on BSD then for Linux it 
> is a correct statement....

I guess my point was lost as well... I don't see development happening
(other than system development, such as the OS) happening in BSD.

I don't see vendors saying "This product will run on BSD" I see "This
product will run on RedHat Linux Enterprise Edition, etc etc"

:-/

(Do not read me wrong--I love FBSD, and have been an instant convert
since 2000 version 4.1 ;).. I just wish it was easier to find commercial
applications that would run under it. Having to spend $2500 or whatever
it was for RedHat Enterprise so I could run Oracle Collaboration Suite
was just wrong on so many levels :-/ )

Best,
G.