The only worthwhile logo-related comments so far....

Erich Dollansky oceanare at
Sat Feb 12 19:59:21 PST 2005


Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 06:10:55PM -0800, stheg olloydson wrote:
>>Core being Core will do what they think is best, and they have every
>>right to. That's not my point. My point is the discussion took place in
>>secret. What I am suggesting is that when certain discussions take
>>place that they be publicly readable.
> Again, FreeBSD has never worked that way, but if you think it should
> then you should raise the suggestion with core.
Could this be the real reason for the "acceptance" problem?

In the same moment, this is also the reason for its strengths. A small 
number of people "controls" FreeBSD giving it a direction they think is 

This concept is what companies do not understand.

If companies use Linux, they do it because it "comes" from IBM or any 
other big vendor. If something goes wrong they go back to the vendor 
with the big name.

I do not see FreeBSD make bigger waves as long as this does not change 
not matter what name or logo FreeBSD uses.

So, why do it then?


More information about the freebsd-advocacy mailing list