How 1-800-ITS-UNIX changed the world [Telecom]

Background: for those who are unaware of Andrew Tanenbaum:

which begins:

" Andrew Stuart "Andy" Tanenbaum is a professor of computer science " at the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam in the Netherlands. He is " best known as the author of MINIX, a free Unix-like operating " system for teaching purposes, and for his computer science " textbooks, regarded as standard texts in the field. He regards " his teaching job as his most important work.

An interview several days ago with Andrew Tanenbaum can be read here in English:

Several interesting passages in the interview caught my eye:

" The reason MINIX 3 didn't dominate the world has to do with one mistake " I made about 1992. At that time I thought BSD was going to take over " the world. It was a mature and stable system. I didn't see any point in " competing with it, so I focused MINIX on education. Four of the BSD " guys had just formed a company to sell BSD commercially. They even had " a nice phone number: 1-800-ITS-UNIX. That phone number did them and me " in. AT&T sued them over the phone number and the lawsuit took 3 years " to settle. That was precisely the period Linux was launched and BSD was " frozen due to the lawsuit. By the time it was settled, Linux had taken " off. My mistake was not to realize the lawsuit would take so long and " cripple BSD. If AT&T had not brought suit (or better yet, bought BSDI), " Linux would never have become popular at all and BSD would dominate the " world. " " Now as we are starting to go commercial, we are realizing the value of " the BSD license. Many companies refuse to make major investments in " modifying Linux to suit their needs if they have to give the code to " their competitors. We think that the BSD license alone will be a great " help to us, as well as the small size, reliability, and modularity.

and

" No, Linux "succeeded" because BSD was frozen out of the market by AT&T " at a crucial time. That's just dumb luck. Also, success is relative. I " run a political website that ordinary people read. On that site " statistics show that about 5% is Linux, 30% is Macintosh (which is BSD " inside) and the rest is Windows. These are ordinary people, not " computer geeks. I don't think of 5% as that big a success story.

and especially this little gem:

" Also noteworthy is that Google and others are putting a huge effort to " remove much of the code from the Linux kernel and replace it with BSD " code in userland, both to make it simpler and get rid of the GPL.

***** Moderator's Note *****

I once worked for a company that is "well known" in the SCADA space, and soon realized that they were rebranding Linux to sell to the various utilities that deliver power and water, etc.

They weren't the first: Red Hat showned the world (as did Bill Gates) that the average corporate IT purchasing manager is a drooling idiot. Red Hat drove the first (pun intended) hurd of cattle up main street, by rebranding Linux and adding "license" fees for products that didn't require a license. Now those who were "present at the creation" of Linux are trying to explain away the Open-Source paradigm as an accident that "those in the know" will soon recover from.

Thus always the path of the revolution: it seems that some animals _are_ more equal than others.

Bill Horne Moderator

Reply to
Thad Floryan
Loading thread data ...

The BSDI lawsuit was about considerably more than the phone number -- it was about how much AT&T code was in the Berkeley Unix distributions. The answer turned out to be not much, and what there was could be quickly rewritten, but he's right that the lawsuit delayed BSD long enough for Linux to get traction.

R's, John, long time BSDI customer

Reply to
John Levine

Would AT&T have been prohibted from buying BSDI, either by the court order that broke them up a few years earlier or by the non-commercial license they'd given to Univ of Cal at Berkeley in early days? I thought all commercial Berkeley-style Unixes were licensed by the university.

Having learned SysVRel4 and earlier, Berkeley-style Unixes have always struck me as weird. Also, inflicting sendmail upon the world was evil. I have comments about sendmail exploits, either built in or that I created due to misconfigurations because sendmail is painful, but they wouldn't be good for the children to hear.

***** Moderator's Note *****

Want to borrow my Exim4 book?

Bill Horne Moderator

Reply to
Adam H. Kerman

Having learned Berkeley Unix back in the early days, USG-style Unixes have always struck me as backwards and painful for no obviously good reason.

sendmail is much better if you're not trying to write its configuration in machine language. These days, it mostly Just Works out of the box, just like other MTAs -- but it's good to know that, if you need to do something truly weird, all of that expressive power is still there behind the scenes. (I think it's been years since I last had to actually touch my sendmail config. Probably when I decided I didn't need the overhead of clam in my mail-processing path, since email is no longer the dominant virus-distribution mechanism.)

-GAWollman

Reply to
Garrett Wollman

No prohibition. One of the outcomes of Greene's order (Modification of Final Judgement) was to remove that block from the 1956 consent decree (the original Final Judgement). AT&T bought NCR in 1991 after all. Now the RBOCs could have run into some roadblocks in that time period perhaps.

And AT&T. The BSD license didn't entail any fees and little in the way of conditions.

Reply to
Andrew Carey

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.