Originally posted by jake_lesser
View Post
Why develop KVM when there's XEN, Why develop XEN when there's VirtualBox, etc.
KVM was developed because a group of developers decided they have a better technological solution to the problems they faced (scratched their itch), even though far more mature solution existed. In the end, they were correct, and KVM, at least as far as I can test, is the better all-around solution.
You can't possibly know for sure that their solution will not hold its ground in 5-10 years time.
BSD's always contribute to fragmentation in contrast to Lennart Poettering and systemd which encourages standardization. You can see the different. Linux is one of the most standardized group of distros around (save for a few) while BSD is the epitamy of fragmentation. Looks like this saying is coming truth, the number of BSD users and BSD distros are converging. When that ratio hits 1:1, it's all over.
B. Linux is just as fragmented. KDE vs. gnome, yum vs. apt, RPM vs deb, vim vs emacs, heck, systemd vs. world. To be honest, fragmentation within the OSS world is a good thing as it breads new solutions, free thinking and competition.
There's a reason for that. x86-64 has rendered i386 redundant. Also x86-64 can emulate i386. You can run an i386 OS on an x86-64 VM or hardware. This excuse by OpenBSD is completely baseless.
Good thing you rarely play with OpenBSD and best of all that you are a Linux guy. But I rather they fail miserably as every BSD related software beings the world more misery.
Heck, I even keep my proprietary software (that mainly targets Linux) compatible with FreeBSD for the heck of it.
- Gilboa
Comment