Why is Linux more popular than BSD?

& Nbsp; thanks to OwnLinux.cn for posting the article "comment: the selection of open-source licenses from the Q q, BSD is relatively unpopular. but is BSD not inferior to Linux? So

 
Thanks to OwnLinux.cn for delivery
I have read an article "comment: from the Q & A contest to check the choice of open-source licenses" which tells me why Linux is more successful than BSD.
Speaking of the Free Software OS, for Linux, BSD is much more unpopular, but the BSD is not inferior to Linux? So what makes Linux more popular than BSD?
Linux is around the BSD lawsuit, and the beginning of the Internet popularity. linux developers and enthusiasts can publish news, post new ideas, ask questions, discuss, DELIVER program code, and return errors in real time through the Internet, this distributed cooperation mode of the Internet brings amazing vitality and unlimited vitality to Linux. the vitality and vitality brought by the Internet is one of the main reasons why Linux has been able to compete with BSD for a long time.

Management philosophy of Linus Torvalds:
Maybe Linus Torvalds is not a talented programmer like Bill Joy (the pioneer of BSD), but he is undoubtedly a top-notch leader. you need to know that not all users can participate in the development of Linux Kernel. how Linus breaks down between these intelligent computer geeks is very intriguing.

Hardware support:
At the time of Linux's appearance, people began to be able to afford personal computers. however, the BSD at that time had poor support for 80386 of the hardware used by the personal computer at that time. However, the average user should not purchase high-price server equipment to play BSD, therefore, if people, especially poor college students, want to play Unix, only Linux is available, BSD is not as attractive as Linux. but speaking of hardware support, in fact, Linux and BSD are just hard to beat, Linux is better, but some are too new and special and the hardware Linux of specific manufacturers still cannot be supported!

GNU's strong support
GNU provides a variety of necessary components required by an operating system, but the most important component-Kernel has been delayed. the development of HURD planned to become the official GNU Kernel has not been smooth, and the emergence of Linux just happened to fill the most important hole in the GNU puzzle. in addition, although GNU's software quality is beyond doubt, BSD hopes that the core tools maintained by their development team can be released in BSDL, so due to the relationship of authorization compatibility, many GNU software have been removed by the people of BSD. therefore, people who love GNU software seem to have no choice except Linux. linux and GNU are inseparable: without GNU, Linux without any tool programs is useless at all. without Linux, the GNU software is missing a stage for full use. therefore, I personally accept that the Linux full name should be GNU/Linux. if we think about the development and growth of Linux, I think this is not too much.

Linus also said that he is not very opposed to the GNU/Linux name. after all, Linux is indeed achieved through many core tools that help GNU. if there was no GNU plan at the time, Linux would not appear in this world at all: when Linux 0.0.1 was published, Linus only completed the following functions: GCC compilation is available, then, all it can do is execute the BASH Shell, and the two tools happen to be GNU works. we can see that Linux had a close relationship with GNU at the beginning.

Churches and markets:
BSD adopts the campus-style school route, while Linux represents the market-style hacker spirit;

Various versions:
The loose structure of Linux is also reflected in the release version of Linux. because Linux does not have any official release version, anyone who is interested and competent can release Linux on their own, this makes it easy to find more than 200 Linux distributions on the Internet, and the actual number is far more than that.

Commercial support:
If we talk about why Linux can quickly enter the commercial market, I think the establishment of Red Hat should be a key factor. for large enterprises, the amount of authorization fees may not be the focus. what they need is a solution that can persuade their superiors and shareholders. with the technical support provided by Red Hat, the information department dared to include Linux in the solution. this advantage is unmatched by BSD with no commercial support.

Media Pushes:
If we talk about representatives in the free software field, I think the list that people will come up with should be Richard M. stallman, Eric S. raymond and Linus Torvalds are indicators. richard M. stallman is recognized as the spiritual leader in the free software field. his opinion has a certain influence on GNU. eric Steven Raymond is the evangelist of hacker culture. he published many articles that have a profound impact on hacker culture, such as the church and market and the wisdom of inquiry. linus Torvalds is the leader of the Linux Kernel project. these metric figures seem to disagree with each other, but they have a common point-they are Linux advocates.

That is to say, when several representatives of the free software community are trying to promote Linux, BSD naturally disappears from people's radar range. no matter how good the BSD is, what people do not know is also unknown.

GPL vs. BSDL:
Richard M. stallman is the spiritual leader in the free software field. apart from initiating the GNU program, he personally thinks that the GPL he wrote for GNU is a decisive factor. GPL is a feedback term biased towards developers: users can freely use the GPL program code, but all modifications must also be made open to GPL, so that everyone (including the original program designers) can benefit from it. this is the ultimate way to ensure that the program code can always be freely used by everyone. in contrast, BSDL should be a kind of free authorization for users: programmers do not have the right to declare that the software is authorized by BSDL. therefore, BSDL software may become closed software one day. for example, Microsoft uses some network components from BSD in the Windows 2000 core, but BSD users do not benefit from this. microsoft does not have to give back the modified program code.

Software support:
Maybe this is a causal relationship, because the BSD family's market share is much lower than that of Linux, and BSD developers are relatively small, therefore, there are a lot of open source code software that lacks resources, so there is no extra effort to put it on BSD, which leads to a lot of software's support for BSD is not as good as Linux. take FreeBSD as an example. freeBSD is a BSD branch developed for i386 hardware. it has been well received for a long time in terms of functions, stability, security, and performance, you can find a "Yahoo! And FreeBSD "to prove this.