Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
So you are suggesting them to use an inferior product, just so that they don't have to release their minor modifications to the Linux kernel? Remember they are hardware companies. Their profit isn't on the kernel they are shipping with their routers.
Plenty of higher end networking gear is BSD based, there's really no reason you couldn't use BSD for lower end gear other than your parts supplier might not have ready made drivers or images for you to modify
You pretty much nailed the problem. Board support packages (not just raw drivers) for WiFi router chips are much more available/complete/mature for Linux than for BSD.
So people are not leaving the GPL. Linux probably never had such a large share of the WiFi router market, while BSD is close to 0%.
However, if GPL had been more permissive this whole incident would never have happened.
Of course it wouldn't. And Linux/U-Boot/Busybox wouldn't be as great as they currently are because corporations wouldn't have contributed back to these projects.
This issue is why people are leaving... the GPL and going to BSD, MIT, others.
Last time I checked, WiFi routers are still full of GPLed software such as Linux, u-boot and busybox. What's the BSD or MIT alternative? The only manufacturer selling BSD-based routers I know is Apple. I don't think companies such as Linksys, Netgear or TP-Link have the resources to develop their own OS. It's either they use Linux and comply with the GPL, or pay for a proprietary alternative.
PC Magazine - "PC Magazine Best Apps"
TRUSTe - Received "TRUSTe Privacy Seal"
Global Mobile Internet Conference App Space - "A top 50 app"
Thanks, I will take a note to never trust these web site reviews.