Re: And this is news? @Kebabbert
Actually SunOS 4 was BSD based. Solaris (SunOS 5) was actually more system V ("real" Unix), although with some bits of the BSD code merged in.
OSF/1 became Digital Unix, NOT HP-UX.
Now going with Linux and GPL2) has the strategic advantage that you know anyone using Linux and making changes is required to release those changes, so it forces everyone to share. If IBM invests 1billion in helping develop features in Linux, it doesn't make sense to do so if some other company could just take the result and go make money without sharing any of their contributions. The BSD license assumes people are nice and that they will help out, but doesn't force them to or demand that they do. As an individual developer or a small team, perhaps that is OK and you are happy to see people making good use of your code. On the other hand if you are putting thousands of people on something, you might want to make sure you aren't funding someone else's business for free.
I personally would use the BSD license if I came up with some small useful piece of code, because I like the being totally free thing, but I certainly see the benefit of making sure everyone plays fair.
Of course these days Linux just makes sense since it supports more platforms than even netbsd now, and it is what everyone supports. The BSDs are just starting to look obsolete in comparison in terms of support for large systems, odd ball systems, etc. Last I saw, freebsd just added support for 64 CPUs, at a time linux supported 4096. There just aren't that many people contributing to freebsd as there is to Linux anymore. of course the BSD userspace being such awful obsolete stuff that drives you insane compared to any linux system in the last decade probably isn't helping, although I suppose one could always use debian/kfreebsd and get the freebsd kernel without the BSD userspace hell, instead using a nice Debian userspace.