6 ms·

Darwin was cool until Apple quit releasing ISO files and just the source code that needed a lot of work to debug it and put it back together. I'm glad to see s

Darwin was cool until Apple quit releasing ISO files and just the source code that needed a lot of work to debug it and put it back together. I'm glad to see someone took it over and has a goal of making Darwin ISO files. I hope it also gets an OSX themed skin for whatever Desktop GUI they decide to use with Cario Dock or something to look like OSX.

pjmlp 10y ago
Without the whole Objective-C/Swift userspace libraries it will just look like OS X, but it won't be OS X.
- fithisux 10y ago
  KDE is better than Aqua. One needs Darwin for drivers and other subsystems. You can even run cocotron on this.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    I cannot seat a Mac OS X user, or developer in front of it, and they will be able to use it just like Mac OS X.
    - Zardoz84 10y ago
      Try to tweak KDE to mimic OSX
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Try to run Pages, iTunes, XCode or Apple Script on KDE.
        cmurf 10y ago
        Right, where's XCode on KDE or GNOME? MIA of course. Where is the XCode equivalent IDE on GNOME or KDE? MIA, unfortunately.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        If you spent ten minutes googling, you'd have found KDevelop.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        Which doesn't offer the necessary XCode features for Darwin to be an OS X replacement.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        We were talking about KDE and GNOME, not OSX replacement. "Right, where's XCode on KDE or GNOME? MIA of course. Where is the XCode equivalent IDE on GNOME or KDE? MIA, unfortunately." I'm curious as to which features you think are missing.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        We are on "PureDarwin – An Informal Successor to OpenDarwin" thread. It is all about having a OS X clone, not yet another GNU/Linux userspace clone. So I am missing: - Objective-C 2.1 support - Swift - Swift Playground - Storyboards - Plist editor - Instruments - Core Data - ...
        anonbanker 10y ago
        none of which matter in GNOME or KDE, which is what this thread (great grandparent on) has been about. So, how is your reply not moving goalposts?
        pjmlp 10y ago
        "Without the whole Objective-C/Swift userspace libraries it will just look like OS X, but it won't be OS X." "I cannot seat a Mac OS X user, or developer in front of it, and they will be able to use it just like Mac OS X." If anyone is moving goal posts it isn't me.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        Try to run Krita, Clementine/Amarok, KDevelop or smalltalk on OS X. Not because you can't, but because the above are better apps and a nicer experience than the Apple equivalents. Once you get out of Apple's walled garden (and reality distortion field), you might find you like it better.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        I use all major consumer OSes. The point here is about the missing features OS X on Darwin, not about alternatives that aren't native OS X.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        If that were true, you would've known about the apps I mentioned. I seem to be responding to your anti-Free Software posts everywhere in this thread.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        If PureDarwin is supposed to be a Mac OS X clone, it has to be provide Mac OS X userspace apps, not ports of UNIX clones. I care about usable software and don't mind paying for developers for their work, they have to pay their bills.
      - mattkevan 10y ago
        And then you'll have a bad copy of a bad copy. The fit and finish of linux desktops, especially KDE, are nowhere near as good as the Mac, and adding a theme which kind of sort of makes it look like OS X only serves to highlight where it doesn't match up. As a long time Mac user and now Linux user the only desktop which is vaguely tolerable is Elementary OS as at least someone there with a good eye for detail went through and made sure it all fits together.
        sspiff 10y ago
        > The fit and finish of linux desktops, especially KDE, are nowhere near as good as the Mac I beg to differ, but only with the "especially KDE" part. KDE is a different beast than most other modern desktop environments, in that it does not try to mimic OS X style in any way. KDE was started way back when with a goal of replicating a Windows-like UI, with a Start-menu like launcher and a Start-bar like task bar with applets. It may not be to your tastes, but the fit and finish of KDE3, 4 and now 5 is excellent. Integrated application sets (K[Anything]) with integration into a centralized control/config panel for shortcuts, MIME type handling, ... The only problem with this is that other popular applications do not bind this tightly to KDE (understandable from application developers - KDE is not the only game in town). Previously, GTK applications in particular acted and looked like they were from '93 when run outside of GTK-centric desktop environments (XFCE, Gnome). However, Qt has developed a GTK2 and 3 engine that uses Qt and Qt themes under the hood, largely solving that problem when properly configured (try any stable OpenSuse release, for instance).
        cbd1984 10y ago
        Macs are nowhere near as usable as Linux systems in any respect, especially at the GUI level. The Mac GUI is just, fundamentally, a mistake Apple made in the 1980s and never moved on from. Even Jobs recognized the Mac's error when he made NeXT, which now lives on in WindowMaker.
      - cmurf 10y ago
        Why? Every time KDE (or even GNOME) undergoes major changes, so many tweaks are also broken. One of the reasons the OS X UI/Ux is so consistent and reliable and mature is because its developers aren't saying "f it, start over" every few years. And there are bugs and annoying aspects to Aqua, it's not perfect, but it is stable.
  - anonbanker 10y ago
    you're being downvoted, but I've converted many a macbook to linux, and KDE was what switched them all. 4.x was far nicer than Snow Leopard-Lion, and 5.x is now vastly superior to Mavericks-current. KDE is the interface that both Apple and Microsoft steal from/reinvent nowadays.
- xvilka 10y ago
  I remember there was a crowdfunding campaign or so, about reimplementing this runtime (including graphics libraries) using opensource ObjC implementations.
  - mdaniel 10y ago
    Are you thinking of GNUstep? I actually backed them but evidently my pledge wasn't high enough: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/203272607/gnustep-project https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/203272607/gnustep-proje...
- derefr 10y ago
  Wow, it isn't built on Objective-C? That's completely the reverse of my expectations. I'd picture an "Open Darwin" as a ground-up FOSS rewrite of Mach + XPC, followed by XNU + IOKit, followed by libobjc and CoreFoundation (and libdispatch), followed by most of Cocoa, then all the stuff like LaunchServices to rotate the userland around to an app-bundle-based perspective... and and then maybe getting to the Aqua stuff, sometime around when HURD is usable. You know, basically like the order Mono occurred in. More to the point, I'd expect the first-milestone goal of an "OpenDarwin" project would be to be able to install and run OSX's Server.app and act as an OpenDirectory master, NetBoot Restore manager, etc. That proves compatibility, and is a useful thing all on its own (because, among other things, it would mean being able to manage OSX from non-Apple hardware†.) Doing a GUI first? Crazy talk! † ...without spending weeks tearing your hair out trying to conform a Linux LDAP+Kerberos+whatever server to OSX's idea of what an OpenDirectory controller is supposed to look like. I tried, I tried so hard...
  - panglott 10y ago
    That sounds like Open OS X more than it sounds like Open Darwin.

pjmlp 10y ago

Without the whole Objective-C/Swift userspace libraries it will just look like OS X, but it won't be OS X.

fithisux 10y ago
KDE is better than Aqua. One needs Darwin for drivers and other subsystems. You can even run cocotron on this.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  I cannot seat a Mac OS X user, or developer in front of it, and they will be able to use it just like Mac OS X.
  - Zardoz84 10y ago
    Try to tweak KDE to mimic OSX
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Try to run Pages, iTunes, XCode or Apple Script on KDE.
      - cmurf 10y ago
        Right, where's XCode on KDE or GNOME? MIA of course. Where is the XCode equivalent IDE on GNOME or KDE? MIA, unfortunately.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        If you spent ten minutes googling, you'd have found KDevelop.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        Which doesn't offer the necessary XCode features for Darwin to be an OS X replacement.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        We were talking about KDE and GNOME, not OSX replacement. "Right, where's XCode on KDE or GNOME? MIA of course. Where is the XCode equivalent IDE on GNOME or KDE? MIA, unfortunately." I'm curious as to which features you think are missing.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        We are on "PureDarwin – An Informal Successor to OpenDarwin" thread. It is all about having a OS X clone, not yet another GNU/Linux userspace clone. So I am missing: - Objective-C 2.1 support - Swift - Swift Playground - Storyboards - Plist editor - Instruments - Core Data - ...
        anonbanker 10y ago
        none of which matter in GNOME or KDE, which is what this thread (great grandparent on) has been about. So, how is your reply not moving goalposts?
        pjmlp 10y ago
        "Without the whole Objective-C/Swift userspace libraries it will just look like OS X, but it won't be OS X." "I cannot seat a Mac OS X user, or developer in front of it, and they will be able to use it just like Mac OS X." If anyone is moving goal posts it isn't me.
      - anonbanker 10y ago
        Try to run Krita, Clementine/Amarok, KDevelop or smalltalk on OS X. Not because you can't, but because the above are better apps and a nicer experience than the Apple equivalents. Once you get out of Apple's walled garden (and reality distortion field), you might find you like it better.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        I use all major consumer OSes. The point here is about the missing features OS X on Darwin, not about alternatives that aren't native OS X.
        anonbanker 10y ago
        If that were true, you would've known about the apps I mentioned. I seem to be responding to your anti-Free Software posts everywhere in this thread.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        If PureDarwin is supposed to be a Mac OS X clone, it has to be provide Mac OS X userspace apps, not ports of UNIX clones. I care about usable software and don't mind paying for developers for their work, they have to pay their bills.
    - mattkevan 10y ago
      And then you'll have a bad copy of a bad copy. The fit and finish of linux desktops, especially KDE, are nowhere near as good as the Mac, and adding a theme which kind of sort of makes it look like OS X only serves to highlight where it doesn't match up. As a long time Mac user and now Linux user the only desktop which is vaguely tolerable is Elementary OS as at least someone there with a good eye for detail went through and made sure it all fits together.
      - sspiff 10y ago
        > The fit and finish of linux desktops, especially KDE, are nowhere near as good as the Mac I beg to differ, but only with the "especially KDE" part. KDE is a different beast than most other modern desktop environments, in that it does not try to mimic OS X style in any way. KDE was started way back when with a goal of replicating a Windows-like UI, with a Start-menu like launcher and a Start-bar like task bar with applets. It may not be to your tastes, but the fit and finish of KDE3, 4 and now 5 is excellent. Integrated application sets (K[Anything]) with integration into a centralized control/config panel for shortcuts, MIME type handling, ... The only problem with this is that other popular applications do not bind this tightly to KDE (understandable from application developers - KDE is not the only game in town). Previously, GTK applications in particular acted and looked like they were from '93 when run outside of GTK-centric desktop environments (XFCE, Gnome). However, Qt has developed a GTK2 and 3 engine that uses Qt and Qt themes under the hood, largely solving that problem when properly configured (try any stable OpenSuse release, for instance).
      - cbd1984 10y ago
        Macs are nowhere near as usable as Linux systems in any respect, especially at the GUI level. The Mac GUI is just, fundamentally, a mistake Apple made in the 1980s and never moved on from. Even Jobs recognized the Mac's error when he made NeXT, which now lives on in WindowMaker.
    - cmurf 10y ago
      Why? Every time KDE (or even GNOME) undergoes major changes, so many tweaks are also broken. One of the reasons the OS X UI/Ux is so consistent and reliable and mature is because its developers aren't saying "f it, start over" every few years. And there are bugs and annoying aspects to Aqua, it's not perfect, but it is stable.
- anonbanker 10y ago
  you're being downvoted, but I've converted many a macbook to linux, and KDE was what switched them all. 4.x was far nicer than Snow Leopard-Lion, and 5.x is now vastly superior to Mavericks-current. KDE is the interface that both Apple and Microsoft steal from/reinvent nowadays.
xvilka 10y ago
I remember there was a crowdfunding campaign or so, about reimplementing this runtime (including graphics libraries) using opensource ObjC implementations.
- mdaniel 10y ago
  Are you thinking of GNUstep? I actually backed them but evidently my pledge wasn't high enough: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/203272607/gnustep-project https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/203272607/gnustep-proje...
derefr 10y ago
Wow, it isn't built on Objective-C? That's completely the reverse of my expectations. I'd picture an "Open Darwin" as a ground-up FOSS rewrite of Mach + XPC, followed by XNU + IOKit, followed by libobjc and CoreFoundation (and libdispatch), followed by most of Cocoa, then all the stuff like LaunchServices to rotate the userland around to an app-bundle-based perspective... and and then maybe getting to the Aqua stuff, sometime around when HURD is usable. You know, basically like the order Mono occurred in. More to the point, I'd expect the first-milestone goal of an "OpenDarwin" project would be to be able to install and run OSX's Server.app and act as an OpenDirectory master, NetBoot Restore manager, etc. That proves compatibility, and is a useful thing all on its own (because, among other things, it would mean being able to manage OSX from non-Apple hardware†.) Doing a GUI first? Crazy talk! † ...without spending weeks tearing your hair out trying to conform a Linux LDAP+Kerberos+whatever server to OSX's idea of what an OpenDirectory controller is supposed to look like. I tried, I tried so hard...
- panglott 10y ago
  That sounds like Open OS X more than it sounds like Open Darwin.