6 ms·

Another proprietary filesystem? I was really hoping they'd adopt ZFS fully.

jasonjei 10y ago
Apple says they intend to open-source the file system in the docs. Open Source: "An open source implementation is not available at this time. Apple plans to document and publish the APFS volume format when Apple File System is released in 2017."
- sirn 10y ago
  Source of the quote is this page: https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/APFS_Guide/UsingtheAppleFileSystem/UsingtheAppleFileSystem.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40016999-CH4-SW1 https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/docum... Releasing a new filesystem is already surprising. And they plan to open-source it. Huh.
- anc84 10y ago
  Free software and patent-free or whatever some lawyers call "open"?
  - skrause 10y ago
    They said "publish the APFS volume format". So that can mean just documentation and not code at all.
    - Retra 10y ago
      Published code doesn't mean 'open' either. You need rights to the code, not merely access to it.
- zingplex 10y ago
  Just like they promised to open source FaceTime and iMessages? Apple has a history of making false promises in regards to open sourcing products.
  - macintux 10y ago
    I don't recall any promises around iMessage, and FaceTime fell victim to patents.
  - wrigby 10y ago
    My understanding was that FaceTime and iMessage weren't open sourced because of issues related to a patent troll (VirnetX IIRC). I'd be interested in hearing from others that are more familiar with the situation.
    - MBCook 10y ago
      Not only that, but apparently Steve Jobs decided to just say that on stage and while it had been discussed a bit it wasn't the plan and came as a total shock to the people involved.
    - pluckytree 10y ago
      Or perhaps concern with having to deal with 3rd party iMessage/Facetime clients while at the same time trying to maintain a high level of security. Apple doesn’t want anything to tarnish the security reputation of these products.
  - Jerry2 10y ago
    > FaceTime They got sued heavily for it. They had to completely change the implementation and it became a non-P2P video chat.
  - qmr 10y ago
    Not sure why you're being downvoted. Too many fanboys I guess. I would hope the community is more enlightened than that.
    - matthewmacleod 10y ago
      Because it's just kind of lazy and incorrect, that's why. Apple did promise to open FaceTime, and was promptly sued – that's why it's not open. AFAIK there was no promise to open iMessage.
- ptx 10y ago
  It says they plan to document and publish the volume format but nothing about the source code of the implementation. It being "not available at this time" doesn't necessarily imply that it will be available in the future.
  - duskwuff 10y ago
    I'd imagine the implementation will show up in the next appropriate XNU kernel release.
    - cmurf 10y ago
      Neither the format nor implementation of Core Storage is documented by Apple. Near as I can tell not even an fs magic number is documented, i.e an offset and a signature that makes it possible to identify Core Storage physical volumes.
- loeg 10y ago
  That's awesome.
- lewisl9029 10y ago
  Would it be wishful thinking to hope Microsoft would follow suit by open sourcing ReFS?
cstross 10y ago
ZFS on OSX was doomed the moment Oracle bought Sun. If you want to know why, just contemplate the smoking wreckage of the Oracle/Google Java API lawsuit.
- Twirrim 10y ago
  ZFS is on a completely open source license. Oracle's beef with Google comes from actions that occurred before Java was open sourced. It's hard to see how the two scenarios are even remotely related, other than "Oracle"
  - smitherfield 10y ago
    A large part of Oracle's case was based on alleging a Google developer had "copied" code that he himself had contributed to Java. I have to say it's made me a lot iffier on contributing to open source projects, or at least those owned by for-profit companies.
    - oldmanjay 10y ago
      That's the same sort of thinking that leads people to condemn Islam for the actions of a few self-proclaimed Muslims.
  - DannyBee 10y ago
    "ZFS is on a completely open source license." This is an ... interesting viewpoint Oracle's viewpoint on what patents are and are not granted by that license is also interesting (as was Sun's). Interesting enough that Apple felt they needed to go get a patent license for it, and couldn't come to terms. http://arstechnica.com/apple/2009/10/apple-abandons-zfs-on-mac-os-x-project-over-licensing-issues/ http://arstechnica.com/apple/2009/10/apple-abandons-zfs-on-m... You are correct this happened pre-oracle, but note that it was confirmed by Sun's spokeperson. (Also note that the national labs, who have been continuing ZFS on linux, are immune to a lot of these issues. Oracle literally cannot get an injunction against them on patent infringement issues, so they are guaranteed they can always work on it)
  - 10y ago

Apple says they intend to open-source the file system in the docs. Open Source: "An open source implementation is not available at this time. Apple plans to document and publish the APFS volume format when Apple File System is released in 2017."

sirn 10y ago
Source of the quote is this page: https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/APFS_Guide/UsingtheAppleFileSystem/UsingtheAppleFileSystem.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40016999-CH4-SW1 https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/docum... Releasing a new filesystem is already surprising. And they plan to open-source it. Huh.
anc84 10y ago
Free software and patent-free or whatever some lawyers call "open"?
- skrause 10y ago
  They said "publish the APFS volume format". So that can mean just documentation and not code at all.
  - Retra 10y ago
    Published code doesn't mean 'open' either. You need rights to the code, not merely access to it.
zingplex 10y ago
Just like they promised to open source FaceTime and iMessages? Apple has a history of making false promises in regards to open sourcing products.
- macintux 10y ago
  I don't recall any promises around iMessage, and FaceTime fell victim to patents.
- wrigby 10y ago
  My understanding was that FaceTime and iMessage weren't open sourced because of issues related to a patent troll (VirnetX IIRC). I'd be interested in hearing from others that are more familiar with the situation.
  - MBCook 10y ago
    Not only that, but apparently Steve Jobs decided to just say that on stage and while it had been discussed a bit it wasn't the plan and came as a total shock to the people involved.
  - pluckytree 10y ago
    Or perhaps concern with having to deal with 3rd party iMessage/Facetime clients while at the same time trying to maintain a high level of security. Apple doesn’t want anything to tarnish the security reputation of these products.
- Jerry2 10y ago
  > FaceTime They got sued heavily for it. They had to completely change the implementation and it became a non-P2P video chat.
- qmr 10y ago
  Not sure why you're being downvoted. Too many fanboys I guess. I would hope the community is more enlightened than that.
  - matthewmacleod 10y ago
    Because it's just kind of lazy and incorrect, that's why. Apple did promise to open FaceTime, and was promptly sued – that's why it's not open. AFAIK there was no promise to open iMessage.
ptx 10y ago
It says they plan to document and publish the volume format but nothing about the source code of the implementation. It being "not available at this time" doesn't necessarily imply that it will be available in the future.
- duskwuff 10y ago
  I'd imagine the implementation will show up in the next appropriate XNU kernel release.
  - cmurf 10y ago
    Neither the format nor implementation of Core Storage is documented by Apple. Near as I can tell not even an fs magic number is documented, i.e an offset and a signature that makes it possible to identify Core Storage physical volumes.
loeg 10y ago
That's awesome.
lewisl9029 10y ago
Would it be wishful thinking to hope Microsoft would follow suit by open sourcing ReFS?

cstross 10y ago

ZFS on OSX was doomed the moment Oracle bought Sun. If you want to know why, just contemplate the smoking wreckage of the Oracle/Google Java API lawsuit.

Twirrim 10y ago
ZFS is on a completely open source license. Oracle's beef with Google comes from actions that occurred before Java was open sourced. It's hard to see how the two scenarios are even remotely related, other than "Oracle"
- smitherfield 10y ago
  A large part of Oracle's case was based on alleging a Google developer had "copied" code that he himself had contributed to Java. I have to say it's made me a lot iffier on contributing to open source projects, or at least those owned by for-profit companies.
  - oldmanjay 10y ago
    That's the same sort of thinking that leads people to condemn Islam for the actions of a few self-proclaimed Muslims.
- DannyBee 10y ago
  "ZFS is on a completely open source license." This is an ... interesting viewpoint Oracle's viewpoint on what patents are and are not granted by that license is also interesting (as was Sun's). Interesting enough that Apple felt they needed to go get a patent license for it, and couldn't come to terms. http://arstechnica.com/apple/2009/10/apple-abandons-zfs-on-mac-os-x-project-over-licensing-issues/ http://arstechnica.com/apple/2009/10/apple-abandons-zfs-on-m... You are correct this happened pre-oracle, but note that it was confirmed by Sun's spokeperson. (Also note that the national labs, who have been continuing ZFS on linux, are immune to a lot of these issues. Oracle literally cannot get an injunction against them on patent infringement issues, so they are guaranteed they can always work on it)
- 10y ago