4 ms·

Darwin? How is it stealing if it's open source, and the end result is the best desktop OS ever created? Sheesh And Apple's work on open source Clang/LLVM and

by alanh 16y ago

Darwin? How is it stealing if it's open source, and the end result is the best desktop OS ever created? Sheesh And Apple's work on open source Clang/LLVM and WebKit has been quite significant has it not?

morphir 16y ago
it has. But I think its important to point out that freebsd and the bsd-stack is not in any way in competition with osx. Apple develops products, and earns money by creating products that average joe can operate with ease. This means that Apple is able to commoditize off open source, by taking and contributing back to their projects of interest. Free Software Foundation have their understanding of what freedom is. Unfortunately the fight for freedom has resulted in a rather complicated GPL v3 opposed to BSD-licenses which demand that your respect copyright and by that restricts you less than the GPLish licenses. It's ironic, but BSD offers more freedom than GPL. Also, it's a shame that VLC - being the most kick-ass videoplayer today - is hindered by legal issues. As a funny sidenote, one could say that if you choose GPL you need to consult your legal-department. But if you choose BSD you don't even need a legal-department.
ajross 16y ago
WebKit is a descendant of KHTML, and thus LGPL by requirement. I have a hard time believing Apple would have ever opened this technology had they developed it internally.
- alextgordon 16y ago
  That seems a little unfair and speculative. Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't've. All we can say for sure is they did.
- protomyth 16y ago
  Clang? OpenCL? I think there are counter examples.
sedachv 16y ago
"Open source" is a misleading term, please stop using it: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.h... As pointed out in other replies, Apple is working on clang because it doesn't want to deal with the GPL (unless you own Apple stock, you're the one losing because of this decision), and WebKit because it's derived from LGPL code. How much work is Apple putting into making Darwin a usable Free Software OS? Versus how much work have Red Hat, Canonical, Novell, IBM etc. have put into making Linux available in a number of different, free distributions? The reason all has to do with GPL and copyleft. There is very little incentive for companies to invest in BSD code, and no disincentive for them to steal it. If Linux wasn't GPLed, it wouldn't be where it is today. There's nothing wrong with what Apple is doing. However, if you think that somehow Apple releasing some of their code under the BSD justifies restricting their end-users to their locked-in App Store and their fight against the GPL, there is something morally off with your thinking. Claiming that this makes the BSD a better choice than the GPL shows that you don't understand that Apple doesn't care about you and your open source; they'll take whatever is convenient. You're the one losing out, and you're justifying it to yourself as a good thing.
- alain94040 16y ago
  Apple will take whatever is convenient. You're the one losing out I know it's a strawman argument, but if you feel superior to Apple, how come you didn't come up with the iPhone innovation? Saying Apple doesn't care about me when they obsess about designing amazing products that blow away anything that existed before is a little big disingenuous.
  - buster 16y ago
    Uhm.. How does it feel to be trapped in Job's Reality Distortion Bubble?
    - alain94040 16y ago
      In your reality, do all smartphones have touch interfaces? That's pretty much the definition of a revolution: when you can clearly point to a before and an after.

by alanh 16y ago

morphir 16y ago

it has. But I think its important to point out that freebsd and the bsd-stack is not in any way in competition with osx. Apple develops products, and earns money by creating products that average joe can operate with ease. This means that Apple is able to commoditize off open source, by taking and contributing back to their projects of interest. Free Software Foundation have their understanding of what freedom is. Unfortunately the fight for freedom has resulted in a rather complicated GPL v3 opposed to BSD-licenses which demand that your respect copyright and by that restricts you less than the GPLish licenses. It's ironic, but BSD offers more freedom than GPL. Also, it's a shame that VLC - being the most kick-ass videoplayer today - is hindered by legal issues. As a funny sidenote, one could say that if you choose GPL you need to consult your legal-department. But if you choose BSD you don't even need a legal-department.

ajross 16y ago

WebKit is a descendant of KHTML, and thus LGPL by requirement. I have a hard time believing Apple would have ever opened this technology had they developed it internally.

alextgordon 16y ago
That seems a little unfair and speculative. Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't've. All we can say for sure is they did.
protomyth 16y ago
Clang? OpenCL? I think there are counter examples.

sedachv 16y ago

"Open source" is a misleading term, please stop using it: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.h... As pointed out in other replies, Apple is working on clang because it doesn't want to deal with the GPL (unless you own Apple stock, you're the one losing because of this decision), and WebKit because it's derived from LGPL code. How much work is Apple putting into making Darwin a usable Free Software OS? Versus how much work have Red Hat, Canonical, Novell, IBM etc. have put into making Linux available in a number of different, free distributions? The reason all has to do with GPL and copyleft. There is very little incentive for companies to invest in BSD code, and no disincentive for them to steal it. If Linux wasn't GPLed, it wouldn't be where it is today. There's nothing wrong with what Apple is doing. However, if you think that somehow Apple releasing some of their code under the BSD justifies restricting their end-users to their locked-in App Store and their fight against the GPL, there is something morally off with your thinking. Claiming that this makes the BSD a better choice than the GPL shows that you don't understand that Apple doesn't care about you and your open source; they'll take whatever is convenient. You're the one losing out, and you're justifying it to yourself as a good thing.

alain94040 16y ago
Apple will take whatever is convenient. You're the one losing out I know it's a strawman argument, but if you feel superior to Apple, how come you didn't come up with the iPhone innovation? Saying Apple doesn't care about me when they obsess about designing amazing products that blow away anything that existed before is a little big disingenuous.
- buster 16y ago
  Uhm.. How does it feel to be trapped in Job's Reality Distortion Bubble?
  - alain94040 16y ago
    In your reality, do all smartphones have touch interfaces? That's pretty much the definition of a revolution: when you can clearly point to a before and an after.