5 ms·

Apple has explicitly chosen to stay away from anything GPLv3. It's the reason Bash and other tools bundled with macOS are so old (they're the last version that

Apple has explicitly chosen to stay away from anything GPLv3. It's the reason Bash and other tools bundled with macOS are so old (they're the last version that were still GPLv2), and why they chose to switch to Zsh as a default.

bumblebritches5 5y ago
Google too, hence Fuscia.
cma 5y ago
Aside from that stuff it is hard to use Mac seriously as a unix anymore after they started wiping out /etc/ changes every update (with insecure ssh defaults like password authentication).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
IntelMiner 5y ago
That's shot them in the foot many times over the years. Especially when they tried to replace Samba with their own SMB implementation in I believe 10.7 Lion?
- whoknowswhat11 5y ago
  I think you underestimate how much traction Samba lost with GPLv3. You used to have a system that was just wonderful across Linux / Mac / Windows. Seriously, you'd run Samba on server and Mac would work great with it because under the hood the Mac was running Samba. Windows would work fine too for what most folks cared about. That was lost when Samba went v3. One thing - the hosting loophole is still there I think with GPLv3, so you can offer HOSTED services with Samba. I think some folks have done things there maybe.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    Samba still works like a charm on my network, but only because I'm sharing between Linux/Android/Windows devices.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    There's no clause in the GPLv3 that says "Apple may not use this software". Apple could use the new Samba if they wanted to, but they choose not to because they like being able to do the bad things that the GPLv3 prohibits doing.
    - ribit 5y ago
      What „bad things“?
      - ajklsdhfniuwehf 5y ago
        sliping in divergencies in the protocol so that you can only connect to Apple-Active-directories or something. Microsoft wrote the book in the 90s about this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
        ribit 5y ago
        Right. And implementing their own SMB server (smbd) allowed them to do these "bad things"? What is the evidence that they did anything like that? Anyway, how about a much simpler explanation: Apple doesn't want to get stuck with a viral license that might open them to lawsuits and force them to open up their proprietary code they want to keep closed source? GPL doesn't work for everyone and there is nothing wrong about that. To suggest that anyone who rejects GPL plans something "bad" is naive and immature.
        ajklsdhfniuwehf 5y ago
        > What is the evidence that they did anything like that? LOL. you are joking right? Apple uses the textbook from microsoft the second they can. When they stuck gold on IOS the first thing they did was draw up a monopoly on music and ibooks licensing scheme. And those are just the ones they were found guild on courts with public records. The last one, also on courts public records, is about how they prevent their messaging applications to work on non-apple because it would "allow families to buy android devices to their children" Oh, you trolls. I keep falling for your low efforts...
- bb88 5y ago
  Yeah, I find it weird that considering that homebrew is what makes macs acceptable for software development, you'd think apple would want to support things like bash as first class citizens on their os.
varajelle 5y ago
The "tivoization" was not the only change in GPLv3. It also has patents related changes, which I think is what scared apple.
swiley 5y ago
Apple has convinced me of the need for FOSS more than RMS ever could have.

bumblebritches5 5y ago

Google too, hence Fuscia.

cma 5y ago

Aside from that stuff it is hard to use Mac seriously as a unix anymore after they started wiping out /etc/ changes every update (with insecure ssh defaults like password authentication).

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

IntelMiner 5y ago

That's shot them in the foot many times over the years. Especially when they tried to replace Samba with their own SMB implementation in I believe 10.7 Lion?

whoknowswhat11 5y ago
I think you underestimate how much traction Samba lost with GPLv3. You used to have a system that was just wonderful across Linux / Mac / Windows. Seriously, you'd run Samba on server and Mac would work great with it because under the hood the Mac was running Samba. Windows would work fine too for what most folks cared about. That was lost when Samba went v3. One thing - the hosting loophole is still there I think with GPLv3, so you can offer HOSTED services with Samba. I think some folks have done things there maybe.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  Samba still works like a charm on my network, but only because I'm sharing between Linux/Android/Windows devices.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  There's no clause in the GPLv3 that says "Apple may not use this software". Apple could use the new Samba if they wanted to, but they choose not to because they like being able to do the bad things that the GPLv3 prohibits doing.
  - ribit 5y ago
    What „bad things“?
    - ajklsdhfniuwehf 5y ago
      sliping in divergencies in the protocol so that you can only connect to Apple-Active-directories or something. Microsoft wrote the book in the 90s about this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
      - ribit 5y ago
        Right. And implementing their own SMB server (smbd) allowed them to do these "bad things"? What is the evidence that they did anything like that? Anyway, how about a much simpler explanation: Apple doesn't want to get stuck with a viral license that might open them to lawsuits and force them to open up their proprietary code they want to keep closed source? GPL doesn't work for everyone and there is nothing wrong about that. To suggest that anyone who rejects GPL plans something "bad" is naive and immature.
        ajklsdhfniuwehf 5y ago
        > What is the evidence that they did anything like that? LOL. you are joking right? Apple uses the textbook from microsoft the second they can. When they stuck gold on IOS the first thing they did was draw up a monopoly on music and ibooks licensing scheme. And those are just the ones they were found guild on courts with public records. The last one, also on courts public records, is about how they prevent their messaging applications to work on non-apple because it would "allow families to buy android devices to their children" Oh, you trolls. I keep falling for your low efforts...
bb88 5y ago
Yeah, I find it weird that considering that homebrew is what makes macs acceptable for software development, you'd think apple would want to support things like bash as first class citizens on their os.

varajelle 5y ago

The "tivoization" was not the only change in GPLv3. It also has patents related changes, which I think is what scared apple.

swiley 5y ago

Apple has convinced me of the need for FOSS more than RMS ever could have.