You mean macOS? > The relevant parts of macOS for this discussion are actually opensource (kernel & most userland utilities), albreit not updated often; > Play

You mean macOS? > The relevant parts of macOS for this discussion are actually opensource (kernel & most userland utilities), albreit not updated often; > Playstation 3/4? Does the fact that product XYZ has a BSD-based product reduces or affect the continuity of the opensource project? No, it doesn't. And that is the beauty of BSD. Some companies build closed source products on it, some companies actually give back contributions (such as Netflix). Its fine either way. > Proprietary, non-free form of BSD, yes. Well, Microsoft used BSD code to some extent in previous versions of Windows (afaik tcp stack, services for unix, ftp client, etc). On the other hand, I do use Android-based devices - which are, for practical purposes, mostly a generic non-free form of Linux. In fact, not only the source code (when you can get it easily) is almost useless for practical use, but often bootcode and drivers are proprietary signed blobs - without which the device is just a fancy brick. Also, I'd argue there is little value brought into the linux project just because it is a core Android component. How is this scenario different from a "non-free form of BSD"?