4 ms·
Sure, but what I'm missing is a support for these claims. Using != supporting is true by it self, but to what extent is that practiced in Apple's case specifica
by adsr 14y ago
Sure, but what I'm missing is a support for these claims. Using != supporting is true by it self, but to what extent is that practiced in Apple's case specifically? It's still just a claim with no supportive argument at all. Some projects that Apple supports and contributes/has contributed to that comes to mind, launchd, libdispatch, ALAC, OpenCL, LLVM, Quicktime streming server, and Webkit to name a few.
- buster 14y agoMy support is this one: https://plus.google.com/u/0/103674611711666213369/posts/7j1c2bZ7jJb https://plus.google.com/u/0/103674611711666213369/posts/7j1c...
- adsr 14y agoThey move from GPL, how and why does that make their open source use "a huge meaningless joke"?
- buster 14y agoYou may have noticed the column "overall packages" which shows a significant (and steady) drop over the last releases, even in Apples own open source license.
- adsr 14y agoYes, yes I did. But I also noticed that the table leaves out other licenses like Apache, MIT and BSD so it doesnt tell you what you think it does. Of the examples I gave, only one uses Apple's APSL license. Never mind.
- ksec 14y agoI was about to write that as well, Apple are using less Apple APSL themselves and moving to wards Apache 2.0 License, and using more BSD / MIT equivalent. Since the Table only includes GPL / LGPL and the not used APSL no wonder why the numbers are dropping.
- buster 14y agoAnd so what? To be honest, the statistic would say enough with only the overall column shown. What do you think what is the outcome when the overall open source software used nearly halved? I leave this as an exercise to the reader (Hint: the last version of Mac OS X contains less open source software then every version before, overall and in licenses).