3 ms·

Neither has Apple. Remember it was Apple that forced the music industry to go from DRM encumbered music to DRM free, etc. etc. The Evil Apple mythology is pure

by MCRed 11y ago

Neither has Apple. Remember it was Apple that forced the music industry to go from DRM encumbered music to DRM free, etc. etc. The Evil Apple mythology is pure political ideology on the part of Apple haters / Google Zealots. And I've been hearing this kind of Apple bashing since the 1980s. Yes, yes, Apple sells more expensive stuff. Apple focuses on design. Apple doesn't compete in the low end (though they are damn price competitive when you compare like systems.) This does not make Apple evil. The idea that Android is "open" simply because linux is an open source operating system is silly- Darwin is open source as well, and Apple and Google both keep the application layer closed source. All those knockoff phones sold in China that you're desperate to count as "Android" to claim Apple's losing (Yet nobody ever actually counts real sales of android devices, because android phone makers keep this data secret, unlike Apple that reports it quarterly to the SEC...why is that I wonder? Maybe the illusion that Android is "winning" would be shattered, hmmm? Meanwhile only %8 of "android" devices are running a current operating system???!? How is that "Winning"?)..... those knock off MediaTec phones are not "Android" and are not running google Apps (unless they've been cracked) because google has just as stringent licensing terms as Apple, actually much worse. And of course those apps are not open source either.

ikt 11y ago
> The idea that Android is "open" simply because linux is an open source operating system is silly- Darwin is open source as well, and Apple and Google both keep the application layer closed source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29 "On July 25, 2006, the OpenDarwin team announced that the project was shutting down, as they felt OpenDarwin had "become a mere hosting facility for Mac OS X related projects," and that the efforts to create a standalone Darwin operating system had failed. They also state: "Availability of sources, interaction with Apple representatives, difficulty building and tracking sources, and a lack of interest from the community have all contributed to this."[24] " Darwin is open source, but to compare that to linux is laughable. Google is one of the top contributers upstream to Linux and subsequntly hundreds of millions of devices are better off because of it. I'm unaware of any modern darwin based distro's and I'm unaware of any iOS mods like Cyanagenmod. To say Apple and Google are about the same when it comes to Open Source is a joke. Based on Steve Jobs stopping all donations to charity I'm fairly certain the fact that Darwin is open source is because the licensing requires it to be. Otherwise Darwin would be proprietary so fast no one would notice because it's too difficult to work with anyway.
- comex 11y ago
  Most of the 'Darwin' open source releases on opensource.apple.com are not under any variant of the GPL. However, they are only provided for OS X - the iOS section only has a short list of LGPL projects, and ARM code is often stripped out; new projects are never added, even rewrites of older code that was open source (launchd, discoveryd); several projects cannot be compiled without some work dealing with missing header files; and some projects (kernel extensions) have over the years had entire files redacted to blankness, or been removed from future distributions altogether. In other words, it very much feels like a legacy thing.

by MCRed 11y ago

ikt 11y ago

> The idea that Android is "open" simply because linux is an open source operating system is silly- Darwin is open source as well, and Apple and Google both keep the application layer closed source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29 "On July 25, 2006, the OpenDarwin team announced that the project was shutting down, as they felt OpenDarwin had "become a mere hosting facility for Mac OS X related projects," and that the efforts to create a standalone Darwin operating system had failed. They also state: "Availability of sources, interaction with Apple representatives, difficulty building and tracking sources, and a lack of interest from the community have all contributed to this."[24] " Darwin is open source, but to compare that to linux is laughable. Google is one of the top contributers upstream to Linux and subsequntly hundreds of millions of devices are better off because of it. I'm unaware of any modern darwin based distro's and I'm unaware of any iOS mods like Cyanagenmod. To say Apple and Google are about the same when it comes to Open Source is a joke. Based on Steve Jobs stopping all donations to charity I'm fairly certain the fact that Darwin is open source is because the licensing requires it to be. Otherwise Darwin would be proprietary so fast no one would notice because it's too difficult to work with anyway.

comex 11y ago
Most of the 'Darwin' open source releases on opensource.apple.com are not under any variant of the GPL. However, they are only provided for OS X - the iOS section only has a short list of LGPL projects, and ARM code is often stripped out; new projects are never added, even rewrites of older code that was open source (launchd, discoveryd); several projects cannot be compiled without some work dealing with missing header files; and some projects (kernel extensions) have over the years had entire files redacted to blankness, or been removed from future distributions altogether. In other words, it very much feels like a legacy thing.