
Robert X. Cringely thinks that Apple will offer virtualization in Mac OS 10.5, but in order to do that, he thinks
Apple will need to drop Mach.
"So Apple will at least offer the option for users to run a virtualized version of Windows Vista atop OS X. Don't be surprised, either, to see that OS X 10.5 has a new kernel, finally giving up Mach and a big piece of its NeXTstep heritage. I write this for one thing - because OS X has kernel problems and needs some help, especially with swap space. I say it also because of the departure of Avie Tevanian, Apple's chief software technology officer, and the guy who hung onto Mach for so long." The Mach kernel has recently been the target for complaints; esp. in server duties, OSX' kernel
lags behind significantly compared to i.e. Linux.
Member since:
2006-03-25
"Why would Apple choose FreeBSD over NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc?"
Because NetBSD already has I/OKit and other Mach-like calls for optimize its Darwin binaries compatibility layer. And NetBSD has a licence perfect from Apple's point of view. In fact, Jobs & Co. don't need to change their own business approach. With a GPL kernel they need.
With a *BSD approach, if they need more Mach-like calls they put these inside the kernel. With a GPL (read Linux) approach, they are free to make proprietary (Trusted?) drivers, but if they want to change the kernel in way they don't want to release for free (some parts of the Cores) they can't.
It isn't a matter of "GPL, good or not", but "*BSD vs GPL" and FOR APPLE *BSD wins because the *BSD approach is already their own. I repeat: not a matter of good and evil, but simply choises already did.