Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Jun 2006 17:52 UTC
Mac OS X "Apple extended the courtesy of meeting with me one day after my column on the closing of the OS X x86 kernel source code was published online. To sum up Apple's objections, they felt I had given a year-old story a fresh coat of paint and sensationalized it for an audience that wasn't affected by it. Yet no story is more timely, or more broadly relevant, than this one." Tom Yager, who raised concerns over the closed-source Intel half of the MacOS, details why he was so concerned. "The kernel will open up again, this tempest will fade away, and I'll be glad for it. What will continue to concern me so deeply is that Apple thought it would be OK, that nobody would notice or care." Note: The 2nd link was incorrect, it is fixed now. Excusez-moi.
Permalink for comment 133622
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Varg Vikernes
Member since:
2005-07-06

That's actually not open source at all. You could even call it closed source, because you choose whom to show the code.

What I don't get here is why do people think it is unethical for them not to open source the code? That's exactly what the license allows them. Using that same logic one could say it was unethical for the person who wrote the code to choose that license.

Reply Parent Score: 1