
Most of you will know that the underlying core set of components of Mac OS X and the iPhone operating system are released under the Apple Public Source License, an FSF-approved open source license. Few of you, however, will have actually used Darwin in any other form than Mac OS X or the iPhone OS. Despite numerous projects attempting so, Darwin has never gained any significant traction apart from Apple's own interest. The PureDarwin project tries to rise from the
ashes of the OpenDarwin project, and has just
released a Christmas developer preview.
Member since:
2005-07-24
Yeah, I think most of us here know that.
Nice put-down.
Feel free to patronize your readers any time you want. :-) Most of your readers are familiar with the different concepts involved. Butters did a pretty good job of calling your understanding into question a while back, IIRC.
Sure, OpenDarwin, PureDarwin, whatever it's called this time around, is different. But what are the advantages of the open source parts of OS X? Anything of special value was proprietized by Apple, and the dregs were left. Mach-based kernel? OK. So it's slower. (And Mach certainly worked well enough for HURD, right?) But what actual *benefits* are reaped from that trade-off? You don't point to any.
Another question I have is this. From reading the link about the demise of the original OpenDarwin, and the associated OSNews comments, it looks like there were very good reasons for that project to have crumbled. What are these new guys doing differently in order to avoid the plight of the original?
I just quoted that bit to highlight the fact that your fangs are showing.
Edited 2008-12-26 18:27 UTC