"I've been saying for years that Linux was well along on its way from being the tech fanboy operating system of choice, to becoming one of big business' favorite operating systems. Well, I was right all along, but in 2006, that progress smacked many Linux fans in the face. This is my list of the five most significant changes in Linux this year. They are not changes, however, that many who have embraced Linux in the past will appreciate. Like it or lump it, these are the changes that I also think clearly predict Linux's future in the mainstream."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-04-25
The problem is, it hasn't done BSD one iota of good. Had BSD used the GPL or a license which stated "OK, you can use this but you can't just surround it with proprietary software. You need to give back" then OS X would have benefitted from the code, but also BSD would have benefitted with code coming back from OS X. OS X would then have benefitted by BSD people working on their code, and it would have snowballed from there.
You are assuming that Apple would have based their core OS on a GPL licenced system.
That's a big leap of faith.
As far as I can tell, Apple hasn't done a whole lot to improve BSD, they just modified it to work with their hardware, and within their system. The only thing that the BSD devs would want is the hardware drivers, and I'm pretty sure that some of Apple's suppliers like Broadcom wouldn't like that.
All of the 'good stuff' (carbon, etc) is theirs alone. Heck, they even replaced the BSD userland tools with GNU ones, so OSX is really a weird BSD/GNU/NEXT hybrid.
Member since:2006-11-15
MacOSX, which is based on bsd is doing a lot better than linux
"It depends on what you look at, in terms of how much better it's doing than Linux.
The problem is, it hasn't done BSD one iota of good. "
Yes it does. it means that a popular OS that people enjoy is benefited by using their quality BSD code. You have to understand the BSD approach is to think of open source as a means to an end, which is better computing experience for more people and BSD has succeeded here.
In the linux/gpl model, open source is the end and a better user experience isn't so important or at best a means to the end of getting everything open source.
Edited 2006-12-21 05:29
Member since:2005-07-02
MacOSX, which is based on bsd is doing a lot better than linux
It is based on the Mach microkernel and on Darwin...it's starting to get quite further from a stock BSD base.
How do you figure out that it's doing "a lot better than Linux"? Just because it has more visibility? As far as market share goes the numbers are similar (Apple is at 4-5%, Linux at 2-3%).
Remember that Apple has been there much longer, and it's one of the most recognizable brands out there. Many people learned computing on a Mac way before it was based on Unix, so I doubt that the platform's popularity is linked to its BSD underpinnings to any significant degree...
Member since:
2005-07-06
MacOSX, which is based on bsd is doing a lot better than linux
It depends on what you look at, in terms of how much better it's doing than Linux.
The problem is, it hasn't done BSD one iota of good. Had BSD used the GPL or a license which stated "OK, you can use this but you can't just surround it with proprietary software. You need to give back" then OS X would have benefitted from the code, but also BSD would have benefitted with code coming back from OS X. OS X would then have benefitted by BSD people working on their code, and it would have snowballed from there.