Linked by David Adams on Tue 8th Apr 2008 16:33 UTC
"I am very happy about the direction in which the Mac OS X GUI is going, although sadly many Mac users aren't interested in (or don't know about) the "lower levels" of the Macintosh Operating System. Have you ever wondered why the Terminal greets you with the words "Welcome to Darwin"? Why do BSD and Mac OS share certain bits of code? Why does Wikipedia describe Mac OS X as a graphical operating system? Today we're going to take a look at the underlying open source technology which powers your fancy Leopard OS - the hidden core set of components, named Darwin."
Thread beginning with comment 308749
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: What BSD could have been
by ari-free on Tue 8th Apr 2008 21:39
in reply to "RE[3]: What BSD could have been"
Member since:2007-01-22
RE[5]: What BSD could have been
by nevali on Tue 8th Apr 2008 22:41
in reply to "RE[4]: What BSD could have been"
Member since:2006-10-12
the usual misconception is that macosx is on top of freebsd.
It's only a partial misconception, in fairness.
Mac OS X's BSD userland is based upon FreeBSD (although it's been modified a reasonable amount since, given that as of Leopard it's UNIX certified). Parts of XNU also contain chunks of FreeBSD code.
It's not just FreeBSD, though, but it's the biggest single source for BSD-family code in Darwin and Mac OS X. That said, the BSDs also borrow from each other, so it's tricky to be precise in some cases.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-11-09
It would seem you are basing your arguments on the assumption that Darwin is not BSD. That is correct, however, neither are the other so called BSDs. BSD is a UNIX that ended distribution in 1995. The contemporary so called BSDs are all BSD derived, and them being licensed under the BSD license doesn't make them any more the BSD UNIX. This fact undermines your arguments as they are based on a false assumption.