Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 26th Dec 2008 11:58 UTC, submitted by probono
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.
Thread beginning with comment 341565
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[7]: Comment by Kroc
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 26th Dec 2008 18:55
in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Kroc"
Member since:2005-06-29
Yeah, I think most of us here know that.
I know. However, the person I replied to obviously did not know, so I pointed this out to him or her.
You don't point to any.
Nobody is talking about advantages. We were discussing *differences*. Those are two different things [and the lamest joke ever award goes to...!].
RE[8]: Comment by Kroc
by sbergman27 on Fri 26th Dec 2008 19:07
in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Kroc"
Member since:2005-07-24
Nobody is talking about advantages.
That's for sure.
We were discussing *differences*.
Fair point. And one which was not lost on me from the start. But "different" in the absence of "better" is what most of us would call "fragmentation". (Certainly, a loaded term in the OSNews world.)
Let's hear from people about how this new project, "PureDarwin", is better in some areas.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
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