Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 26th Mar 2011 02:00 UTC
Mac OS X When you run smbd -V on your Snow Leopard installation, you'll see it's running SAMBA version 3.0.28a-apple. While I'm not sure how much difference the "-apple" makes, version 3.0.28a is old. Very old. In other words, it's riddled with bugs. Apple hasn't updated SAMBA in 3 years, and for Lion, they're dumping it altogether for something homegrown. The reason? SAMBA is now GPLv3.
Thread beginning with comment 467946
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
avgalen
Member since:
2010-09-23

They've had over 2 years to write and test it - and all of it according to the specifications from day one. Why do you automatically assume it is going to be crap? based on what evidence? Microsoft made some major re-writes in Windows 7 and look at what has happened, one of the best selling version of Windows of all time.


Actually, Vista had those major rewrites and was one of the worst selling versions of Windows of all time. Windows 7 improved on those rewrites and "got it right" resulting in being one of the best selling versions of Windows of all time.

Rewrites that are done with only internal testing very often break when tested by the larger public. (Look at OsX 10.0 for the best proof that Apples rewrites can be very crappy)

Reply Parent Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Actually, Vista had those major rewrites and was one of the worst selling versions of Windows of all time. Windows 7 improved on those rewrites and "got it right" resulting in being one of the best selling versions of Windows of all time.


No, all Windows 7 did was actually finish the job; GDI acceleration should have been something in Windows Vista rather than it being held off till the next version. What you're talking about has nothing to do with re-writing and everything to do with Microsoft not finishing the job properly. They were in a situation that either the hold it back for another 6 months and risk the thing turning into vapourware or just getting the damn thing out the door asap.

Where is the evidence that Apple's implementation of SMB2 will be 'feature incomplete'?

Rewrites that are done with only internal testing very often break when tested by the larger public. (Look at OsX 10.0 for the best proof that Apples rewrites can be very crappy)


Mac OS X 10.0 was never designed for mass consumption - it was to get it out the door, that is why they offered a free upgrade to 10.1, that is why they offered dual boot configurations. Apple realised that 10.0 was 'work in progress' and hence they never thrusted it upon people - end users always had the option of going with Mac OS 9 if they wanted and many did go that route until 10.1 was released 6 months after 10.0 was released.

Edited 2011-03-27 04:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Vista was a beta shoved out the door to give them something to sell while they built the REAL version, aka Windows 7...nothing more. If you look up the history of Longhorn (what was to be Vista) you'll see it was due to be out in 2003 and not only did it end up nearly half a decade behind schedule but but they had to drop a whole bunch of features such as WinFS just to get it out the door at all.


I have to agree that with that is so loyal Apple is nuts not to be beta testing this software in the wild. As for GPL V3, what did everyone expect? Thanks to the "TiVo trick" GPL V2 is officially useless, hell you might as well just release as PD for all the freedom GPL V2 gives you now. That is why I've been trying to warn people that think the GPL will keep them from getting boned by Android because Google went out of their way to avoid GPL V3 and already we are seeing the fruits of that avoidance with more phones coming out locked down while running Android. What good is having the code if you can't actually use it?

So while I support Apple's right to choose whatever software runs on their OS (and I still think MSFT should have been busted for the OEM clauses and NOT IE, as they should be able to bundle anything they want with THEIR product) I would advise all those that support FOSS to be pushing developers to switch to GPL V3 ASAP, because otherwise the corps can just TiVo trick your rights away. With eFuses and code signing being so cheap all GPL V2 does is give corps a license to rip off developers while not only giving nothing back but actually taking away the rights of users to modify and improve, which was the whole point of GPL in the first place, which some seem to forget.

For those that don't know or have forgotten RMS came up with GPL in the first place because he wasn't allowed the code to improve a printer driver at MIT. And this is why GPL will always above all support the right of the user to modify and improve the code so that GPL users don't find themselves in the same situation RMS was in all those years ago.

Reply Parent Score: 1