Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Mar 2012 22:47 UTC
Linux "If you meet Linus Torvalds, he comes off as a mild-mannered, down-to-earth Finnish-American. He lives with his wife Tove, three kids, a cat, a dog, a snake, a goldfish, a bunny and a pet rat in a comfortable 6000 square foot home just north of Portland's tony Lake Oswego neighborhood. The house is yellow - his favorite color - and so's the Mercedes. But he's not really like any of his neighbors. He drives his Mercedes fast, slamming the car into gear and flooring it. There's no coaxing, no hesitation. Either the hammer is down, or the car is at rest. And he has an abnormal number of stuffed penguins on his mantle." Yup, sounds like the to-the-point Fin we all know and love.
Thread beginning with comment 511322
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Mac OS X
by henderson101 on Wed 21st Mar 2012 00:55 UTC in reply to "Mac OS X"
Member since:

What if Jobs had asked Torvalds before Apple had started on the Darwin part of the Mac OS X project ? 2000 is even before the first release of Mac OS X. The world would have been a different place.

Um... no. Darwin is based on the Mac OS X base OS. Mac OS X is based (when you rewind back throught he version to the Developer Releases) on Mac OS X Server, which in turn is based on Rhapsody, which in turn is based on OpenStep, which in turn is based on NextStep. You must then factor in that NextStep was Jobs baby back in the late 1980's. Indeed, when Next demonstrated their hardware in 1988, the OS that Mac OS X is based on existed.

Linux was first released in the Winter of 1991.

Do you see the problem with your logic? Jobs was never going to go anywhere near Linux. Even the mkLinix that Apple Sponsored used the Mach kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Mac OS X
by Lennie on Wed 21st Mar 2012 09:02 in reply to "RE: Mac OS X"
Lennie Member since:

I've never really looked into the history of it.

I thought the Mac OS X UI and application framework was based on NextStep and so on.

I also thought the Darwin part, thus the base OS, did not exists before the Mac OS X project and was based on parts of FreeBSD and an existing micro kernel project.

My thought was, what if the base OS was Linux.

As I've not looked into it. It might not have been able to make it work. Maybe the other parts of Mac OS X just can't function without the micro kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Mac OS X
by henderson101 on Wed 21st Mar 2012 11:20 in reply to "RE[2]: Mac OS X"
henderson101 Member since:

No. Mac OS X, as it is now, is the evolution of what Next had in 1988 (and, likely, earlier.) the same lead engineer was working on Mac OS X from the genesis of the Mach kernel at Carnigie Melon, right up till 10.5. His name is Avie Tevanian - google him.

What Apple did was slowly replace the ageing subsystems with sections of more modern BSD code (usually FreeBSD), but the project was continuous and progressive. If you look at OpenStep and then at Rhapsody, you can see the evolution towards Mac OS. You then look at Mac OS X Server 1.x (which is nothing to do with Mac OS X 10.x Server directly), and you see the basis for the Mac OS X public Betas. It was a continued evolution, not a sudden change. Yes the kernel is now XNU, but it evolved out of the Mach R&D with concepts from BSD bolted on. The driver model is akin to that of OpenStep, and Linux at the time would have been a giant step backwards.

Reply Parent Score: 4