Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 26th Feb 2006 14:15 UTC, submitted by subterrific
Mac OS X Apple had their pick of kernels when transitioning from OS 9 to OS X, and they chose to create their own kernel based on Mach 3.0. Was that really the best decision or did Apple make a huge mistake? At the time Linux was gaining support and developing rapidly, while development on Mach had pretty much ended two years earlier. This article makes a case for Apple using the Linux kernel in a future version of the Mac OS.
Thread beginning with comment 99302
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wow
by jackeebleu on Sun 26th Feb 2006 15:12 UTC
jackeebleu
Member since:
2006-01-26

I remember reading somewhere that Jobs contacted Torvalds to talk about the possibility of using Linux in Apple's new OS and even inviting him to work for Apple, Linus instead chose to criticize Avie Tevenian's work w/Mach, and continued to talk disparingly about Apple, and thats where the road ended.

Linus is a very arrogant person, despite not really accomplishing much. Steve's also arrogant, but he has alot of wins under his belt and the market loves a winner. Does OS X need help? Yes, but i seriously doubt that apple would base the OS on linux solely for the reason that there are so many people (not all) in the open source community that still dont truly understand what "free" software is and think that they shouldnt have to pay for anything and hardware should be as cheap as possible and be based so that they can hobble together disparate pieces of code and call it an application. This is why overall linux adoption has stagnated. Rememer 2003 was supposed to be the year that it crossed over to the desktop, then 2004, then 2005, now folks are content using it on servers.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Wow
by somebody on Sun 26th Feb 2006 16:59 in reply to "Wow"
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

Linus instead chose to criticize Avie Tevenian's work w/Mach, and continued to talk disparingly about Apple, and thats where the road ended.

I remember those talks, but Linux never talked disparingly about Apple. He only talked about Mach.

Linus is a very arrogant person, despite not really accomplishing much. Steve's also arrogant, but he has alot of wins under his belt and the market loves a winner.

So basicaly, you measure success by money? And Linus not acomplishing anything? Wow, I have to thank god, that I haven't got equiped by your brains (I don't need excessive accessories without actual usage in my head) when I was born.

This is why overall linux adoption has stagnated. Rememer 2003 was supposed to be the year that it crossed over to the desktop, then 2004, then 2005, now folks are content using it on servers.

Nah, it never stagnated.

Now to translate "Year of Linux" for you, so your brains could follow the logic.

It doesn't mean "We will take over the world". It means "significant change in number of new people using linux". Every year has been "the year of linux".

I see at least 5 times more Linux users in the same circles than 2 years before.

Reply Parent Score: 5