On Sep 1, 2009, at 10:43 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
Even if they do monopolistic things with your code? See this:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137291/Mac_clone_maker_sues_Apple_over_Snow_Leopard
I think the preceding article is one of the strongest arguments for
copyleft
I've ever seen.
Why? Apple is free to do what they want with their code. If they only
implement drivers and kernel support for their own computers, how is
that wrong?
As for MacOS, the base operating system, Darwin, happens to be free as
in beer. You can download the source code for it, and build your own
drivers, system loader, etc. It's very easily done and has been done
many times. There have been many distributions of Darwin for generic
PC's, many of them bundled with bootleg MacOS distributions, some of
them not.
What is proprietary is the GUI called Aqua which runs under it and
the programs which run under Aqua, although you can if you wish
develop or port FOSS to it. See OpenOffice.org for example, the early
versions of OO were launced under Aqua (but could have been launched
via the Darwin CLI) and ran in XWindows (which was also FOSS). The
newest version and a branch (NeoOffice) replaced the Xwindows UI with
a Java one, so that it could be portable across all platforms and
still access the GUI.
Apple produces a better product (MacOS) and can afford to test and
support it better because it is limited to their hardware. If they
expanded it to support all PC's it would be much larger, require more
testing and more support. Look at any PC generic product such as
Windows or any distribution of Linux and tell me that it has testing
and support anywhere near as good as MacOS. it doesn't. Windows Vista
was a disaster of testing and support, and look at the size of
Microsoft, and Linux, look at the quality of the latest releases from
Ubuntu for example. 9.04 was IMHO something that made Windows Vista
look like heaven. The release would not boot on small computers, and
the small computer emergeny "fix" would not boot on bigger computers.
It took over two months to release a 9.04 kernel that would both
support optical drives and not memory leak to the point it had to be
rebooted every 24 hours.
Apple is actually a pretty decent supporter of FOSS, they just chose
not to use the GPL, which lead them to BSD instead of Linux, and they
kept parts of their operating system and technology proprietary. They
have an obligation to their stockholders to maintain the value of
their investment. They also pay their employees fairly and have good
benefits, something that some people on this list feel is their right
as consultants marketing FOSS, but not the right of the developers of
it.
Geoff.
--
geoffrey mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Jerusalem Israel geoffreymendel...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Linux-il mailing list
Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il
http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
