Apple OS X, BSD and Jordan Hubbard

We've had a number of posts noting that Boston.com's digitalMASS has a very decent article on Apple's OS X, BSD and Jordan Hubbard.

Comments

OS X

[ShadeEagle]

Is it as good as I've heard some say? I don't trust many reviewers, unfortunately...

Basically, it's going to affect whether I buy a Mac or not - it's certainly a step up (on the Mac side) from my Doorst...I mean Mac Classic...

Re:OS X

[TummyX]

ease of development with GNU tools, fantastic memory management, rock solid stability, multi-user ability, and a horde of other features that Microsoft can only dream of


Troll alert! Windows XP supports GNU tools thru cygwin. Also visual studio + gnu tools makes a much better enviroment. XP has rock solid stability, better hardware support, multi user ability (including logging on graphically with multiple users - Apple can only dream of that).

Re:OS X

['This is false.']

MAC os X sux a lot.

Apple = ultimate monopoly ?

[sh0rtie]

Just imagine if Microsoft owned the hardware and the software like Apple !

oh yeah so they do

Is Jordan betraying his ideals?

[Astral Traveller]

I can understand that, with Wind River's recent disowning of FreeBSD, Mr. Hubbard needs a more secure job position, but I can't help but wonder if , by joining Apple, he is abandoning his ideals for open-source software. Apple is one of the most closed companies ever, historically being unwilling to share hardware specifications or even tolerate imitations of their Macintosh look and feel. With a horde of lawyers poised like attack dogs, ready to bite the ankles of any possible patent violator, often shitting on Apple's own dedicated fanbase, is this the place for an idealist open-source developer like Jordan to be spending his time?

I frequent the FreeBSD mailing lists, and I have a large cluster of FreeBSD boxes powering the demanding computer applications my Fortune 500 employers demand, and it is the only operating system I have ever seen able to take the punishment my servers take on a daily basis. Jordan has practically abandoned the lists since joining Apple, and the discussions as a whole feel more hollow and less directional without his guidance. With the continuous slippage of FreeBSD 5.0's development, I fear for the future of my operating system. I can't help but feel that Jordan has abandoned his project to rot like BeOS and the Amiga.

Re:Still the same complaint though.

[RazzleFrog]

Who modded this a troll? Propietary hardware isn't a legit beef? Sounds like a sour-grapes macaddict.

Darwin isn't enough

[Astral Traveller]

Does one token open-source project really make up for Apple's intense closed-mindedness? One need only look at their recent past to see that they are still up to their old schemes, what with the recent stink over Aqua-like themes and their continuing refusal to open the Sorensen codec, which powers nearly all the streaming media on the web. Darwin seems to me more like Apple trying to get a free ride by encouraging their users to develop their core operating system for them, while they reap the profits and keep their platform under an iron grip.

thanks, but that's not the way I see it

[Erris]

Apple has contributed back TONS of software to the community. The BSD license said they didn't have to give anything back at all, but Apple did. The opened up their entire base OS. They have provided patches, fixes and enhancements to BSD. They work with BSD developers on a daily basis. But all you can do is complain that it isn't Debian. Go crawl back in your hole.

Let's stick to the facts instead of name calling. They have not opened their entire base, and they continue to punish anyone who would violate their "look and feel". If they had really opened everything up, every Linux distro would come with Quicktime, DVD recording software and many other Apple goodies. The choice of underlying OS is not the issue, it's all the extra effort they go through to protect their goofey little IP. If they took advantage of FreeBSD, fine. My preference is for OpenBSD, but so what? The idea is that they should just concentrate on what they think is so important, look, feel, backwards compatibility issues, and and not the rest of it.

Is it so absurd to think of them pooling their resources to make Debian or some specific BSD better? Why don't they tap into a nice pre existing user community instead of going it alone all the time? I mention Debian because it's distrobution method is superior.

Oh yeah, they might put their central reporting requirments where they put their termination clause.