Slashdot Mirror


Jordan Hubbard moves to new OpenDarwin.org

bootc writes "Last week we heard the news that Jordan Hubbard was leaving the FreeBSD Core Team. I received an email about the new OpenDarwin.org web site and had a look around, just to find that our friend Jordan was member of the OpenDarwin Core Team!" Apple has consolidated its Open Source web site, including Darwin, under its developer site, while the Internet Software Consortium is hosting the independent OpenDarwin.org, which will develop OpenDarwin with the developer community and collaborate with Apple to merge OpenDarwin technologies into Darwin and Mac OS X.

18 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I wonder by Spencerian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, Jordan is an Apple employee, too. So he gets paid to have fun and contribute to the FreeBSD family. A nice arrangement.

    Seems that the w00ts go to you for being first poster...

    --
    Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
  2. Re:x86 by flynn_nrg · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm not sure if you are serious about this. Darwin has been running on x86 since day one!

    Read about it here

  3. Re:OT: Story icon by piecewise · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just think it's amazing that there's a hexley.com!

    --
    The next comment I write will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
  4. Re:Darwin? We want Aqua!! by billvinson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have a good *nix with the premier desktop...

    It is called Mac OS X :)

    Seriously, Aqua and Quartz are definitely slower than KDE or GNOME. That is partially due to some of the effects, but it is also due to their youth. Aqua, Quartz, and OS X as a whole has gotten better with each release and I am looking forward to Jaguar (10.2).

    I don't think Apple will open source any of the GUI components as it doesn't have much of an upside for them. The reason Aqua is so nice to look at is that it is uniform. Once it is given away for everyone to change up, we all know what will happen. Everyone would have their own agenda on where to take it. This will destroy the uniformity and make aqua no better than KDE or GNOME (neither has a look as clear, well defined or consistent as OS X). Don't get me wrong, they are nice and I would love more code to be released, but GNOME and KDE don't even come close to comparison to the OS X user experience.

    Bill

  5. Re:Darwin? We want Aqua!! by NumberSyx · · Score: 5, Informative

    IMHO, it's the lack of a good desktop (KDE is OK) that's keeping *nix from becoming the premiere desktop and Aqua could help a lot.

    I seriously doubt Apple will ever release Aqua, there are too many advantages to keeping it in house, the biggest reason being control. Apple is primarily a hardware company and they, like Sun, use software to sell thier hardware. If Aqua were released to an open source license, it would be ported to other platforms, at which point at least one reason for buying an Apple system is gone. Who would spend $1800 on an iMac when you could get similar functions from a $800 Celeron system.

    I personally think we may, in the future see some x86 OEM do something similar with Linux. Have an open source core (command line only), with a proprietary GUI on top (only sold and supported with thier hardware, no retail version), but make it easy to run X Windows concurently in rootless mode, so all the hardcore Linux users can still use thier favorite programs. I suspect someone could sell alot of hardware this way, if done right and done well.

    --

    "Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
    -Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development

  6. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    If it was possible to advance OSX sans helping BSD, apple would do it.

    What? No one's forcing Apple to contribute back to BSD. If they wanted to, they could keep all the changes to themselves. It's not like FreeBSD is licensed under the GPL or another viral license.

  7. Apple isn't about to give Aqua away by maggard · · Score: 5, Informative
    When the hell are they gonna release the source to Aqua? At least the parts that aren't licensed from other companies (like Adobe).
    1. Aqua depends on the Quartz rendering layer (Display PDF)
    2. Apple developed Quartz (Display PDF) in-house specifically in order to avoid paying licensing fees to Adobe like Next was for Display postscript
    3. The PDF spec is open for anyone else to develop their own implementation, just like Apple did
    4. Apple's implementation of Display PDF is apparently fairly MacOS X-specific and while chunks of it could likely be retargetted it's supposedly not a candidate for a direct port
    5. Apple considers the Aqua GUI their trade dress and are quite vigorous about defending it
    So, instead of whining at Apple to give away their goodies how about actually supporting the projects out there with the same aims? And instead of looking to rip-off their interface howzabout showing some initiative and coming up with a distinct sperate one - goodness knows there's enough folks happy to criticize the Aqua GUI.

    When did Open Source become gimme gimme gimme?

    --
    I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
  8. Re:Darwin? We want Aqua!! by BlueGecko · · Score: 5, Insightful
    We have Aqua. Or about 95% of the look. (Not the underlying technology, but then, does it matter?)
    No, looks are everything! So I took off this Porsche Boxter chasis and stuck it on a Chevy Lumina, and I was wondering if you'd be interested...

    On a slightly more serious note, it's very clear you haven't used OS X. Looks are NOT everything. If you honestly believe that the KDE 3 user experience is on par with Mac OS X, then I truly hope you stay out of usability testing. It's getting better all of the time, as is GNOME, but it's just not there yet. For example, the KDE configuration system is far more complex than System Preferences. Sure, it's because you get a lot of extra customization, but it overwhelms newbie users. (And, on a similar note, any user who really wants to customize things that badly in OS X need merely get the TinkerTool Panel installed and he can configure a number of out-of-the-way system settings.) KDE lacks any functionality close to an iDisk, and you cannot configure things such as webserving with the click of a button like you can in OS X. The excedingly simple directory structure of OS X is completely lacking in all Linux distros. (I.e., while the full structure is, of course, there, the user needn't worry about it. ~/Preferences houses all the user's prefs, /Applications holds all of the pretty Aqua apps which can simply be dragged there to install and to the trash to remove, etc. "./configure ; make ; make install" just cannot compare to this, and even .rpms and .debs are nowhere close, in my opinion.) Font managing is trivial, upgrades can be performed with a single button click or automatically while you sleep, etc., etc., etc.

    Just because it looks like a duck does not mean that it quacks like a duck.
  9. Actually, we have something closer. by pschmied · · Score: 4, Informative
    GNUStep though not terribly similar in looks to aqua, is technologically very close to the modern NeXT-style development.

    Don't believe me? Check out these screenshots:

    GNUMail on Linux/GNUStep

    GNUMail under Aqua/MacOS X


    Don't write off GNUStep just because they haven't reached the popularity of KDE or GNOME. I think that with Apple's dominance in the UNIX market place, that we may see GNUStep become increasingly important.

    -Peter

  10. Re:I wonder by doubtless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder how much Apple is "contributing" towards him.

    Why does this even matters? He gotta support his life anyhow, it's a nice thing when one can support open source and make a living out of it at the same time.

    --
    geek page at KY speaks
  11. New Icon by loconet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I believe slashdot will need a new icon image for Open Darwin's Hexley

    --
    [alk]
  12. Re:Darwin? We want Aqua!! by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A few corrections.. hope you don't mind...., Sure, it's because you get a lot of extra customization, but it overwhelms newbie users. (And, on a similar note, any user who really wants to customize things that badly in OS X need merely get the TinkerTool Panel installed and he can configure a number of out-of-the-way system settings.)

    Talking of usability testing, do you have any data to back this up? It's true the KDE Control Centre is bizarrely designed, but in fact it's being restructured for KDE3.1

    KDE lacks any functionality close to an iDisk, and you cannot configure things such as webserving with the click of a button like you can in OS X.

    Incorrect. There is no centralised free disk service like the iDisk, but on the other hand remember you effectively pay for the "free" mac.com services when you buy a Mac. If you want, you can pay me and I'll give you some FTP space. You'll then find you can browse your "mikeDisk" direct from Konqueror like a normal filing system, and also all your apps will be able to load and save to it directly - you need never know it's on a remote disk. What, you want even more power? Then try InterMezzo, which is a caching, conflict resolving offlineable remote drive system. Not only do you get network transparecy, but also you can disconnect at any point and continue working.

    Oh, I almost forgot, there is a KDE panel applet that includes a small webserver, that can be switched on or off with a mouseclick. I think it's included with KDE3 or if not then with 3.1

    The excedingly simple directory structure of OS X is completely lacking in all Linux distros.

    Switch to root and try again. The whole UNIX directory structure is there, the finder simply hides it. Fine - I can make a version of Konqueror that hides it all as well, would that make it easier to use? Perhaps. I don't know to be honest. It might be something to look into.

    You're right in terms of software management, but it's being worked on. Font management is also improving.

    What matters is the process - OS X is simply a way of locking you into proprietary Apple hardware and kit. All platforms have their strengths and weaknesses, and the weaknesses you mentioned in Linux are being resolved fast. I could name a lot of weaknesses in OS X too, which I believe Apple are on the verge of solving. So what? What matters is - are you the one in control 5 years from now?

  13. Re:Interesting News by scumdamn · · Score: 3, Funny

    When I read "sig other" I didn't quite understand and went looking at your sig and everyone else's in the thread before I realized it was an abbreviation.

  14. Re:Darwin? We want Aqua!! by Jonathan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Huh? There's never any fees though and you can have as many accounts as you want. Your statement is like saying you effectively pay for "free" Linux when you buy an x86 machine.

    No -- the point is the very real costs of maintaining the ftp servers are paid by Apple out of its income. Transparent ftp connectivity is already part of KDE, the problem is that there can be no centralized server without *somebody* paying for it.

  15. Re:Is Darwin better than FreeBSD in any way? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    That's a trick question, you know that right?


    FreeBSD is a fine OS, there isn't a whole ton of things you can point at and say are intrinsicly wrong with it. There are some religion issues and a handful of ticky tacky things that some of us might want different but it's pretty darn good. It's very well engineered.


    Darwin is maybe a more modern design. It uses Mach as a microkernel and 4.4 lites as a BSD support subsystem. Internally it is very different. Better? I wouldn't say that. The microkernel design appeals to everyone's sense of aesthetics and design but to make it perform well you often have to break the model some.


    I'm inclined to believe that while the monolithic BSDs are all fine products then future of where BSD is going is probably microkernel based. In that sense Darwin is probably a better place to be. That's just guessing though.

  16. Re:Darwin? We want Aqua!! by BlueGecko · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Talking of usability testing, do you have any data to back this up?
    Sun's GNOME Usability Test made that point, and KDE's panels are similar enough to GNOMEs that I assumed the comparison was fair.
    Oh, I almost forgot, there is a KDE panel applet that includes a small webserver, that can be switched on or off with a mouseclick. I think it's included with KDE3 or if not then with 3.1
    It's not on my KDE 3 system, but that may be because I left out a package or something. Even if it is, though, my point doesn't really stand changed; KDE is improving with leaps and bounds, but it's just not entirely there, yet.

    Re. transparent file access: that wasn't really my point. The iDisk in OS X is extremely thoroughly integrated, such that applications assume that it's there and you can easily send a file to your iDisk even if it's not mounted. Further, the very structure of the iDisk is critical for much of this to work properly. iPhoto assumes that a folder named Photos exists on your iDisk (just like your home directory, I might add), and HomePage assumes that it will find photos there if for your photos page. KDE doesn't need a central service to dupliate this functionality, but a standard disk format and easy way to essentially point to the iDisk (kDisk?) server of your choice would be a really simple and actually very nice addition.

    Switch to root and try again. The whole UNIX directory structure is there, the finder simply hides it. Fine - I can make a version of Konqueror that hides it all as well, would that make it easier to use? Perhaps. I don't know to be honest. It might be something to look into.
    I know it's still there; hell, I rely on it being there in some of the apps I write that in turn call the standard Unix tools in /usr/bin. The key is that the USER doesn't need to know, EVER. The /etc files are entirely obsoleted by NetInfo. Applications the typical user needs can be placed anywhere on the disk without any problem, and can be installed and deinstalled simply by drag and drop. I actually run with all files and directories exposed, but still find the OS X structure far easier for general apps.

    Again, I appreciate that everything is improving, but you've got to understand that it's not quite there yet. That was my only point, and I honestly look forward very eagerly to when KDE and friends are on-par or surpass Apple's offerings. That's the point where no one will any longer be able to deny that open source desktops are around the corner.
  17. Re:Suck it GNU hippies by Lars+T. · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hrrm, is the development speed of HURD so slow because it's a microkernel? ;-)

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  18. Sorry, C# is an ECMA standard by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can go off and write your own C# tools anytime you like. As long as you conform to the ECMA documents, you can claim that your tool deals with C#. Micorosft invented it but does not own it.