Slashdot Mirror
Apple Plans To Release Rendezvous As Open Source
Snuffub writes "According to MacCentral, Apple announced during an interview today that they would be releasing Rendezvous, their implementation of the zeroconf standard, under an open source license. I can't see this as being anything but great news for everyone involved -- the community gets a mature implementation of an emerging technology, and Apple benefits as more devices are created to support Rendezvous. For everyone interested, you'll be able to download the source from Apple's site in a couple weeks." uglyhead69 adds: "The article is light on details and doesn't mention what license will be used, but it's probably safe to assume that it's the APSL."
As apple already is losing enough revenue as it is.
Hi Dad!
The other challenge, of course, has been to get past the vigilant scrutiny of our christian leadership to perpetuate their irrational pro-homosexual agenda.
Fortunately, Microsoft has more-or-less put an stop to that (for all practical purposes, at least).
The next smart business move would be for Apple to drop prices affordable to most people. If I could afford it, I would rather work on a Mac. They tend to be more stable and not to mention they are usually cool looking. Plus most Windows programs I use are available for Mac, too.
Fortunately, Microsoft has more-or-less put an stop to that (for all practical purposes, at least).
Yeah, by indirectly encouraging their employees to be asexual and shower all their devotion on the company. Most books I've read about Microsoft mention that being married is considered a 'liability' if you work at Microsoft because you can't devote your life to the company.
I enjoy smellgin his feet. At least they smell better than Hemo's dick-cheeze!
It is what they *call* open-source....it is another one of apple's "what's yours is mine"
kinda microsoft would have you believe that their shared source is the true 'open-source' (while GPL is not... never mind that both the originators of the terms "GPL" and "open source" think otherwise...)
Would someone please explain, in normal english what the major differences are between the GPL policy [which I understand to be, if you modify the code, your modifications have to be open source and GPLed and anyone should be allowed to use them],and the APSL policy [which I understand to be any modifications you make must be distributed with the original code intact, all the disclaimers intact, wiht the source and must be usable by anyone including us].
As I see it, there's no real difference there.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Would someone please explain, in normal english what the major differences are between the GPL policy [which I understand to be, if you modify the code, your modifications have to be open source and GPLed and anyone should be allowed to use them],and the APSL policy [which I understand to be any modifications you make must be distributed with the original code intact, all the disclaimers intact, wiht the source and must be usable by anyone including us].
To me, there seem to be no big differences, so why do people have such a problem wiht the APSL
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Thanks for enlightening me. I was under the mistaken impression that the only FreeBSD stuff in the Darwin kernel was the filesystem and network code (and a bit more, I'm oversimplifying). I somehow got the idea that it had a completely different driver model (IOKit) and a completely different core (Mach). Silly me thought most of it came from NeXT. Boy, was I ever wrong! Thanks!