iPods Don't Run OS X
Redrum writes "Everyone thinks that Apple's iPod runs an OS called Pixo, and that the iPhone ushered in a brand new epoch based on OS X. That myth has been busted: the iPod runs Apple's own Mach/BSD kernel, and Pixo is only used as a graphics layer. Daniel Eran outlines the story behind Pixo and what OS X means for Apple. It's no joke; the story was confirmed by Tim Monroe, a member of Apple's QuickTime engineering team, as is easy to verify yourself." Update: 07/15 19:48 GMT by KD : Turns out to be an April Fools joke.
Because it was a joke, and SNOJOB is the coolest name the joke writer could think of, plus rot-13d SNOBOL is just so stupid it should be an obvious joke.
Oh dear, it turns out the iPod is running Mac OS X--with a Mach kernel and a Unix userland--and has been for years.
Nonsense.
What this listing shows is not an iPod running "Mac OS X". It shows an iPod that may be running "a Mach-based version of UNIX", presumably a variant of Darwin. Darwin is not OS X. This would be like finding a copy of "vmlinuz" in an embedded device and claiming it's running Ubuntu.
Roughlydrafted is nothing more than drivel made to look like news by and for apple fanboys. It's truly funny that this apple fanboy is sourcing an April Fools joke.
This is why I hate April Fools day.
Granted, you do get some good jokes, but most of the time people who are not remotely funny spend the day playing unfunny jokes on each other. But you're not allowed to complain, because then you get accused of having no sense of humour.
Marking it informative also acts as both a meta joke and may be correct in the off chance that the poster was serious.
I always try to moderate as if the poster was being dead serious. Things are much more surreal that way.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
My bicyles
Ok, because someone modified Linux to remove the MMU requirement means that Darwin couldn't be modified to work on hardware without an MMU? I'm so lost as to how that makes sense as a logical argument. But that's ok, don't RTFA just mod up the guy who isn't making sense.
Please RTFA people. It talks about how it isn't the related April fools joke and provides concrete evidence. It doesn't claim that it *IS* Darwin but that you can see evidence of the Mach/OS kernel and bits of userland. Proof is provided. Proof that wasn't sourced from a joke.
I have worked on embedded systems with microkernels (QNX) and this all seems perfectly reasonable. You can run a UNIX app in 4 megs with a microkernel and userland. And with the number of iPods Apple is selling you can understand why they would want to own the OS it was running in house.
-- http://thegirlorthecar.com funny dating game for guys
There's no indication that it's an April Fool's joke. You had to read it when it was first published to know that it was published in April, but it's still lingering around to misinform the unsuspecting reader. Apparently some know it's a joke, but I hadn't read it until now and it looks legitimate to me.
If MacTech is ok with printing this garbage then why should we consider them with any respect or confidence?