DJ Ed White, I like you -- you're a troublemaker. I remember from the old days how you kicked Apple's ass around a bit in public for selling you a flakey TiBook, and now you're making sure that Red Hat stays on the straight-and-narrow. Good for you. Most people just give in and accept whatever the big companies shovel into their faces and tell them to eat. We need more people like you, and a lot less "Yes-Men" here on Slashdot.
The REAL question I'm wondering is: Did Red Hat seriously not take five minutes to look into any prior instances of the name "Fedora" in similar projects (any search engine would turn this up), or did Red Hat decide they were big and powerful enough that they could pretend they were Microsoft or Apple and just throw their legal and financial weight around and simply steal the name from the "little guy"?
Not to compare Microsoft to the mucho superior Apple, but... if this was Apple's promo, they'd have figured out that letting potential customers bathe themselves in promotional material only leads to increased sales, and as such is A Very Good Thing (although I still think Apple should release a CD of all their ads on it. I'd buy it!).
Only Microsoft is so stupid as to bury something that even Linux lovers are dying to see. Moronic. Basically they spend a wad of cash on this thing, and by allowing it to collect dust off in/dev/null (or uh.. "the Recycle Bin") will be rewarded with lost mindshare daily as they wallow in their own idiotic ignorance and PR ineptitude.
So, I was correct all along... Microsoft Windows *IS* based on Macintosh. It may not be derived from the sources of Macintosh, but the idea and the running of it most certainly is based on Macintosh. The look and feel is definitely there. The similarities are definitely there. Reading the history of Bill's "borrowing" (read: cloning) of Apple's GUI goodies adds weight to the geneology, regardless of what the judge says (that there are only so many ways to do similar things).
Linux has the "look and feel" of Unix, just as Windows has the "look and feel" of Macintosh.
Because they look and feel the same, are they necessarily related? My Chev is 90% the same as your BMW, they have big metallic/fiberglass bodies, four wheels, and perform the same functions, hell, they're even based on the same scientific principles! But nobody thinks they're derivatives of each other any more than waffles are based off toast. We all KNOW there is some swapping of ideas in the industry, and it's acceptable. I'm only so tall because I stood on the shoulders of giants, and all that. Is my stapler a derivative of your stapler, and if it is, what does it matter? I'm sure the code in Linux is more different from the code in Unix than the process to build my stapler is from the process to build your stapler, but nobody's demanding the stapler companies throw out all the good ideas in the stapler world and come up with a working stapler without using any previous technology to build on, efficiency and practicality be damned.
But assuming you're correct that things that borrow ideas are derivatives, I find that now, with the advent of Mac OSX, which is based on Unix (FreeBSD and Mach), I think we can accurately say that since Macintosh is based off Unix, and Windows is based off Macintosh, Windows is based off Unix, which means that Windows *IS* Linux. There is no escape from the Redmond Beast.
MPlayer RULES! I just recommended it to my friend this weekend - he wanted something that could play pretty much everything he threw at it and save him from the jumbled mess that is windows media player. The only problem is that the Win32 version I got my friend uses keyboard controls for everything (FF, REV, etc.) which sucks. The OSX version has a much nicer GUI -- ie, it actually HAS a GUI.
You are correct, there is no excuse for vandalism.
But what you are overlooking is that *like it or not, it's going to happen*. We the victims have no control over that. Getting hacked, robbed, or virused actually *can be* a good thing, if the incident was easily recovered from, and taught you a lesson to be better prepared against the scarier attacks which are sure to follow. I know that after my house got broken into, I lock every damn door now, whereas I didn't before.
It would be nice if we could learn to load patches (and better yet, get off accursed Windows completely) without taking some damage due to our stupidity first, but homo sapiens doesn't seem to learn that way.
And I probably won't stop with the bacon double cheeseburgers until my first heart attack, which is scheduled for right abou---
You're quoting from an article you yourself wrote? That's pretty sad. That's like me quoting from my old Slashdot posts as evidence to prove a point. In fact, I can quote from 350 different sources right now, all of them written by me. That's a majority, enough to get a president elected.
So if you hate X, just say so. All the other trolls don't need a cookie-cutter premade crutch to get a reaction, although oldies but goodies like "In Soviet Russia", "BSD is dead", and "Natalie Portman's hot grits" can get the creative juices flowing, and a goatse link or two can't hurt.
Fact is, X is not perfect. We all know that. You don't like it, write something better.
Scott Kelby, IIRC, has a similar rant in Macintosh: The Naked Truth. You should read it, if you haven't already. It's excellent, and you an he are "on the same page".
OOPS! Sorry, bro, my bad. You are 100% correct. Stealing redistributes wealth without just compensation, right? I take your bike, now you don't have one, and I have it instead, but you got nothing out of the deal. Satellite's not the same, you still have your signal, but I do too. It's more like sharing, which we all know is the socially ethical thing to do, or even better, the Christian parable of "the loaves and the fishes"... Jesus created food out of thin air and fed the multitudes who had no money to buy food anyway... Sounds very similar, but I wouldn't try it in Court except in Texas.
I like your fight-the-power anarchist rage and all, but MY country makes a LOT of tangible products. And movies don't cost us $6 here, and I was mostly being funny in the parent post, so mellow out dude and smoke some semi-legal Canadian weed and enjoy your freedom to do so.
Big media propaganda like this may work in a small sector of society, but it seems consumers are slightlyunsatisfied with how the big media companies are handling things. And when the people aren't happy, economics dictates that they do what they have to do to get happy, in this case, pirate. I watch Survivor, all those pirate dudes love it there. Piracy is your friend. Now, I'm not condoningpiracy, but the fact is, the corporations and the customers both have a responsibility to defend their respective positions, and to prevent the other power group from stealing too much control and upsetting the fragile and beautiful balance we call crapitalism. The system only works if both sides are doing their jobs, and that is:
Corporations: Adapt to the changing environment as you have always done. Listen to the customers and do everything possible to keep these informed consumers on your side. Search for innovative ways to improve your product, streamline your processes, and still make a REASONABLE amount of money. Stay alive to serve the customers tomorrow.
Here's a quick rundown of some of the main gripes consumers have with big media products today:
Things Wrong with Movies: Overpriced movies to match the overpriced snacks, Ben Affleck and J-Lo, crappy plots (which also may fall under the Ben Affleck category), $20+ million dollar salaries for actors which leads to increased ticket prices, irritating and useless copy-protection on DVDs, etc.
Things Wrong with Music: Overpriced CDs, Britney Spears, not enough money given to the artists, Britney Spears, generic one-hit wonder boy bands pushed like a cheap drug, Britney Spears, general refusal to adapt to the internet (thank Apple for what innovation there is there), etc.
Things Wrong with Satellite: Well, nothing.... We're just stealing that because we can.
Oh boy, did you miss the point of my post. But then, you're paranoid.
Yes, I am, when it comes to security. Can you re-explain your point?
I agree with you, manual code checking takes a lot of effort, but for big banks, currency traders, etc. it's well worth it. And Apple themselves says FileVault would take 149 trillion years to brute force, although I'm sure one key a second isn't even close to the actual rate of speed. If brute forcing is out, the logical way in is to search for a way around the encryption, ie. a backdoor. So making sure there are no backdoors is paramount.
Oh, my dear lord. It's in the filesystem code, you shitwit! But looking for "filevault.c" is like scanning Adobe's servers for "photoshop.c."
Well, DUH, moron, I was being facetious. I guess that went over your head. Should have expected that from an Anonymous Coward. It should be easy for you to find the FileVault code and link it. Go.
What's not? The windowing code, the source for the core UI libraries, and bundled applications. That's all.
So basically everything interesting then. I'm happy the command-line is open source (*/sarcasm*). Too bad EVERYTHING a user would care about ISN'T open. Basically, everything that makes OS X great is closed, and everything that's subpar is open for the geeks to help them fix.
The OS itself is completely open source.
As always, the Apple Fanatics definition of "operating system" and "completely" is different from everybody elses. There's a common usage for "OS" that you don't seem to understand. When we say the OS we're using is Windows, we mean the total package, not just ntoskrnl.exe. Most of us don't even know WHAT ntoskrnl.exe is. You can win an argument on a technicality, but it's dirty pool. Why don't you quit the misdirection and be honest, Apple can stand on it's own. I have faith in them, why don't you?
That's a surprise, because you don't seem to know much about anything else.
Oh ho ho. You're so funny. This coming from a coward and a zealot troll. Nice. "Try to negate the message by negating the messenger"... That's *Old-school Propaganda*. I've got a lot more credibility than you regardless. I log in, for one. I speak in generalities, ethics and ideas that are common sense. You try to win customers for Apple based on technicalities while avoiding the obvious truths. Answer the original question, which you have strayed so far from: which, LOGICALLY, would you trust more; an app in which the source code is open and available for perusing, or an app in which the source is hidden, and you have ONLY the word of a faceless corporation that it is secure? Of course, if the corporation is Microsoft, you wouldn't trust them, but I know you'll make an exception for Apple because Steve Jobs wouldn't lie, would he? Oh no. Not to make sales or get publicity... Like the "first 64-bit desktop" thing. He claims all the other 64-bit computers were "workstations", not "desktops", even though I know people who've been using them as desktops for years. A bit nebulous, don't you think? I wonder why he didn't say the TiBook was "the first widescreen grey laptop", conveniently omitting the black widescreen laptops, the beige widescreen laptops, and "notebooks" of all colors... My point HERE being that if a company feels it's ethical to stretch the truth to this point, can they be trusted with the security of your vital files?
I got my first Mac in February, 1984. I doubt it.
Apple IIe. 1983. PRE-Macintosh. Mange moi. And I grabbed a Macintosh 128k soon after. If you're a real troll, and you obviously are, you'll demand to fight about the month, day, and minute as well. All any of this shows is that we both come from money and backed a losing horse. By the way, fanboy, your dickhead elitist attitude makes me want to buy a Dell. Probably affects others the same way too. When people smell BS or overexaggerated claims, they back off in disgust. That's what I'm doing.
The point is that you act like a newbie and a fanboy. Honest mistake, I mistook you for someone without a clue. It could easily happen based on the quality of your posts. I outgrew my Steve worship the first time he sent Apple Legal after a fan website, or a guy making icons or themes, or canceled a popular app's development, or made a deal with Bill Gates. By the way, whatever you say is negated and tainted by the fact that you're posting as an AC to avoid the karma slaps people would give you if you were logged in, and because you're obvio
So you think everyone should just give up on security, then? Or should people take the time to run an app to scan the code for possible backdoors and hidden links to the net? Even if every backdoor can't be found with a quick scan, 99% of the source you compile yourself from open-source apps is clean beyond a reasonable doubt. There ARE people scanning open-source code for backdoors. You can trust individual Linux coders (for example) to bust open a backdoor, for many personal reasons: fame, karma, to help the community, to take down an evil backdooring company, etc. You can't trust Apple employees to rat on their employer if there are backdoors, because as an employee, it's not Win-Win, it's Lose-Lose. Lose a job, break an NDA, get sued, hurt Apple's sales, piss off the government if they're involved. Lose-Lose.
The standard of "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" cannot be proven with closed source apps. Nobody except Apple is able to scan FileVault for backdoors, and even they don't claim to be doing so. There is no guarantee of a program's integrity with closed source code, and Apple won't even answer emails asking them about the possibility of backdoors. They refuse to be questioned or doubted. They give the image that they are above suspicion. They are not, of course. You have NO REASON to trust Apple. If your security is important, you cannot trust a company you are not in active business partnership with, one who does not have a stake in your success. And even then, double-check it yourself. Don't you think Apple would roll over on you if the IRS or Dep't of Homeland Security wanted access to your data? Definitely.
That said, Apple's cool, their stuff is pretty good quality, but they're still a company, and as such, are not bound by ethics, but by expediency; that means that they will roll over on you, and backdoors in their software are actually quite probable, in order to better comply with government requests, if they should arise. Apple NEEDS to be able to assist the government if they need help. That means backdoors are a precaution that must be taken, but never revealed. To reveal them would be to destroy their utility.
Bzzt. The code for mounting encrypted disk images is part of Darwin. Go download it.
Okay, send me the direct download link to filevault.c. Must've missed it, I don't see it anywhere.
Darwin? EVERYBODY and their dead grandmother knows about Darwin. You AC zealots have only mentioned it a hundred million times in every thread open source is mentioned. Thanks so much for alerting me to the fact that their KERNEL is open, everything else is not. Great. Claiming that OSX is open because one or two parts out of 100,000 are open is like claiming that you're Wayne Gretzky because you scored one goal in little league. You're on the right track, but you fall slightly short of the mark. 50% is a pass. Neither your hockey skills nor Apple's OSX make the passing grade where openness is concerned. It's a great OS, to be sure, but to claim it's open is... subtly deceptive.
And before you troll again; Yes, of course I know about Rendezvous being open. That's because Apple is pushing it as a standard and is willing to give up their monopolistic control in return for greater market share.
In conclusion: I've probably been a Mac user longer than you and I don't feel a need to jump on every post and try to prove Apple's better than what it really is - why do you? The truth should be your goal, not good PR, otherwise Apple will feel no pressure to improve their flaws. Why don't you give the over-protective zealotry a rest and come back to reality, you'll be doing yourself, Slashdot, and even Apple a big favor. Apple doesn't need any more Yes-Men, they've already got too many. And if their product is good, it can stand on it's own merits. It doesn't need you to defend it with claims that are, at best, white lies and at worst, 100% propaganda.
The Mozilla name was an apt choice as a nod to the roots of the project. It is also unique (free of trademark issues), memorable, and relatively easy to spell and pronounce. Mozilla is a good name.
I could have sworn that the people who make the Godzilla movies were threatening to sue due to the similarity...
Slashdot Mirror
Extremely. Good. Comment.
It's SOOO nice to see a rational post here at Slashdot (my own included)...
DJ Ed White, I like you -- you're a troublemaker. I remember from the old days how you kicked Apple's ass around a bit in public for selling you a flakey TiBook, and now you're making sure that Red Hat stays on the straight-and-narrow. Good for you. Most people just give in and accept whatever the big companies shovel into their faces and tell them to eat. We need more people like you, and a lot less "Yes-Men" here on Slashdot.
The REAL question I'm wondering is: Did Red Hat seriously not take five minutes to look into any prior instances of the name "Fedora" in similar projects (any search engine would turn this up), or did Red Hat decide they were big and powerful enough that they could pretend they were Microsoft or Apple and just throw their legal and financial weight around and simply steal the name from the "little guy"?
Not to compare Microsoft to the mucho superior Apple, but... if this was Apple's promo, they'd have figured out that letting potential customers bathe themselves in promotional material only leads to increased sales, and as such is A Very Good Thing (although I still think Apple should release a CD of all their ads on it. I'd buy it!).
/dev/null (or uh.. "the Recycle Bin") will be rewarded with lost mindshare daily as they wallow in their own idiotic ignorance and PR ineptitude.
Only Microsoft is so stupid as to bury something that even Linux lovers are dying to see. Moronic. Basically they spend a wad of cash on this thing, and by allowing it to collect dust off in
So, I was correct all along... Microsoft Windows *IS* based on Macintosh. It may not be derived from the sources of Macintosh, but the idea and the running of it most certainly is based on Macintosh. The look and feel is definitely there. The similarities are definitely there. Reading the history of Bill's "borrowing" (read: cloning) of Apple's GUI goodies adds weight to the geneology, regardless of what the judge says (that there are only so many ways to do similar things).
Linux has the "look and feel" of Unix, just as Windows has the "look and feel" of Macintosh.
Because they look and feel the same, are they necessarily related? My Chev is 90% the same as your BMW, they have big metallic/fiberglass bodies, four wheels, and perform the same functions, hell, they're even based on the same scientific principles! But nobody thinks they're derivatives of each other any more than waffles are based off toast. We all KNOW there is some swapping of ideas in the industry, and it's acceptable. I'm only so tall because I stood on the shoulders of giants, and all that. Is my stapler a derivative of your stapler, and if it is, what does it matter? I'm sure the code in Linux is more different from the code in Unix than the process to build my stapler is from the process to build your stapler, but nobody's demanding the stapler companies throw out all the good ideas in the stapler world and come up with a working stapler without using any previous technology to build on, efficiency and practicality be damned.
But assuming you're correct that things that borrow ideas are derivatives, I find that now, with the advent of Mac OSX, which is based on Unix (FreeBSD and Mach), I think we can accurately say that since Macintosh is based off Unix, and Windows is based off Macintosh, Windows is based off Unix, which means that Windows *IS* Linux. There is no escape from the Redmond Beast.
MPlayer RULES! I just recommended it to my friend this weekend - he wanted something that could play pretty much everything he threw at it and save him from the jumbled mess that is windows media player. The only problem is that the Win32 version I got my friend uses keyboard controls for everything (FF, REV, etc.) which sucks. The OSX version has a much nicer GUI -- ie, it actually HAS a GUI.
You are correct, there is no excuse for vandalism.
But what you are overlooking is that *like it or not, it's going to happen*. We the victims have no control over that. Getting hacked, robbed, or virused actually *can be* a good thing, if the incident was easily recovered from, and taught you a lesson to be better prepared against the scarier attacks which are sure to follow. I know that after my house got broken into, I lock every damn door now, whereas I didn't before.
It would be nice if we could learn to load patches (and better yet, get off accursed Windows completely) without taking some damage due to our stupidity first, but homo sapiens doesn't seem to learn that way.
And I probably won't stop with the bacon double cheeseburgers until my first heart attack, which is scheduled for right abou---
You're quoting from an article you yourself wrote? That's pretty sad. That's like me quoting from my old Slashdot posts as evidence to prove a point. In fact, I can quote from 350 different sources right now, all of them written by me. That's a majority, enough to get a president elected.
So if you hate X, just say so. All the other trolls don't need a cookie-cutter premade crutch to get a reaction, although oldies but goodies like "In Soviet Russia", "BSD is dead", and "Natalie Portman's hot grits" can get the creative juices flowing, and a goatse link or two can't hurt.
Fact is, X is not perfect. We all know that. You don't like it, write something better.
NOT!
No offense, oh almighty mods, but labelling this mostly informative, innocuous post a "Troll" is extremely moronic.
Scott Kelby, IIRC, has a similar rant in Macintosh: The Naked Truth. You should read it, if you haven't already. It's excellent, and you an he are "on the same page".
We could set up our own distributed SETI program, but just very incompetently, so that we're not even close to finding aliens, only good channels!
And it seems logical that as a concerned citizen you should have a right to analyze these signals to see if they're cancer-causing, anyway.
With Windows XP, we all expect "not completely satisfactory"!
OOPS! Sorry, bro, my bad. You are 100% correct. Stealing redistributes wealth without just compensation, right? I take your bike, now you don't have one, and I have it instead, but you got nothing out of the deal. Satellite's not the same, you still have your signal, but I do too. It's more like sharing, which we all know is the socially ethical thing to do, or even better, the Christian parable of "the loaves and the fishes"... Jesus created food out of thin air and fed the multitudes who had no money to buy food anyway... Sounds very similar, but I wouldn't try it in Court except in Texas.
I like your fight-the-power anarchist rage and all, but MY country makes a LOT of tangible products. And movies don't cost us $6 here, and I was mostly being funny in the parent post, so mellow out dude and smoke some semi-legal Canadian weed and enjoy your freedom to do so.
**I died in a car accident, you insensitive clod!!**
Which would explain my pathetic lack of a posting history...
Turn off Messenger
Customers: Shop wisely. You are voting with your dollars. If you accept draconian DRM, you will NEVER get your freedom back. You must protect your individual rights by choosing the best product and not buying based solely on emotionally exciting advertising hype or getting pushed around by impotent corporate shortcuts to profitability.
Corporations: Adapt to the changing environment as you have always done. Listen to the customers and do everything possible to keep these informed consumers on your side. Search for innovative ways to improve your product, streamline your processes, and still make a REASONABLE amount of money. Stay alive to serve the customers tomorrow.
Here's a quick rundown of some of the main gripes consumers have with big media products today:
Things Wrong with Movies: Overpriced movies to match the overpriced snacks, Ben Affleck and J-Lo, crappy plots (which also may fall under the Ben Affleck category), $20+ million dollar salaries for actors which leads to increased ticket prices, irritating and useless copy-protection on DVDs, etc.
Things Wrong with Music: Overpriced CDs, Britney Spears, not enough money given to the artists, Britney Spears, generic one-hit wonder boy bands pushed like a cheap drug, Britney Spears, general refusal to adapt to the internet (thank Apple for what innovation there is there), etc.
Things Wrong with Satellite: Well, nothing.... We're just stealing that because we can.
I guess you haven't seen the Dual G5s.
Thanks, pal. Now, was that so hard?
Yes, I am, when it comes to security. Can you re-explain your point?
I agree with you, manual code checking takes a lot of effort, but for big banks, currency traders, etc. it's well worth it. And Apple themselves says FileVault would take 149 trillion years to brute force, although I'm sure one key a second isn't even close to the actual rate of speed. If brute forcing is out, the logical way in is to search for a way around the encryption, ie. a backdoor. So making sure there are no backdoors is paramount.
Well, DUH, moron, I was being facetious. I guess that went over your head. Should have expected that from an Anonymous Coward. It should be easy for you to find the FileVault code and link it. Go.
What's not? The windowing code, the source for the core UI libraries, and bundled applications. That's all.
So basically everything interesting then. I'm happy the command-line is open source (*/sarcasm*). Too bad EVERYTHING a user would care about ISN'T open. Basically, everything that makes OS X great is closed, and everything that's subpar is open for the geeks to help them fix.
The OS itself is completely open source.
As always, the Apple Fanatics definition of "operating system" and "completely" is different from everybody elses. There's a common usage for "OS" that you don't seem to understand. When we say the OS we're using is Windows, we mean the total package, not just ntoskrnl.exe. Most of us don't even know WHAT ntoskrnl.exe is. You can win an argument on a technicality, but it's dirty pool. Why don't you quit the misdirection and be honest, Apple can stand on it's own. I have faith in them, why don't you?
That's a surprise, because you don't seem to know much about anything else.
Oh ho ho. You're so funny. This coming from a coward and a zealot troll. Nice. "Try to negate the message by negating the messenger"... That's *Old-school Propaganda*. I've got a lot more credibility than you regardless. I log in, for one. I speak in generalities, ethics and ideas that are common sense. You try to win customers for Apple based on technicalities while avoiding the obvious truths. Answer the original question, which you have strayed so far from: which, LOGICALLY, would you trust more; an app in which the source code is open and available for perusing, or an app in which the source is hidden, and you have ONLY the word of a faceless corporation that it is secure? Of course, if the corporation is Microsoft, you wouldn't trust them, but I know you'll make an exception for Apple because Steve Jobs wouldn't lie, would he? Oh no. Not to make sales or get publicity... Like the "first 64-bit desktop" thing. He claims all the other 64-bit computers were "workstations", not "desktops", even though I know people who've been using them as desktops for years. A bit nebulous, don't you think? I wonder why he didn't say the TiBook was "the first widescreen grey laptop", conveniently omitting the black widescreen laptops, the beige widescreen laptops, and "notebooks" of all colors... My point HERE being that if a company feels it's ethical to stretch the truth to this point, can they be trusted with the security of your vital files?
I got my first Mac in February, 1984. I doubt it.
Apple IIe. 1983. PRE-Macintosh. Mange moi. And I grabbed a Macintosh 128k soon after. If you're a real troll, and you obviously are, you'll demand to fight about the month, day, and minute as well. All any of this shows is that we both come from money and backed a losing horse. By the way, fanboy, your dickhead elitist attitude makes me want to buy a Dell. Probably affects others the same way too. When people smell BS or overexaggerated claims, they back off in disgust. That's what I'm doing.
The point is that you act like a newbie and a fanboy. Honest mistake, I mistook you for someone without a clue. It could easily happen based on the quality of your posts. I outgrew my Steve worship the first time he sent Apple Legal after a fan website, or a guy making icons or themes, or canceled a popular app's development, or made a deal with Bill Gates. By the way, whatever you say is negated and tainted by the fact that you're posting as an AC to avoid the karma slaps people would give you if you were logged in, and because you're obvio
The standard of "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" cannot be proven with closed source apps. Nobody except Apple is able to scan FileVault for backdoors, and even they don't claim to be doing so. There is no guarantee of a program's integrity with closed source code, and Apple won't even answer emails asking them about the possibility of backdoors. They refuse to be questioned or doubted. They give the image that they are above suspicion. They are not, of course. You have NO REASON to trust Apple. If your security is important, you cannot trust a company you are not in active business partnership with, one who does not have a stake in your success. And even then, double-check it yourself. Don't you think Apple would roll over on you if the IRS or Dep't of Homeland Security wanted access to your data? Definitely.
That said, Apple's cool, their stuff is pretty good quality, but they're still a company, and as such, are not bound by ethics, but by expediency; that means that they will roll over on you, and backdoors in their software are actually quite probable, in order to better comply with government requests, if they should arise. Apple NEEDS to be able to assist the government if they need help. That means backdoors are a precaution that must be taken, but never revealed. To reveal them would be to destroy their utility.
Okay, send me the direct download link to filevault.c. Must've missed it, I don't see it anywhere.
Darwin? EVERYBODY and their dead grandmother knows about Darwin. You AC zealots have only mentioned it a hundred million times in every thread open source is mentioned. Thanks so much for alerting me to the fact that their KERNEL is open, everything else is not. Great. Claiming that OSX is open because one or two parts out of 100,000 are open is like claiming that you're Wayne Gretzky because you scored one goal in little league. You're on the right track, but you fall slightly short of the mark. 50% is a pass. Neither your hockey skills nor Apple's OSX make the passing grade where openness is concerned. It's a great OS, to be sure, but to claim it's open is... subtly deceptive.
And before you troll again; Yes, of course I know about Rendezvous being open. That's because Apple is pushing it as a standard and is willing to give up their monopolistic control in return for greater market share.
In conclusion: I've probably been a Mac user longer than you and I don't feel a need to jump on every post and try to prove Apple's better than what it really is - why do you? The truth should be your goal, not good PR, otherwise Apple will feel no pressure to improve their flaws. Why don't you give the over-protective zealotry a rest and come back to reality, you'll be doing yourself, Slashdot, and even Apple a big favor. Apple doesn't need any more Yes-Men, they've already got too many. And if their product is good, it can stand on it's own merits. It doesn't need you to defend it with claims that are, at best, white lies and at worst, 100% propaganda.
I could have sworn that the people who make the Godzilla movies were threatening to sue due to the similarity...