BSD zealots are quick to deny the "death" of BSD
nowadays by pointing to the existence of OS X, which has supposedly
given BSD "thousands" of users. Infact this is a myth propagated by Apple,
eager to tout the "Industrial Strength Unix Foundations" of their
new "Darwin" OS.
The kernel of Darwin is not the BSD kernel, but rather the Mach kernel,
Infact, the
core of Darwin is of a totally different design to BSD, being of an
elegant microkernel structure rather than the monolithic
structure that BSD still retains. It is strange that Apple
would choose to tout that their OS is based on 4.4BSD, which even
by BSD standards is obsolete by over 10 years.
Darwin includes totally rewritten filesystem and network support and
does not use the BSD code here either. Infact, BSD code is only used
in the OS
as a "skin" to wrap the underlying OS in order to provide a virtual
Unix-like environment, in much the same way as Cygwin wraps Windows.
Higher up in userland, adapted versions of the BSD tools are used
for the Unix command line, an odd choice, considering
the GNU
utilities are superior. Files are kept in odd places
and in many cases manpages are
out of date. Many basic system services such as user authentication
are provided by Apple's own proprietary system rather than the
traditional Unix methods. In general, the OS X command line is a lackluster
and messy ordeal, and certainly radically unlike any BSD system.
The only reason that there is a menu editor is for you damn KDE freaks who were taught that bad habit.
No, the ability to edit the menu was lost several versions back. Before now, there was no way to edit the menu.
Gnome menu editing is integrated with the damn menu, everything is drag & drop or context menu.
This is not true. There is no way to edit the menu by drag and drop or via the context menu, nor has there ever been.
Many KDE users couldn't figure it out when in reality HIG studies by both Red Hat and I believe also Novell showed that normal users found that intuitive and having to open up a whole new program just to edit a menu in KDE was absurd.
If this is true, it is quite astounding, as no such feature ever existed! HIG studies into nonexistant features, whatever next?
Slashdot Mirror
When did eBay become pacman?
The kernel of Darwin is not the BSD kernel, but rather the Mach kernel, Infact, the core of Darwin is of a totally different design to BSD, being of an elegant microkernel structure rather than the monolithic structure that BSD still retains. It is strange that Apple would choose to tout that their OS is based on 4.4BSD, which even by BSD standards is obsolete by over 10 years.
Darwin includes totally rewritten filesystem and network support and does not use the BSD code here either. Infact, BSD code is only used in the OS as a "skin" to wrap the underlying OS in order to provide a virtual Unix-like environment, in much the same way as Cygwin wraps Windows.
Higher up in userland, adapted versions of the BSD tools are used for the Unix command line, an odd choice, considering the GNU utilities are superior. Files are kept in odd places and in many cases manpages are out of date. Many basic system services such as user authentication are provided by Apple's own proprietary system rather than the traditional Unix methods. In general, the OS X command line is a lackluster and messy ordeal, and certainly radically unlike any BSD system.
first postness?
Wow, you're a smooth talker.
Don't be a jerk!