YAAAAWWWWWWNNNNNNN.
That is, to quote the great sage Vyvyan Basterd, the single most predictable and BORING thing that anyone could ever say whilst commenting on a thread about Apple.
216 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Oct 2014
Came here to say something similar. Surely employing people to work on the FOSS projects that the company uses is a good thing? I'm sure there are plenty of those die-hard fossers that will complain about "special interests" or something, but isn't this one of the models that was first proposed?
Don't want to bring up the "B" word, but I tried explaining the notion that "unelected officials" is exactly how government works in the UK. It seems a large portion of the country is under the assumption that governments make laws and decisions. The Civil Service is very good at perpetuating that myth, to be fair...
They (Apple) used the name UNIX in marketing for Tiger(?). The Open Group were displeased and sued. Apple decided to certify as it was cheaper than litigation or buying The Open Group, and they've certified ever since. It means that Apple can bid on contracts with organisations that require UNIX certification. It's also why Solaris, HP-UX and AIX are all still a thing, even though FOSS alternatives exist. That said, I'm surprised at this stage that SLES, Red Hat and Canonical haven't certified their products yet.
If you look into the design of NeXTSTEP, it's was extremely advanced for its time. To be fair, even by modern standards, it still stands up. As Liam points out, the kernel is a hybrid of MACH and 386BSD, and the networking stack is BSD, much like Windows and Linux too (happy to be stood corrected on that on). Most of what was NeXTSTEP can still be found in modern macOS. Avie Tevanian and Bertrand Serlet are very clever chaps indeed...
The Berkeley Software Distribution go back to the 1970’s! It literally predates Linux by over a decade. What we have today are in essence forks of the original BSD. Nearly all the BSDs and commercial UNIX OSs (including Darwin) can trace direct lineage in some way back to the Unix of Ritchie and Thompson.
The problem here is that Epic is an immoral org whose sole existence is to nickel and dime kids. Yes, yes, “won’t somebody think of the children?!” Though in this case, it about death by a thousand paper cuts for parents. Micropayments, and abused by cunts like Tim Sweeney are vile, and it would be great to see the EU hammering these shiesters hard. By supporting them, they are implicitly supporting the notion that constant micropayments for shitty games is fine. Be under no illusion, Tim Sweeney want to lock you in to his store to charge you what he wants, and that’s fine, just don’t tell me that this is about frEeDhUM!!1! - this is a late stage capitalist complaining that he can’t fleece you the way he wants to.
I think you’re referring to userland in Apple’s case, which is different. The POSIX layer of XNU was 4.3BSD derived. The userland tooling came from FreeBSD. The primary reason that Linux wasn’t a consideration for the XNU Kernel is that Linux didn’t exist in the late 89’s when XNU was being developed at NeXT. They did use to use some GNU utilities in userland, BASH arguably being the most prominent- and a project that Apple contributed to, until the GPLv3 stupidity - hence 3.whatever being the version shipped with macOS today. Though now almost everyone on macOS uses the superior ZShell, I can see them dropping BASH soon too.
Well, that’s a take.
The reason - and by the way, interest in the BSDs is growing, albeit slowly, largely due to foot-guns like systemd - is that while there was FUD around BSD, GNU/Linux grew roots and established itself. GPL v2 is also a much less me onerous license than v3 too - note that Linus is not a fan of v3 - and far friendlier for business generally.
> But tell me, do you have an actual use case for more than 255 characters?
Bless. You've clearly never worked with architects or engineers. Every file in it's own folder, long descriptive file names. Whether or not it's a valid use case is moot - they will have spent weeks and months designing the folder hierarchy - without consulting IT - and expect it to work to their will.
I think you're confusing 'intuitive' with 'simple' old chap. Let's be honest, the computer thingys can do considerably more that they used to be able too. Add the incessant pressure from customers and the tech press (looking at you El Reg) for iNnOvasHun!!1!, and things get messy, quickly.
I have a p14s and within days of taking it out of the box, the USB-C connector felt loose and cables fell out regularly. I'm genuinely not being hyperbolic here either. I've had a succession of Lenovo ThinkPads, and at this stage can only say that they are riding on the coat tails of IBMs build quality. The last 4 I have had have all universally been awful.
> It's getting more and more closed and locked-down
I see this time and again. And it's bollocks. I expect better from you, Liam. The feeling of being 'locked-down', as I'm sure you know, is largely down to SIP. This can very easily be disabled, but I wouldn't recommend it. Frankly, KEXTs are a terrible idea, no software should mess with the network stack or the kernel, and the /bin and /sbin should be treated as sacrosanct by the OS if needs be. And yes, developers should absolutely sign their code. Apple should make it easier for developers to do this, but by the same token, forcing it is a good thing.
Because for an IT site, "wrappers around Safari' is so spectacularly incorrect, it's funny. Mozilla, Google and Microsoft, or whomever else wants to write [i]a browser[/i] can add, within reason, any functionality they want, provided that they use (in simple terms that some that this 'just a wrapper for Safari) WebKit. So downvoted for lazy, incorrect comment and you for being a coward and the MAGA comment.
> "You don't need to be a monopoly to be guilty of monopolistic behaviour"
I keep seeing this utter nonsense written in every forum where big tech is mentioned. Firstly, there is no such thing as "monopolistic behaviour". It's a meme started by an ignorant party that's to often ignorantly repeated on the internet. Secondly, monopolies are not intrinsically unlawful. A monopoly happens when one company or entity is the only one offering a particular product or service. The reasons for this can vary – it might be natural, because of location, technology, government rules, or simply because everyone uses it. This is fine and dandy, but now the entity is a monopoly; it has to obey social rules to conduct its business.
> "If Tesla bought the company running Golden Gate Bridge and only allowed Teslas to use it, that would be monopolistic behaviour even though Tesla aren't the only car company."
And there would be nothing illegal about it unless Telsa prevented other entities from providing other means to cross San Fransisco Bay. Of course, local or even national governments could take action against them, but it would not be due to monopoly.
This is obviously result of the Tories being inept, arrogant, feckless and corrupt. Might not be Brexit, and as a remainer, I promise to stop pointing towards Brexit as the problem. I will continue to point at Brexiteers along with the fucking Tories (official name) though, as they are more than likely the idiots that in 2010 voted the Tories in, and that continue to vote for them.