Comments on: Why OS X and not Linux? http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux Technology Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:21:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Jared http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15406 Jared Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:05:50 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15406 I guess if you're defining "power" as Unix-ishness, then that makes sense. I just don't see it that way. Most of the most important advantages of Linux ("power", in my mind) come from its open and free (as in freedom) nature. I won't argue that OSX has benefited by basing their product on stuff that was originally developed in this fashion, but the act of making their extensions to that base closed and proprietary takes a great deal away from that advantage, in my opinion. I guess if you’re defining “power” as Unix-ishness, then that makes sense. I just don’t see it that way.

Most of the most important advantages of Linux (”power”, in my mind) come from its open and free (as in freedom) nature.

I won’t argue that OSX has benefited by basing their product on stuff that was originally developed in this fashion, but the act of making their extensions to that base closed and proprietary takes a great deal away from that advantage, in my opinion.

]]> By: Jared http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-106914 Jared Sat, 10 Nov 2007 07:05:50 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-106914 I guess if you're defining "power" as Unix-ishness, then that makes sense. I just don't see it that way. <br><br>Most of the most important advantages of Linux ("power", in my mind) come from its open and free (as in freedom) nature.<br><br>I won't argue that OSX has benefited by basing their product on stuff that was originally developed in this fashion, but the act of making their extensions to that base closed and proprietary takes a great deal away from that advantage, in my opinion. I guess if you're defining “power” as Unix-ishness, then that makes sense. I just don't see it that way.

Most of the most important advantages of Linux (”power”, in my mind) come from its open and free (as in freedom) nature.

I won't argue that OSX has benefited by basing their product on stuff that was originally developed in this fashion, but the act of making their extensions to that base closed and proprietary takes a great deal away from that advantage, in my opinion.

]]> By: Jared http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65748 Jared Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:05:50 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65748 I guess if you're defining "power" as Unix-ishness, then that makes sense. I just don't see it that way. <br><br>Most of the most important advantages of Linux ("power", in my mind) come from its open and free (as in freedom) nature.<br><br>I won't argue that OSX has benefited by basing their product on stuff that was originally developed in this fashion, but the act of making their extensions to that base closed and proprietary takes a great deal away from that advantage, in my opinion. I guess if you’re defining “power” as Unix-ishness, then that makes sense. I just don’t see it that way.

Most of the most important advantages of Linux (”power”, in my mind) come from its open and free (as in freedom) nature.

I won’t argue that OSX has benefited by basing their product on stuff that was originally developed in this fashion, but the act of making their extensions to that base closed and proprietary takes a great deal away from that advantage, in my opinion.

]]> By: Dan Cameron http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15345 Dan Cameron Sat, 10 Nov 2007 04:42:01 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15345 See also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#Description http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Mac_OS_X http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification So from what you said, Solaris was not powerful until it became "free", or is it not at all? [edit] Looks like only a portion of Solaris is open, like OS X. See also,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#Description
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Mac_OS_X
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification

So from what you said, Solaris was not powerful until it became “free”, or is it not at all?

[edit]
Looks like only a portion of Solaris is open, like OS X.

]]> By: Dan Cameron http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15341 Dan Cameron Sat, 10 Nov 2007 04:16:10 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15341 I'm talking about actual power, as in the "fully complaint <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html">UNIX</a>" system at it's core. <a href="http://developer.apple.com/opensource/overview.html">Which supports...</a> Not the power in opinion towards "freedom". I’m talking about actual power, as in the “fully complaint UNIX” system at it’s core. Which supports…
Not the power in opinion towards “freedom”.

]]> By: Jared http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15315 Jared Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:43:32 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-15315 Since I decided to avoid Apple bashing, I'll just say that it's a decent article, for the point he's trying to make. The only unclear bit is when you're talking about "power of the underlying OS". Personally, I feel that a lot of the "power" of Linux is based on its openness and adherence to the standards of software freedom. In that regard, I can't think of an OS that's more opposite of Linux than OSX, so being "practically the same" is certainly a subjective judgement. Since I decided to avoid Apple bashing, I’ll just say that it’s a decent article, for the point he’s trying to make.

The only unclear bit is when you’re talking about “power of the underlying OS”.

Personally, I feel that a lot of the “power” of Linux is based on its openness and adherence to the standards of software freedom. In that regard, I can’t think of an OS that’s more opposite of Linux than OSX, so being “practically the same” is certainly a subjective judgement.

]]> By: Dan Cameron http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65747 Dan Cameron Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:42:01 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65747 See also,<br><br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#Description">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#Description</a><br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Mac_OS_X">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Ma...</a><br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specif...</a><br><br>So from what you said, Solaris was not powerful until it became "free", or is it not at all?<br><br>[edit]<br>Looks like only a portion of Solaris is open, like OS X. See also,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#Description
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Ma...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specif...

So from what you said, Solaris was not powerful until it became “free”, or is it not at all?

[edit]
Looks like only a portion of Solaris is open, like OS X.

]]> By: Dan Cameron http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65746 Dan Cameron Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:16:10 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65746 I'm talking about actual power, as in the "fully complaint <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html">UNIX</a>" system at it's core. <a href="http://developer.apple.com/opensource/overview.html">Which supports...</a><br>Not the power in opinion towards "freedom". I’m talking about actual power, as in the “fully complaint UNIX” system at it’s core. Which supports…
Not the power in opinion towards “freedom”.

]]> By: Jared http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65745 Jared Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:43:32 +0000 http://dancameron.org/general/why-os-x-and-not-linux#comment-65745 Since I decided to avoid Apple bashing, I'll just say that it's a decent article, for the point he's trying to make.<br><br>The only unclear bit is when you're talking about "power of the underlying OS". <br><br>Personally, I feel that a lot of the "power" of Linux is based on its openness and adherence to the standards of software freedom. In that regard, I can't think of an OS that's more opposite of Linux than OSX, so being "practically the same" is certainly a subjective judgement. Since I decided to avoid Apple bashing, I’ll just say that it’s a decent article, for the point he’s trying to make.

The only unclear bit is when you’re talking about “power of the underlying OS”.

Personally, I feel that a lot of the “power” of Linux is based on its openness and adherence to the standards of software freedom. In that regard, I can’t think of an OS that’s more opposite of Linux than OSX, so being “practically the same” is certainly a subjective judgement.

]]>