Apple may provide or recommend responses as a possible solution based on the information provided every potential issue may involve several factors not detailed in the conversations captured in an electronic forum and Apple can therefore provide no guarantee as to the. This site contains user submitted content, comments and opinions and is for informational purposes only. (Though that is, in fact, happening.) As for OS X, Apple has been doing the same thing for the past 16 years, fulfilling its obligations to open source the Darwin kernel at the heart of OS X.Answer (1 of 6): Think of the use-case: when would you want internet access on a laptop where traditional wifi isnt available If youre not at home, not at work, not at a WiFi enabled coffee shop, where are you A passenger in a car In a grocery store Wandering around a Apple Footer. This isn't about Apple getting open source religion. Choose the Advanced Tab.Apple just open sourced the innards of its popular Mac OS X operating system, but relax.That's simply not how open source works. Even if Apple were releasing Mac OS X Sierra 10.12 in its entirety, the odds of developers doing much with it are negligible. And no, it doesn't mean you can start selling an OS X fork.But this doesn't mean Apple is releasing OS X Sierra 10.12 itself. OS X has always been based on a Unix variant, which is one thing that makes it so powerful for developers. I now own an iPhone, an Apple Watch, an iPad Pro, and a MacBook Pro.What, exactly, is Apple open sourcing? Despite Apple admittedly "doubling down on open source," this particular release of Darwin source code is much more modest. My love affair with Apple began with an iPod nano.Now what?After all, who would use it? Microsoft? The odds of Microsoft taking Mac OS X to replace Windows are less than zero. As Lance James pointed out, "Analogous to a car, the engine and wheels are open source and free but the car frame and all other features are not."Not that it would matter even if Apple were to release Mac OS X Sierra in its entirety. Lots (and lots and lots and lots) of the cool stuff that makes a Mac a Mac (GUI and lots more) are proprietary, not based on open code, and thus not shared." To be clear, it's significant code, but not the sort of thing that comprises an entire operating system.
Why No Apple News Mac OS X Operating SystemCompetitors can take its code (even if cleverly compiled to make this difficult), but they can't thereby take its ecosystem of thousands of ISVs and IHVs that build on the official Red Hat Enterprise Linux product.So why doesn't Apple release it? The better question is why should it? To make any open source project successful requires fantastic documentation, not to mention a heck of a lot of code clean up and ongoing maintenance and marketing. Apple: The holy war that wasn't (TechRepublic)This is why Red Hat can sell a free, easily copied Linux operating system and make billions of dollars doing so. A software business is rarely just a matter of some 1s and 0s, but rather about a complex mesh of hardware, software, and third-party integrations. No US or European company of any credibility would attempt to reverse engineer the Apple hardware that powers Mac OS X, and no company anywhere would attempt to replicate Mac OS X itself, even if they had an official fork, because of this ecosystem. Those already exist and arguably would become more functional if blessed with an official fork of OS X rather than poor attempts at reverse engineering.But even these would suffer from falling outside the official Apple ecosystem. Would we potentially see Chinese knock-offs? Sure. Format converter for macAnd ironically, neither do we.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorAmber ArchivesCategories |