On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 22:27:11 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ suckmysav ] on Saturday 10 February 2007 21:52 \__
>
>> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 18:00:47 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> Is Apple the New Evil Empire?
>>
>> What do you mean by new?
>>
>> Apple are just as bad as Microsoft. Apple are quite happy to use open
>> source software to build their products but when was the last time
>> you saw Apple give something back in the form of say, releasing a port of
>> itunes for Linux. Or perhaps QTVR?
>>
>> Whats that you say? They have never ported a product to Linux?
>>
>> And you can't say that it's because Linux doesn't have enough market share
>> to justify the work involved, because last time I checked Linux had a
>> bigger slice of the market than OSX.
>>
>> Now, I'm not stupid. I realise that they support OSX as means to
>> maintaining the credibility of their own OS as that is the main driver
>> for their primary business which is hardware sales, but the fact remains
>> that apple is just as keen to see Linux fail as Microsoft is.
>>
>> They don't even give lip service to Linux in their support pages. They
>> pretend that it doesn't even exist.
>>
>> They are worse than Microsoft in this respect.
>
> Yes, I agree with what you say (and I learned many new things as well). Do
> you happen to know if they contribute back to KHTML? I have never heard
> about an open source project that gets patches from Apple. Even Oracle are
> better in that respect (they have some kernel backflow).
I can't really say. I know they had their Darwin kernel as OSS for a while
but I seem to recall that they have withdrawn it and closed it. I could
be wrong though
What I do know is that whenever an apple proprietary product gains some
traction such as ipod and to a lesser degree QTVR, you can bet that apple
will do absolutely nothing to try to broaden its appeal by porting it to
Linux. They are more than happy to pretend that MS are the only other game
in town. You can see it in their advertising. They present their PC vs Mac
ads as if PC = Windows.
They have no wish for non-proprietary software to flourish, even while
they use it to build their own proprietary products.
At least Microsoft is slightly more honest in that respect. What they
don't develop themselves they have blatantly purchased or stolen from
other proprietary vendors. That is assuming that they haven't been using
free source code in their software and hiding it for years of course. They
have overtly used OSS in the past with their original TCP stack in NT
which came from one of the BSD's if I recall correctly.
|
|
