> IS OPEN SOURCE APPLE'S SALVATION?
> Joe "Zonker April 21 2003
> ".. While Apple's reliance on open source has changed the nature of
> its products, it is not likely to result in a huge change in market
> share. Open source is not the key to Apple taking over the world, says
> Roger Kay, director of client computing at IDC .."
> ".. The question is whether adoption of open source has any real
> impact on Apple's overall strategy and health or is just an
> interesting side note .."
Another interesting thing to note is that Apple's Public Source license
has some similarities to the GPL. So, although they used BSD code,
anyone who modifies Darwin code would be required to contribute back.
As for what they've contributed back to FreeBSD, I heard a long time ago
they contributed an NFS debugging tool. I don't know what else. The
BSDL doesn't require it, but some companies do contribute back anyways,
or have an additional agreement as to how handle such things. Like, for
example, one company that builds embedded products derived from NetBSD
code signed an agreement that the source was to remain closed for 6
months, and then opened. I think this is what Lindows and/or someone
associated with United Linux tried to do with GPL code. The BSDL does
allow this flexibility while being compatible with the GPL (due to the
removal of the obnoxious advertising clause). RMS was right is lobbying
to have that clause removed. Of course, the BSDL has its obvious
weaknesses, as others have pointed out.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----