Apparently, 12% of Technology Workers Believe that MacOS is based on Linux
-
Hide WINE in the box
-
Boxed WINE? Disgusting
-
Ahhh give him a break he probably just forgot. If it helps, I'm sure he was thinking something horrible about somebody reasonably nice. /s
-
That compatability has been dropping recently, especially for games. Most of my CD games need extra libraries to run now, if they work at all.
-
Huh. That’s interesting. Are the MacOS coreutils incapable or not user-friendly in some way? Or is it more that they’re too different for people who know GNU and BSD coreutils?
I also wonder if their coreutils are open source. I quickly tried searching here but couldn’t find an answer https://opensource.apple.com/releases/
-
Just remember that they didn't certify macOS for any practical reason, Apple was just weaseling out of a lawsuit and figured that paying the certification was cheaper than damages. I think they lost the certification some time later. Newer macOS is not Unix certified.
-
While I was doing OS-X stuff, I remember Darwin just being a really painfully bad implementation of the apt functionality in Debian based Linuxes... Potaytoe, Potahtoe, Darwin is like burnt house fries, IMO.
-
I comment on both my phone and PC. As a sofware developer, its not a big deal for me to copy/paste, I do it all the time (even read the O'Reilly book on the subject
).~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
Also as someone else suggested, look into automation lol
Just so I don't repeat myself...
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
So their only real development effort becomes contributing to the kernel and wine. Ez pz.
-
TOS can't change Law, can't strip away rights that you have.
Law always trumps TOS.
In fact, if a company tries to via their TOS they are opening themselves up for big risks/lawsuits, as they are trying to gain ownership of your content, voiding their Safe Harbor law protections.
They can't have it both ways, thats not how the Law works. Either they have the protection, or they own the content.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
They share some inspiration. Same with Linux/Unix confusion.
About 15 minutes in a terminal trying to do Linux'y things are you get completely disillusioned.
-
Well, scrapers probably would ignore it.
Maybe, I wouldn't doubt it, if true. We live in the age of "ask for forgiveness and not permission". But the law is the law, and forgiveness may cost them some $$$ down the road. At the very least it leaves them exposed vis-a-vis 'Safe Harbor' laws-wise, when some other powerful entity wants to go to war with them.
In either case, I'm not going to give up my rights just because currently laws are not enforced. Like most things with humans, things move back-and-forth throughout time, and what may be overlooked today may be scrutinized thoroughly tomorrow.
(And for the record, you're the bazillionish person to tell me that. The repetition is real.)
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
-
One or two Linux distros were (are?) UNIX certified, though.
-
Newer macOS is not Unix certified.
It's UNIX 03 compliant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification
-
Linux Is Not Unix, Xavier!
-
Anything can be Unix if you're willing to pay for the certification.
-
That license does nothing.
Especially since the comment itself in question is so short that it would be public domain in practically every jurisdiction.
-
But not the Linux kernel itself.
-
What would you say determines whether a kernel is a Unix kernel? I believe Linux is as much a Unix kernel as the BSD kernel is, the FreeBSD kernel, the AIX kernel, the System V kernel, etc.
