On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 08:02:34AM -0800, Derrill 'Kisc' Guilbert <lister at insaneninjahero.com> wrote: > I haven't used an Apple computer since IIc, so maybe I'm not the best > judge ... but you do know that OS X is written on a FreeBSD based > kernel, right? My brother in law (http://www.daemonnews.org, > http://www.bsdmall.com) insists that all things BSD are inherently > superior to anything else. Any major manufacturer that is willing to say > to the open source community that "we were wrong, and we're going to do > it your way now" gets some free points from me. (again, parrotting > Chris' words... I don't know diddley about OS X). > > The only thing I know about Linux vs. BSD is that my brother in law > likes BSD, a lot of the people he knows are convinced that the GPL is > almost as bad as M$ says, and every Linux proponent I've ever spoken to > says that is patently crap. It's true that Apple gets some points for adopting a UNIX-based model, but it's also worth noting that they picked BSD because of the license, not because BSD is necessarily better or worse than Linux. The GPL would have prevented Apple from taking the Linux kernel, modifying it, and selling the result as their own work (perhaps with a line or two of credit). Whether that idea bothers you or not is a good proxy for BSD users vs Linux users. As for "inherently superior"... they are, after all, trying to sell you something, even if that something is their free operating system. It's a matter of opinion, and there are advantages and disadvantages either way. -- Matthew Hunter (matthew at infodancer.org) Public Key: http://matthew.infodancer.org/public_key.txt Homepage: http://matthew.infodancer.org/index.jsp Politics: http://www.triggerfinger.org/index.jsp