thrunner Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20060622/tc_zd/181775 Daniel Drew Turner - eWEEK Thu Jun 22, 5:55 PM ET Playing on Apple's past "Switch" ad campaign, which was aimed at getting Windows users to migrate to Apple's Mac OS X-based computers, a few longtime Mac and open-source gurus are vocally publicizing their switch away from Apple's platform to more open-source solutions. Though the practical impact is impossible to gauge, their arguments have been making waves. The first was Mark Pilgrim, who wrote free software for the Mac in the mid-1990s. He is involved with various current open-source projects, was a certified Mac OS X trainer and has written about Web site accessibility and scripting. In a post on his blog, Pilgrim wrote that though he has long been impressed by Apple's hardware and software, he thought that the latter had grown less attractive and more "restrictive," leading him to seek alternatives. Pilgrim wrote that he regretted that Apple's software, including the operating system, was not open-source (Pilgrim has published software under the GNU GPL [General Public License]; the license states that software published under it includes the source code, which users can modify to their liking as long as they document the changes.) He noted that most applications he uses are so open—"Why keep running them on an operating system that costs money and restricts my rights and my usage?" Part of Mac OS X is already open-source. Click here to read more about the Linux community's reaction to Windows on Macs. Darwin, the Unix foundations of the operating system, is available under the APSL (Apple Public Source License), a free software license. The APSL is not compatible with the GPL, however, because it does not force developers using it to release their software for free. And no other part of Mac OS X, from its user interface layer to the applications (and their file formats), is open source. Pilgrim's argument was that non-open software often ties user data to a proprietary file format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Now they can say that they're switchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedragon1971 Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 There is so much inaccuracy about open source software in that article that I don't know where to begin! As for his supposed "data loss" from iPhoto and iTunes database corruption, that is utter nonsense. The data files aren't stored in the database, it is simply an index of the files in other folders. You would think a programmer would know the difference. The article seems to be just a shill piece for Ubunto Linux (notice that it is the only distro mentioned by name?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Ubuntu Linux reminds me way too much of OS 9 graphics wise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts