Re: [Fed-Talk] Apple closes down OS X Kernel
Re: [Fed-Talk] Apple closes down OS X Kernel
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Apple closes down OS X Kernel
- From: Boyd Fletcher <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 14:54:08 -0400
- Thread-topic: [Fed-Talk] Apple closes down OS X Kernel
Title: Re: [Fed-Talk] Apple closes down OS X Kernel
Dell, like Apple, licensed the proprietary technology from Intel. Though Dell more likely just OEM’d a product from a Taiwanese manufacturer instead of actually designing a system like Apple did. The only non proprietary chips in mass production on the market today are SPARC and PowerPC both of which are controlled by industry consortiums. You can go to SPARC International, pay a couple hundred bucks and gets the complete specifications for the SPARC processors. This is really no different that going to ISO or IEEE and paying a couple of hundred bucks to get the specifications for Ethernet or some other standard.
Intel has never released its chip specifications in that manor. If you want to use the Intel instruction set and build products that work with Intel chips, you are going to have to license patents and technology from Intel. AMD, Via, Abit, etc.... all do.
boyd
On 5/18/06 4:20 PM, "Michael Pike" <email@hidden> wrote:
Well, someone had to release something because Dell has a CoreDuo computer... if Dell has it, it cannot be that proprietary because they do not innovate anything.
On 5/18/06, Boyd Fletcher <email@hidden> wrote:
the Mac is absolutely proprietary. Last I checked Intel hasn't released the patents and copyrights on their chipsets nor did Apple. Just because you can run multiple O/Ses on the hardware has nothing to do with whether or not the hardware design is proprietary. I agree with Brian, Apple making the x86 kernel and driver closed source is going to do much more harm that good. one of the reasons I like the Mac was the core operating was open source.
boyd
On 5/17/06 3:35 PM, "Michael Pike" <email@hidden> wrote:
Just a little comment of my own here... even though it is closed source does not mean it is proprietary. Keep in mind that even though OS X itself may close the kernel (and I can see why they have done it), you can still run open source operating systems on the Mac since it has an intel processor.
On 5/17/06, Brian Raymond <email@hidden> wrote:
I imagine this will generate some traffic on the list so I thought I would
throw my hat in the ring.
It looks like the Intel version of the OSX kernel might so closed source, I
can understand the reasoning however I don't think it will solve the
problem. If Apple is trying to limit what crackers can attack when trying to
get it to run on generic hardware I think it might help a little but it will
not solve the problem because people will still crack it.
The second more general point I wanted to make regarding Apple's source has
been that this has been used time and time again as a reason why you would
use Apple over competitors. I can't see Apple being able to use the
non-proprietary argument anymore.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=14663&Page=1&pagePos=8 <http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=14663&Page=1&pagePos=8> <http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=14663&Page=1&pagePos=8> <http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=14663&Page=1&pagePos=8>
- Brian
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden <mailto:email@hidden> )
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden