GnuGo for iPhone center of controversy.

[kirkmc]

Apple works very closely with free software developers for Mac programs, even releasing a free version of much of their OS.

The way you write this seems to imply Apple developed an OS and handed some of it over to open source out of kindness. FreeBSD was around WAY before OSX. Apple built and tightly integrated a very slick user interface on top of it. It also brought in a lot of ideas, and maybe code, form NeXTstep. True, with the way the BSD license works Apple doesn't need to work with the free software community, but you make it sound like Apple just delivered the bulk of their OS to the world. It was actually the other way around

Actually, they took BSD Unix, made a lot of changes, then released the changed version as Darwin. So, yes, they started with open source software, then released their changes, as the BSD license requires.

[Redbeard]

Actually, they took BSD Unix, made a lot of changes, then released the changed version as Darwin. So, yes, they started with open source software, then released their changes, as the BSD license requires.

Sorry, I can't let that stand. The BSD license does not require that companies release changes to code. It only requires that developers include a statement that the program contains BSD code. Developers are free to include BSD code in proprietary/closed source applications, which is why most of Apple and Microsoft products use it. The GPL requires that changes to the code be released, which is why Apple and Microsoft try to avoid using GPL code.

I felt that this needed to be clarified for those reading this thread who may not be familiar with these licenses.

[kirkmc]

Actually, they took BSD Unix, made a lot of changes, then released the changed version as Darwin. So, yes, they started with open source software, then released their changes, as the BSD license requires.

Sorry, I can't let that stand. The BSD license does not require that companies release changes to code. It only requires that developers include a statement that the program contains BSD code. Developers are free to include BSD code in proprietary/closed source applications, which is why most of Apple and Microsoft products use it. The GPL requires that changes to the code be released, which is why Apple and Microsoft try to avoid using GPL code.

I felt that this needed to be clarified for those reading this thread who may not be familiar with these licenses.

Thanks, I thought they both had that condition.

[cdybeijing]

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... g-brother/ (w/f/s)

*grabs popcorn*