helloSystem 0.5 Released For macOS-Inspired FreeBSD Desktop

[Xodiced]

Yes very true, actually most operating systems do (Even Windows's Winsock is based on an old version of the BSD network stack.)

However it does still stand, macOS and Windows is not based on BSD (unlike this helloSystem would be). macOS (via Darwin) uses a hybrid microkernel (XNU), Not the monolithic BSD one. And really there is is a lot of GNU code in there too. It shipped bash and screen in the userland for example.

However you could certainly say that macOS is composed of code derived from NEXTStep, BSD, Mach and other free software projects code, as well as developed by Apple. It certainly is clear that Apple is making good profit from everyone elses work too (including GNU and BSD projects).

Plenty of people make profit from "everyone else's work" (nee Open-source software). Stop acting like Apple is alone in that.

[remenic]

MacOS X is already the MacOS of BSDs.

Don't you mean was? They've been at version 11 for a while now. Next one is 11.3 I think?

[aht0]

However you could certainly say that macOS is composed of code derived from NEXTStep, BSD, Mach and other free software projects code, as well as developed by Apple. It certainly is clear that Apple is making good profit from everyone elses work too (including GNU and BSD projects).

So is Android. But would you label it BSD?
And Apple gave BSD back Clang.

[kpedersen]

So is Android. But would you label it BSD?

No I wouldn't label Android as BSD either. Same reason why Windows isn't BSD, Linux isn't BSD and macOS isn't BSD.

There is a strange phenomenon certainly we see with beginners on the FreeBSD forums / mailing lists of people trying to connect the dots and think a fancy frontend on FreeBSD "makes it macOS". But these dots unfortunately don't exist and it wouldn't make any more of an end result compared to doing the same with Linux.

And Apple gave BSD back Clang.

LLVM was actually created by the University of Illinois. Just because Apple is a well marketed brand name it is important to realize they are very reliant on academia and open-source. Though they did start the clang frontend along with contributions from Microsoft, Google, ARM, Sony, Intel and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and many of us little guys.

However in a sense, yes, the project gave the BSDs a suitably licensed compiler. Though I wouldn't say it gave it "back". It never actually had a BSD licensed compiler so this was a really happy bonus. Traditionally BSD used pcc and gcc since it was released as open-source. So it has always had many compilers available to it, just under less permissive licenses.

Android also officially uses clang. But again, that is not BSD. So I guess Apple gave Linux kernel derived platforms back Clang.

[mzs_47]

Can someone confirm whether sleep works on desktops? It has become a major feature for people using UPS.

[aht0]

No I wouldn't label Android as BSD either. Same reason why Windows isn't BSD, Linux isn't BSD and macOS isn't BSD.

I was being rhetorical. Because idiots putting OSX into same kettle with BSD's are entirely ignoring little fact that large piece of Android code also originate from BSD's. C library is kind of important in an OS, don't you agree (just an example)?
Quite the opposite, Android gets thrown in your face usually as an poster-child-example of "linux's success and superiority" when some linux-fanatic-asshole starts yet another "linux is better than bsd" -flamewar.

[kpedersen]

I was being rhetorical. Because idiots putting OSX into same kettle with BSD's are entirely ignoring little fact that large piece of Android code also originate from BSD's. C library is kind of important in an OS, don't you agree (just an example)?

Heh yeah I had a feeling you might have been. However I thought I might as well clarify for the sake of coder

Yep, pretty much all of these operating systems share bits. That is why I do find it quite amusing when you get those pathological anti-BSD weirdos.

[ElectricPrism]

[Paradigm Shifter]

I wish them luck with their endeavours, but I can't help but feel they're on to a loser before they even start. If they closely replicate macOS, they'll be marked down for the few areas where it's not 100% the same... if they diverge and do something different, they'll be criticised for that, instead. I'm not even going to start worrying about what pedigree what OS has with regards to kernel right now...

[Darquier]

I wish them luck with their endeavours, but I can't help but feel they're on to a loser before they even start. If they closely replicate macOS, they'll be marked down for the few areas where it's not 100% the same... if they diverge and do something different, they'll be criticised for that, instead. I'm not even going to start worrying about what pedigree what OS has with regards to kernel right now...

Every operating system is criticized because everyone has different preferences. It's reasonable to use something similar or exactly the same concept as macOS for the most important things. As long as the main working methods are similar, there is no need to criticize a free OS. I must say that on my own I managed to make the UI of my FreeBSD system largely similar to the UI of macOS: https://i.ibb.co/CvbFfG3/Screenshot-...4-01-32-18.png And I'll be quite honest, there are many things where FreeBSD is better than macOS. Eg the performance in many apps, such as in NginX. Furthermore, macOS doesn't have a free image viewer as elegant and fast as Viewnior.