7 ms·

HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open. Everyone abandoned WebKit for some unknown reason having to do with Apple. Please list these OSS Apps, I would love

HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open. Everyone abandoned WebKit for some unknown reason having to do with Apple. Please list these OSS Apps, I would love to know since Google and Wikpedia say nothing like that.

kunai 13y ago
TextEdit and Chess are two.
- UntitledNo4 13y ago
  And even more important - CUPS.
  - gizzlon 13y ago
    Yes, but they didn't create CUPS. Keeping it open source might have been a conditions of the purchase (citation needed :)
    - UntitledNo4 13y ago
      Perhaps you're right, I don't know, but for me it's irrelevant. Someone wanted examples of OSS from Apple, and in my opinion it's the most important one when I was a Linux User. I was not trying to defend Apple. I think they deserve a lot of criticism they receive, but that they also deserve some credit. This is also true for most (if not all) other firms that are often discussed here. Just wanted to highlight that rarely are things black or white, but that we rather deal with a lot of different shades of grey.
clobber 13y ago
http://www.opensource.apple.com/ http://www.opensource.apple.com/ Crazy, huh?
- reidrac 13y ago
  I don't know if it's crazy, but I wouldn't say that site is the answer. Yes, it has the open source word all over it, but have you spent two minutes to look at the content? Most of the "relevant" stuff is just to comply with third party OSS licenses (read: non APSL projects). Although not exactly the same, it looks to me more or less like this: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200203720 http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=2... OSS is about community not just a website to release files (aka "code dump"). If you had pointed to http://www.webkit.org/ http://www.webkit.org/ or http://www.cups.org/ http://www.cups.org/ ; well, that would be different. EDIT: typos
  - devcpp 13y ago
    You're thinking free software. Open source does not mean free. But you're right, open source without being free is pretty bad, as is locking your devices on your software and your own only, even for the purpose of making the experience "perfect".
  - Intermernet 13y ago
    Maybe not CUPS. From http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html "CUPSTM is provided under the GNU General Public License ("GPL") and GNU Library General Public License ("LGPL"), Version 2, with exceptions for Apple operating systems and the OpenSSL toolkit." I wonder why the OpenSSL toolkit needs an exemption.
    - sciurus 13y ago
      OpenSSL's license imposes additional restrictions which are not compatible with the GPL. Thus, if you release code under the GPL but want to allow people to link it with OpenSSL, you need to provide an exception. There's an article covering the topic with much more nuance at https://lwn.net/Articles/428111/ https://lwn.net/Articles/428111/
      - Intermernet 13y ago
kedean 13y ago
>HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open What, because some vendors take liberty with codec choices? HTML5, while not officially ratified as an RFC, has an agreed-upon standard version, and the implementations of it are far more standardized than HTML4 ever was. As for openness, it's a markup language, there's nothing that CANT be open about it. The only possible thing about html5 that isn't open is the popular choice of video codec, h264, in which case: whoop de doo.
- NewAccnt 13y ago
  Thanks for making my point for me.
sbuk 13y ago
Google does: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=apple+open+source&l=1 http://lmgtfy.com/?q=apple+open+source&l=1

kunai 13y ago

TextEdit and Chess are two.

UntitledNo4 13y ago
And even more important - CUPS.
- gizzlon 13y ago
  Yes, but they didn't create CUPS. Keeping it open source might have been a conditions of the purchase (citation needed :)
  - UntitledNo4 13y ago
    Perhaps you're right, I don't know, but for me it's irrelevant. Someone wanted examples of OSS from Apple, and in my opinion it's the most important one when I was a Linux User. I was not trying to defend Apple. I think they deserve a lot of criticism they receive, but that they also deserve some credit. This is also true for most (if not all) other firms that are often discussed here. Just wanted to highlight that rarely are things black or white, but that we rather deal with a lot of different shades of grey.

clobber 13y ago

http://www.opensource.apple.com/ http://www.opensource.apple.com/ Crazy, huh?

reidrac 13y ago
I don't know if it's crazy, but I wouldn't say that site is the answer. Yes, it has the open source word all over it, but have you spent two minutes to look at the content? Most of the "relevant" stuff is just to comply with third party OSS licenses (read: non APSL projects). Although not exactly the same, it looks to me more or less like this: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200203720 http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=2... OSS is about community not just a website to release files (aka "code dump"). If you had pointed to http://www.webkit.org/ http://www.webkit.org/ or http://www.cups.org/ http://www.cups.org/ ; well, that would be different. EDIT: typos
- devcpp 13y ago
  You're thinking free software. Open source does not mean free. But you're right, open source without being free is pretty bad, as is locking your devices on your software and your own only, even for the purpose of making the experience "perfect".
- Intermernet 13y ago
  Maybe not CUPS. From http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html "CUPSTM is provided under the GNU General Public License ("GPL") and GNU Library General Public License ("LGPL"), Version 2, with exceptions for Apple operating systems and the OpenSSL toolkit." I wonder why the OpenSSL toolkit needs an exemption.
  - sciurus 13y ago
    OpenSSL's license imposes additional restrictions which are not compatible with the GPL. Thus, if you release code under the GPL but want to allow people to link it with OpenSSL, you need to provide an exception. There's an article covering the topic with much more nuance at https://lwn.net/Articles/428111/ https://lwn.net/Articles/428111/
    - Intermernet 13y ago

kedean 13y ago

>HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open What, because some vendors take liberty with codec choices? HTML5, while not officially ratified as an RFC, has an agreed-upon standard version, and the implementations of it are far more standardized than HTML4 ever was. As for openness, it's a markup language, there's nothing that CANT be open about it. The only possible thing about html5 that isn't open is the popular choice of video codec, h264, in which case: whoop de doo.

NewAccnt 13y ago
Thanks for making my point for me.

sbuk 13y ago

Google does: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=apple+open+source&l=1 http://lmgtfy.com/?q=apple+open+source&l=1