Darwin is dead.

[Swad]

In a move that doesn't surprise those who have kept up with the saga, Apple now appears to have fully ended the Darwin program of an open source OS X kernel. Although Darwin was essentially OS X without most of the things that make OS X great (streamlined UI, etc), it was a show of faith from Apple to the open source community. Many advanced users enjoyed tweaking the kernel for their own uses.

 

It appears that those days are over. According to this MacWorld article,

Thanks to pirates, or rather the fear of them, the Intel edition of Apple's OS X is now a proprietary operating system.

 

Mac developers and power users no longer have the freedom to alter, rebuild, and replace the OS X kernel from source code. Stripped of openness, it no longer possesses the quality that elevated Linux to its status as the second most popular commercial OS.

 

The Darwin open source Mach/Unix core shared by OS X Tiger client and OS X Tiger Server remains completely open for PowerPC Macs. If you have a G3, G4, or G5 Mac, you can hack your own Darwin kernel and use it to boot OS X. But if you have an Intel-based Mac desktop or notebook, your kernel and device drivers are inviolable. Apple still publishes the source code for OS X's commands and utilities and laudably goes several extra miles by open sourcing internally developed technologies such as QuickTime Streaming Server and Bonjour zero-config networking. The source code required to build a customised OS X kernel, however, is gone. Apple says that the state of an OS X-compatible open source x86 Darwin kernel is "in flux."

We obviously know that piracy of the OSx86 kind is a new phenomenon to Apple. But does it really require the closing of its operating system?

[quietglow]

I just saw this and was going to post. Is this news or is this the rehash of what has been brewing? Did Apple release a statement? Seems like all the talk they were doing about OSS in the last few years would kinda demand something in the way of an explanation.

 

This is very sad.

 

So what does this do to the status of the darwin bits posted all over the boards?

[Swad]

I just saw this and was going to post. Is this news or is this the rehash of what has been brewing? Did Apple release a statement? Seems like all the talk they were doing about OSS in the last few years would kinda demand something in the way of an explanation.

 

I don't know - the thing that may be news is the "flux" part. They haven't released any updates for awhile.

[keith]

I guess apple can do whatever they want, I mean people ARE stealing THEIR operatingsystem.

 

But I am sure that the people who used Darwin is a tool are quite mad.

[quietglow]

I guess apple can do whatever they want, I mean people ARE stealing THEIR operatingsystem.

 

This is what Apple would like to frame the issue as. There are people here who will remember, I'm sure when Apple got a WHOLE lot of mileage out of the claim that they were part of the OSS community. That was easy talk when they were the only major player in the PPC world. Apple backpedaling on all that without so much as a statement is what is sad.

[naitram]

while I can't blame apple for the decision, it still upsets me a bit. I would be more than happy to pay for a copy of osx that would run on non apple hardware (maybe this is where they are headed?). This forum is proof that it can be done, and done well. I guess now we just sit, hope, and run with the kernel we have for as long as possible.

[munky]

Guys, does nobody else think this might have less to do with piracy and more to do with all the rumours we've been hearing lately about apple replacing Mach?

 

Maybe this is REALLY all about Leopard...

[quietglow]

Guys, does nobody else think this might have less to do with piracy and more to do with all the rumours we've been hearing lately about apple replacing Mach?

 

Maybe this is REALLY all about Leopard...

 

 

Yeah no kiddin!

 

And I'm starting to think this really isn't news. If you look at the links at macnn:

 

http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/05/17/os....el.locked.down/

 

You'll see that they are using an article from Feb 24 as a reference--that story was also on Slashdot. I'm thinking Tom Yager is blogging about what we've seen up till now: a slowdown in adding stuff to darwin.

 

Can anyone confirm that changes have taken place in the Darwin project?

 

Edit: Slashdot user says its no news:

 

http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=...ad&cid=15351035

[Blackice]

Isn't darwin a derivative of BSD? As in... an OS that requires source sharing?

 

I also feel that this is a prelude to replacing Mach, rather than a fear of pirates. Then again, if Apple do replace Mach, they'll probably not open the source for any of it (if its a new kernel from scratch).

[quietglow]

Isn't darwin a derivative of BSD? As in... an OS that requires source sharing?

 

FreeBSD. No sharing required. There is FreeBSD in windows. Floppy drivers or something?

[Swad]

Indeed, this appears to be rehashing of older news. Oh well. Still interesting.

[Victor Gil]

Bad news for all of us that can't afford to buy a new Mac, but I really think this change has more to do with the fact that they're planning to change the kernel on the new OS, I don't think it's because of the piracy problem. I better start saving some money to buy a new Mac because I'm not planning to get back to Windows in the near future

[ibm-apple]

mving away from the mach kernel and moving one step close to a windows kernel? hs dovorak had any thing to say about this. bottom line is greenbacks homeboy.

 

i always thought apple was a bunch of nazi's with thei restrictive policies and closing down darwin is not news for a company like apple. however, there product is pretty to look at.

[bofors]

Indeed, this appears to be rehashing of older news. Oh well. Still interesting.

 

Yeah, and it sounds like the conclusions that MacWorld is making about Darwin are a little premature too. Nonetheless, it really wouldn't that surprising either. I really wonder how many people actually run Darwin per se.

[rogabean]

In a very slashdot way...

 

nothing to see here... move along.

 

[pianoman]

Yeah this is simply someone with a blog and an opinion. I doubt they release any open source updates to the x86 kernel until the xServe is made x86 based and leopard is out. At this point in time, they really do not benefit by doing so, although it may be demanded when people with custom server applications need it in the not-too-distant future. I think speculating is premature until the entire product line is intel and leopard is out.

[ZFS]

Are we still good or is it over?

 

I still can't confirm this with the current posts. @_@

[Phusho]

Is this the end of this comunity ? Or there is hope ?

 

Is this the end of this comunity ? Or there is hope ?

[A Nonny Moose]

I'm not placing blame, but consider the issues here:

 

1. There are already hacked OS X disks making their rounds in Asian markets, probably with other markets to come.

 

2. People in internet forums discuss Hackintosh systems (whether or not it is a bad thing is another topic) and freely advertise their systems in signatures (again, another topic if it's bad, ok?).

 

Apple sees this and let's face it, it's not what Apple (a private company) wants. Less system sales mean less profit and we have to remember that Apple is a hardware company with software components. The entire purpsoe of OS X, iLife, Final Cut, and iWork is to get a Macintosh system. It has nothing to do with your enjoyment of the applications. It's to drive hardware sales (which pissed off a lot of G3 owners with the new iLife and iWork, but I digress).

 

So we have this problem of perceived rampant piracy with a lot of little pieces of evidence to back it up (again, forgive the bluntness). Either:

 

1. Apply some whacked out update that keeps it open sourced but closed to Apple branded systems. This will most likely be hacked again and again, resulting in more and more fixes until one most likely makes every system inherently unstable.

 

OR

 

2. Close off the valve before the flow increases to the point that it can't be shut off.

 

To Apple, closing off the valve is their solution. Is it a good solution or a bad one? As with any decision, it's a mixed bag. The average user really won't know and won't care so long as their applications still work. Those that seriously need to hack the kernel (and no, making it run on a Dell box doesn't count here) will be looking for new ways to do it. Will it stop people from forcing it to run on Dells? It makes them hit a brick wall, but hackers tend to have and use hammers to get through those brick walls.

 

I do ask though, with QuickTime, WebKit, and Banjour already open sourced and Apple freely giving out the way to make viruses, er, applications with XCode, is closing off the kernel necessarily a horrible thing?

[bofors]

Is this the end of this comunity ?

 

Certainly not, this community is going to here for a long time, the indefinite future. This board has over 30,000 registered users, the cat is out of the bag. Even if Apple does manage to significantly improve the security of Leopard (10.5), it will still only be a matter time before someone like Maxxuss cracks it again. In a worst case scenerio, we are probably talking about months instead of weeks to run a new version of OS X.

 

In no way are we dependant on Darwin being open source. That has merely a convience at times.

[wayneoats]

Hey all is not lost. You guys still have to remember that we are some of the smartest people in the world, so in my words "this is not the end."

[Swad]

Is this the end of this comunity ? Or there is hope ?

 

It's certainly not the end of this community. First, for those using OSx86, Darwin isn't really needed any more from what I understand. It was used in the old days (last summer) but not now.

 

Also, this community keeps growing with new Macintel users and old OSx86 users who upgrade. It's become one of the better Mac forums around, especially when it comes to specific knowledge about the Intel transition (plus the community feel that our forum maintains... I really like that!).

 

Don't worry, we're here to stay.

[charlie]

I am going to wait and see, I am not sure if this is old news or if its based on some new development we are missing.

 

In terms of switching to a new kernel it makes a lot of sence. The micro kernel idea which Mach is based on seems to have had its day. The problem is not desktop systems, its servers, the current Tiger kernel is apparently very inefficent for certian types of heavly threaded work. Exactly the same type of work which busy servers do all the time.

 

I have seen a benchmark of MYSQL and Apache which demonstrate this very clearly, you lose almost half the performance by running on Mac OS X server. It in theory it would make a great server platform, the power of unix and the simplicity of a Mac, sounds perfect to me.

 

To clear a few things up about BSD and its relation to it, Tige. The BSDs and even Linux to a lesser extent all share their routes from the early unix in the 70's. Since then they have all diveraged and gone there seperate ways. However apparently apple has recently borrowed some parts of FreeBSD and used them in the some what long in the tooth Tiger kernal. Which thanks to the BSD license they a free to do, although they have apparently contributed some code which they didnt have too back to FreeBSD.

 

The problem is FreeBSD like linux and nearly everyother main stream OS uses a monalithic kernel archetecture which means apple has had to add lots of plumbing code to make the FreeBSD stuff fit, which is even less efficent.

 

Also there have been reports that a key employee has left apple who was influential in the use of the Mach kernel in Tiger. So it would make sence that apple is switching and writting a new kernel, which conviently, probably wont be open sourced, which would be a shame.

 

If I were apple I would build a new kernel using the FreeBSD one as a base and carry one like they have with darwin (open source kernel, proprietary consumer OS). Still I am not apple and I am sure they have there reasons. You never know it could even be priacy related. Although if they sold OS X seperatly they would massively reduce that issue.

 

Just my thoughts anyway.

[leninsz]

Darwin is dead for a long time. If it would be of any use there would be a fork already.

I don´t think that Apple will move to a monolithic kernel because that is a great effort, to do so; and there is almost no gain. MacOS is a great desktop OS - for that a microkernel is quite enough; on the other hand MacOS for server? I don´t think so... Why in the world would someone pay for a slow server OS when there are BSD and Linux based OSes for free with better performance than MacOS. And if you really want something that you can only get for money you buy a real UNIX server.

Apple should stick with their insane priced desktop solutions.

[OryHara]

has it been stated FROM APPLE that leopard will NOT contain darwin?