open source does not equal free

there is too much confusion as to what is free and what is open source and the relationship of each.

Note in the vid i cite freebsd as os x kernel but the whole kernel is xnu which is a hybrid of freebsd and mach. I only wanted to cite the open source of freebsd.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Apple
• Mac
• freeBSD
• open
• source
• linux
• free
• software

[TheJakeDTH]

You are confusing Free Software with Freeware. Free Software is about the freedom to run, copy, distribute, sell, study, change, and improve, the software. Freeware is gratis software, free of charge software. So "Open Source" does equal "Free Software" but it does not equal "Freeware". In actuality, most "Open Source" software is Free Software (it even says so in the license, the GPL is a Free Software license NOT an Open Source license), Free Software pre-dates Open Source.

[mrbit10]

@TheJakeDTH no i do not believe i am confusing he issue, there is free as in freedom and free as in free of charge, have a look at my "Open Source & Free software" video

[Peterle07]

Ich habe dieses Video gefunden, als ich nach Apple FreeBSD gesucht habe und es ist das beste von allen!

[mrbit10]

Ich danke Ihnen, und danke für den Kommentar

[netytan]

Not to correct you, I really enjoy your videos, but isn't the Kernel inside OSX XNU? It does use code from the BSD kernel but they're fundamentally different.

Keep up the good work :).

[mrbit10]

yep you are correct, if you look at the very first comment, i noticed that I left out the mach kernel in the vid, so i added it as a comment. freebsd along with the mach kernel make XNU. I just wanted to show the open source part of the kernel rooting from bsd to apple's own. Thanks for the comment :)

[lin545]

The cruicial part where programers are striking is:

- they want to reuse the code the way they want

- they want to be payed for writing the code

So, charge for work. Dont charge for result. Or set your result a one-time collective price, which, once payed by community, is released opensource.

I mean human work is always needed to be charged, or there would be no point in programming.

Reselling the code itself however very stupid - that was the starting point for patents and DRM.

[lin545]

Its actually pretty easy:

Freeware: closed source, proprietary, copyright, free distribution

Opensource: open source, proprietary, copyright, free distribution

Free software: open source, open licensing, copyleft, free distribution

BSD: open source, open licensing, almost zero copyright(steal, steal, steal), free distribution

Public Domain: absence of any license.

[Robot5sl]

Approval!!!

[somethings90]

The gpl doesn't require that the software be free "cost wise." In fact, the gpl prohibits that requirement. The gpl does, however, make selling gpl'd software highly unprofitable.

[jeroeniskoning]

Atleast is opensource FAAAAAAR more open then closed source...

Go Opensource !

[pcfxer]

XNU is not a hybrid of BSD and MACH. The kernel is MACH implemented in the fashion of a monolithic kernel (MACH really is a micro kernel). The BSD part manages user processes and resources. BSD interacts with the XNU kernel through an API written by apple.

Open source is mean free. If you apply restrictions to code that I can download then it is OPEN. Read up on openbsd and I think that is the true definition of OPEN source. If you apply restrictions to code, it is AVAILABLE source, not open.

[Imprezaman555]

open source was originally called free software, but was changed because buisness' assosiated free with crappy, cheap, ect. I know what u mean and pretty much all open source software used the gpl which means that it has to be free "cost wise" and people must be able to modd it. and yes OSX has some open source parts but the OS as a whole is closed so it dont count.

[13thpersoncomedy]

well, you can have completely free program from source code :P ! I mean, you can pay for RedHat or get source code and make a free legal iso out of it, another example is Xchat (windows) it's not for free, but you can get source code and compile it yourself (but linux's is for free)

opens-source means free... Mac open-sourced SOME parts, which made it not free ;)