Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

openradar.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#21

Post by pjmlp »

Terretta wrote: post #18
techrat wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we honestly surprised? Apple has a history of being quite hostile to consumers despite their image as a trendy company. Nothing they do is done unless there's an actual threat to their bottom line, whether it's finally offering larger screens for the iPhones, finally making iTunes (partially) DRM free or closing up code/eliminating venues for cross compatibility. Apple is about anti competitive as they get.

> history of being quite hostile to consumers That's going to need some really impressive fact-based justification. I think a good case could be made Apple's the only PC maker focused on making mass market consumers happy (vs enterprise or technology buyers). They've also seemed more focused on the product experience than on market share. - - - Some TL;DR specific thoughts on each of your examples: - "finally offerin…

Well, I remember another Apple, back in the 80-90's.

Not the open source friendly one, that developers that only know Apple since Mac OS X days seem to think about.

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#22

Post by davidw »

pjmlp wrote: post #21
Terretta wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> history of being quite hostile to consumers That's going to need some really impressive fact-based justification. I think a good case could be made Apple's the only PC maker focused on making mass market consumers happy (vs enterprise or technology buyers). They've also seemed more focused on the product experience than on market share. - - - Some TL;DR specific thoughts on each of your examples: - "finally offerin…

Well, I remember another Apple, back in the 80-90's. Not the open source friendly one, that developers that only know Apple since Mac OS X days seem to think about.

Exactly - Apple has always been about control. Back when Microsoft was building up their software monopoly, Apple was aiming for control of both hardware and software.

Maybe they require it for their users' benefit or something, or say they do, but Apple is very much about control in a way that I, as a hackerish kind of guy, am not ok with for the core of my computer usage.

My parents have Macs on the other hand, and are very happy with them - it seems to be a good system for the kind of people who don't hack on stuff and like the tight integration.

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#23

Post by halostatue »

davidw wrote: post #22
pjmlp wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I remember another Apple, back in the 80-90's. Not the open source friendly one, that developers that only know Apple since Mac OS X days seem to think about.

Exactly - Apple has always been about control . Back when Microsoft was building up their software monopoly, Apple was aiming for control of both hardware and software. Maybe they require it for their users' benefit or something, or say they do, but Apple is very much about control in a way that I, as a hackerish kind of guy, am not ok with for the core of my computer usage. My parents have Macs on the other hand, an…

It’s also a good system for people who don’t have time to hack on things that aren’t related to their core interests. Like me. I stopped building my own PCs in 2001 (when I switched to laptops almost exclusively) and stopped fighting with both Windows and Linux desktop configuration horrors in 2006 (when I switched to Mac OS X as my host system).

I have things that I think are far more interesting to work on than worrying about hardware compatibility. If I ever reach a point on Apple hardware + software where I can’t hack on the things that I want to hack on, then I will leave it. But as of right now, it gets out of my way and lets me do those things that I want to do. (Some of the various Linux distros have gotten better about this, but they aren’t there yet, even for me—and definitely not for my wife.)

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#25

Post by dingaling »

halostatue wrote: post #23
davidw wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly - Apple has always been about control . Back when Microsoft was building up their software monopoly, Apple was aiming for control of both hardware and software. Maybe they require it for their users' benefit or something, or say they do, but Apple is very much about control in a way that I, as a hackerish kind of guy, am not ok with for the core of my computer usage. My parents have Macs on the other hand, an…

It’s also a good system for people who don’t have time to hack on things that aren’t related to their core interests. Like me. I stopped building my own PCs in 2001 (when I switched to laptops almost exclusively) and stopped fighting with both Windows and Linux desktop configuration horrors in 2006 (when I switched to Mac OS X as my host system). I have things that I think are far more interesting to work on than wor…

> I have things that I think are far more interesting to work on than worrying about hardware compatibility.

I've never used an Apple system, but I have the impression that only a subset of third-party hardware is compatible. Is that accurate? I've perhaps deduced incorrectly from the number of one-star Amazon reviews that decry 'lack of Apple drivers'.

To me that would be frustrating since there are only two parties that can resolve such an issue ( Apple and the vendor ) rather than in OSS world where there's a chance of reverse-engineering a driver.

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#27

Post by doodpants »

Terretta wrote: post #18
techrat wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we honestly surprised? Apple has a history of being quite hostile to consumers despite their image as a trendy company. Nothing they do is done unless there's an actual threat to their bottom line, whether it's finally offering larger screens for the iPhones, finally making iTunes (partially) DRM free or closing up code/eliminating venues for cross compatibility. Apple is about anti competitive as they get.

> history of being quite hostile to consumers That's going to need some really impressive fact-based justification. I think a good case could be made Apple's the only PC maker focused on making mass market consumers happy (vs enterprise or technology buyers). They've also seemed more focused on the product experience than on market share. - - - Some TL;DR specific thoughts on each of your examples: - "finally offerin…

"In every day use, once the phone is part of you, one handed becomes natural when right sized."

Am I the only one who almost never uses a moble device one-handed? Anything that requires fairly rapid accurate tapping, I just can't do reliably with my thumb.

Actually, now that I think about it, it probably has to do with the fact that I turned off auto-"correct" from the very beginning, so when I'm typing I have to tap every single character manually.

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#28

Post by Shish2k »

palunon wrote: post #15
rwmj wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have loads of engineers, special hardware of your own (ARM), and secret insights into other hardware from your suppliers (Intel), then I can see it could make a lot of sense. That doesn't mean it's a nice thing to do. Was this derived originally from FreeBSD code? This could be why the GPL is a good thing.

That's exactly what the GPL is for.

Though BSD advocates would make the argument that if it was GPL, Apple would never have used it in the first place.

(Personally I'm not sure if it's even possible to definitively say which situation is better; you can't do something scientific like releasing a library under both licenses and seeing which people use, because they would interfere - you really need two parallel universes to see the true effect of that one change)

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#29

Post by davidw »

halostatue wrote: post #23
davidw wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly - Apple has always been about control . Back when Microsoft was building up their software monopoly, Apple was aiming for control of both hardware and software. Maybe they require it for their users' benefit or something, or say they do, but Apple is very much about control in a way that I, as a hackerish kind of guy, am not ok with for the core of my computer usage. My parents have Macs on the other hand, an…

It’s also a good system for people who don’t have time to hack on things that aren’t related to their core interests. Like me. I stopped building my own PCs in 2001 (when I switched to laptops almost exclusively) and stopped fighting with both Windows and Linux desktop configuration horrors in 2006 (when I switched to Mac OS X as my host system). I have things that I think are far more interesting to work on than wor…

I've been buying Dells with Ubuntu for something like 10 years, and once in a while have a minor annoyance with something, but not more than I see people complaining about on twitter with their Macs.

And I have had occasion to hack on low-level stuff like kernel drivers, now and then, so knowing the whole system well because I use it every day has been an advantage.

Re: Apple: We have decided to no longer release Libm source (2013)

#30

Post by pdpi »

dingaling wrote: post #25
halostatue wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also a good system for people who don’t have time to hack on things that aren’t related to their core interests. Like me. I stopped building my own PCs in 2001 (when I switched to laptops almost exclusively) and stopped fighting with both Windows and Linux desktop configuration horrors in 2006 (when I switched to Mac OS X as my host system). I have things that I think are far more interesting to work on than wor…

> I have things that I think are far more interesting to work on than worrying about hardware compatibility. I've never used an Apple system, but I have the impression that only a subset of third-party hardware is compatible. Is that accurate? I've perhaps deduced incorrectly from the number of one-star Amazon reviews that decry 'lack of Apple drivers'. To me that would be frustrating since there are only two parties…

This might or might not be an issue. Personally, I've never encountered it.
Post reply on HN