Some facts: >The BSD code present in XNU came from the F

>>58912696
Apple is actually moving away from XNU in general, towards a BSD kernel. They're also giving us loads of code.

>Take advantage of Mac OS X's open sourced parts released by Apple to build an OS.

This,

THIS is what I want.

>tfw Apple doesn't release Darwin builds anymore

Not even FreeBSD devs use FreeBSD on the desktop. It's pretty cool for storage (ZFS) and networking (supposedly, I haven't tried it), but not for the desktop. If you want a free desktop, GNU/Linux is literally the only choice.

>>58912880
You seem to have forgotten about OpenBSD

>>58912880
Mac OS X has its core based on software whose license is FSF approved, that means better drivers, meaning better performance, meaning it is the best free desktop operating system.

>>58912807
>They're also giving us loads of code.
The BSD cuck continues to dream.

>>58913134
Thread's over, the shitposter found it

But Mac OS X isn't good, and FreeBSD has known flaws compared to the other BSDs.
https://vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt
It's also well-known that XNU isn't a good kernel for performance.

>>58912956
The filesystem is incredibly slow.

>>58913145
It's not like your argument is based on anything, but your ass. Aside some hipster, nobody use freebsd on desktop. Even bsdnow made on Windows.

>>58916099
It's not slow on my machine.

>>58912696
There are no drivers for OSX though. Even when manufacturers do make drivers they won't update them and OSX versions break compatibility.

Support on OSX is by far the worst out of Windows Linux GNU/Linux with Linux being on top.

>>58916112
Good for you.

>>58916112
>Woerkz on mai macheen (((tm)))

>>58916099
Even FreeBSD developers use macOS on the desktop. They ssh into their FreeBSD machines. Go to any FreeBSD conference and you'll see MacBooks everywhere. Go to an OpenBSD conference and you'll see thinkpads running OpenBSD though.

File: wew.png (30KB, 960x531px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 960x531px

>>58916112
>It's not slow on my machine.

>>58916267
What shell is that?

>>58916319
Used Bash because zsh likes to spit out a bunch of verbose shit.

File: myfiles.jpg (96KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 400x400px

>>58916099
>The filesystem is incredibly slow.
fast
secure
reliable

pick any two

File: berkleysoftwaredisorder.png (64KB, 466x851px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 466x851px

>>58916371
>implying LUKS isn't secure or reliable

>>58916267

ksh: seq: not found

>>58916404
((x=1; x <= 100 ; x++))

>>58916267

real    0m0.086s
user    0m0.000s
sys    0m0.000s

real    0m0.091s
user    0m0.000s
sys    0m0.000s

wat is habbening ?

>>58916427
You aren't using a disk.

>>58916425
Your shit doesn't work, maybe you should learn how to use a posix shell like everyone else is doing, retard. I'll write a shell script tomorrow since I can barely stay awake at the moment.

>>58912696
There's many other choices, primarily illumos if you're going to build your own new distro.

Joylent/SmartOS and other OpenSolaris clones are based on it and you get full support for DTrace, Zones (KVM) and real OpenZFS not the half assed FreeBSD implementation.

>>58912880
FreeBSD makes a badass home server/NAS. I got it running on a Poweredge T20 and it runs beautifully. Was a cinch to set up, easier than doing the same with a Linux distro (in my personal experience). I fucking love how this like config files are standardized across the board, even with a lot of third-party stuff… it's a stark contrast to Linuxland where nobody can agree on anything, even within the confines of a particular distribution.

>>58916458
its an wd caviar blue. Maybe i am just missing something.

>>58916505
Dude I don't use sh I have no idea how to count to 100 in it. If you don't either then you probably don't know enough to care whether your shell is posix or not beyond blaming scripts for not working.

>>58916553
>I don't use sh
>>>/v/

>>58916527
Filesystem could just be 15x faster I suppose, but I only get those speeds in tmpfs, so I'm leaning towards the latter.

File: stoked.png (13KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 1024x1024px

>>58916582
BSD baby can't count to 100
:(

File: screen.png (27KB, 802x458px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 802x458px

>>58916593
im on ubuntu , maybe i just missed the point of this being about bsd or something.

FreeBSD is already very stable, secure, and mature. I see no need to fork Apple's code to create an OS when the foundation (FreeBSD) is a suitable choice.

Now then, what we can make REALLY good use of is:

OpenSSH
OpenNTPd
Anything in BSD
Apple's drivers
Any driver written in the BSD license

We need to create a desktop environment that normal people can use very easily, create office software that isn't GPL'd, and then we'll need to write more software.

Then, we'll put it on a CD, close the source, and sell it for $50 -- A POSIX Compliant system with Pro-Grade support and stability.

I assume none of this violates Free/OpenBSD's license.

File: 1424019245186.jpg (54KB, 400x580px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 400x580px

>>58916616

>>58916633
It was meant as a simple benchmark to show what "fast" means on BSD, but I guess they don't have bash and don't know how to count to 100 in sh so it was a useless endeavor.

>>58916099
They are looking at ZFS but want to write their own version being OpenBSD http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/ZFS-on-OpenBSD to deal with ZFS issues that were never solved. This is still ongoing 3yrs later.

If you want ZFS, and a ridiculously robust server that will run your private cloud and never go down no matter what happens (hardware failure, exploding traffic, VM failure ect) then use SmartOS. Zones + ZFS + fault management architecture (fmadm(1M) / svcadm(1M)) make it possible. You can run FreeBSD or Linux inside the zones and essentially create your own AWS

File: murdock.jpg (60KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1280x720px

>>58916385
Implying that Linux users do not have mental disorders?

>>58916739
touche

File: dielinuxdie.jpg (239KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 640x480px

>>58916739
How about this guy lol.

He didn't get raped by cops and still offed himself.

>>58916139
>There are no drivers for OSX though. Even when manufacturers do make drivers they won't update them and OSX versions break compatibility.
Nvidia makes drivers that are regularly updated, though I don't think polaris is covered yet. Intel drivers are built-in. Some AMD drivers are too.

>>58916659
init system and display server?

Because

>Use OS X
>finder polutes literally everything you connect physically with resource fork files, directory metadata, and trashes
>forced to use the command line to transfer files without wasting device space
>no setting to disable this except for networked storage
>FS support: HFS (garbage), FAT (garbage), NTFS (garbage)

At least on Linux you can read more than the worst FSes on earth and plug in your fucking SD card and use it without the command line

>>58912696

>Why even bother with Linux when there is a much stronger company making deals with the manufacturers to create drivers for their desktop AND server operating system?

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/members/corporate

>>58916798
That's 3 drivers bro.
Linux has literally thousands.

>>58912880
thats an old meme. freebsd works fine on desktop now, it just takes a lot of manual config similar to arch.

In ksh on OpenBSD on some toaster I use as my webserver.

0m00.63s real     0m00.01s user     0m00.06s system

And again, trying to get even more pessimistic by not using ksh's builtin test:
0m00.70s real 0m00.03s user 0m00.01s system

>>58916907
chrome and firefox still show abysmal performance (even after adding your user to video and getting the right drivers and blah blah) it's just not ready for desktop yet. im rooting for it because the system is fabulously designed but for desktop nope

>>58917051
hmm I'm not getting any real performance difference with firefox between freebsd and debian testing on my end. either way, I agree with you about the design, I love their implementation of OSS.

File: dunce hat pepe.jpg (23KB, 420x460px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 420x460px

>>58912696
Isn't just the desktop environment, a few apps, and the recovery/bootloader that are closed source? Couldn't we use Gnome or Cinnamon, trash the apps and recovery, and use GRUB 2? Can we make it compatible with most current Mac OS X apps?

>>58912880
>Not even FreeBSD devs use FreeBSD on the desktop. It's pretty cool for storage (ZFS) and networking (supposedly, I haven't tried it), but not for the desktop. If you want a free desktop, GNU/Linux is literally the only choice.
I use it on my laptop dumbo. Works better than systemd+Linux

I love how people constantly mention that some 'big company' should put out their own stable linux distro. and then you have apple, a big company, that have essentially put out their own stable unix 'distro' and they're the most hated company in the world.

one thing I've learned about this board its filled with fucktards kek

>>58917385
I only hate Apple hardware myself. The software is great and I have a T420 hackintosh right in front of me that I use for Adobe products, music production, programming, and shitposting.

>>58917209
Aqua/Quartz (mac DE) isn't X or Wayland based, so those wouldn't work, and Cocoa isn't open source and all Mac apps require it. So in short, no.

If you had a feature-complete implementation of Cocoa that was based on garden variety linux desktop stuff, then yes. But such a thing doesn't exist. The closest thing is GNUStep which is forever stuck at compatibility with the Cocoa of 2007.

>>58916659
Depends on what you mean by violate. Certainly, you're free to close-source the modifications you make, but the unmodified parts have to comply by even the 2-clause BSD license requires you to include a license telling everyone where you got the vast majority of "your work" from, and even then FreeBSD base isn't completely free of GPL yet (although it's getting there, the only big remaining issue as I recall is grep). So what you'd be left with is essentially what TrueOS has, except that you'd not be impressing anyone with your upstreaming of code, and you'd just be called a clone of TrueOS.

>>58917385
apple is mostly hated for the overpriced hardware and crimped iphones

>>58912696
The vast majority of OSX nowadays is Apple or NeXT code, and is closed-source. The only things it retains from the fork of FreeBSD that became Darwin are the process model, vfs and netstack, as well as the userland. XNU is also open-source, but not strictly speaking related to BSD.

With Wayland in ports on FreeBSD, clang, llvm and lld in base and the few GPL components in base removed in 1-2 years, TrueOS with Lumina on Wayland will probably be the new desktop OS of choice for people looking to replace Windows or OSX.

What is trueOS? Just a shittier/more beginner-friendly FreeBSD?

>>58916099
>The filesystem is incredibly slow.
it's perfectly fine for a desktop operating system

the worst part is fscking if it shuts down abruptly

anyway i hope HAMMER2 is gonna get done soon

>>58916163
>OpenBSD conference
That's nice. They don't have time and money for bullshit, if they have an irl meeting they do hackathons.

File: bite_the_apple.png (304KB, 834x491px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 834x491px

>>58916739
go fuck yourself

>>58917765
It's essentially a FreeBSD distribution, in that it ships the FreeBSD kernel, but it also ships the entire userland with some modifications (most of which they upstream back to FreeBSD when they've tested them properly). It also tracks -CURRENT, but that's easily done on FreeBSD itself. It appeals to the crowd that wants a ~desktop experience~, but anything except the SysAdm stuff can be done in FreeBSD, and FreeBSD will probably migrate to OpenRC because of TrueOS.
It's run by Jordan Hubbard, one of the FreeBSD founders, and almost all of the staff at iXsystems (which are behind both TrueOS, TrueOS Server (which is essentially an attempt to create something like Solaris but based on FreeBSD) and FreeNAS and TrueNAS (an enterprise HA-aimed version of FreeNAS)) are FreeBSD commiters themselves or have their work sponsored by FreeBSD commiters when they upstream.
This is just my guess, but it seems like Jordan Hubbard is trying to use iXsystems to essentially do what Redhat once did for Linux - he's making a company that can improve FreeBSD, not just improve FreeBSD for x company who needs feature y and z (which is what Netflix, Verisign, ScaleEngine, Isillon/EMC/Dell, NetApp and similar companies who contribute code regularily already do).

If you ask me, the biggest problem in Linux-land is that the idea of upstreaming code is all but unheard of. NIH-syndrome is so strong, that Linux users often suffer for it.

>>58916833
Badly written opentrash drivers.

>>58916829
>NVIDIA
yet they release shit drivers for it. it took fucking valve for them to get less lazy, emphasis on less.

>>58913134
I'm sure you're very well informed. I'm sure that you've managed to sneak in the private hangouts to have that information when I wasn't there

>>58918922
fyi you're responding to the resident /g/ bsd troll

>>58916099
>The filesystem is incredibly slow.
Works on my machine
>It's not like your argument is based on anything, but your ass. Aside some hipster, nobody use freebsd on desktop. Even bsdnow made on Windows
Where did I say anything about using FreeBSD?

>>58916664
>shittiest tripfag on /g/ is incapable of even the most trivial things such as installing a different shell
What a surprise

I always suspected it was Apple paying these bsd shills to spam /g/ with this crap.

File: shadowman-large.jpg (48KB, 1034x963px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1034x963px

>>58921848
5 days has been added to your Red Hat Subscription Account for this post.

File: 1444689047974.png (683KB, 680x264px) Image search: [Google]

683KB, 680x264px

>>58921848
>I always suspected Apple pays people to shill for non-Apple operating systems

>>58916099
>bsdnow made on windows
lel

>bsd licensed software dropped

>>58921905
10 rupees and a plate of curry has been dispatched to your designated shilling account rajesh

>>58922736
5 pounds have been deposited to your happy merchant account, ahmed.

>>58921909
>still playing 1D chess

>>58912696
> AND server operating system?
Seriously hope you are not implying Mac OS is better choice then linux as a server operating system.

>>58926215
Nobody's implying an OS last updated 15 years ago is better than a modern OS for servers

>>58916907
FreeBSD on desktop is even more meme than Arch Linux.

You'll spend half your week fixing and compiling ports for common userland software.

>>58916821
>Not using BlueHarvest on macOS.

What a faggot.

http://www.zeroonetwenty.com/blueharvest/

>>58916821
You can use ZFS and Ext3 on OS X, just not for the root partition. On older versions you can install it on UFS.

>>58926337
Why the fuck are you compiling from ports unless you need non-default options - pkg exists for a reason.

>>58926409
Nigga you don't need ZFS for macOS.

macOS has APFS built in, but it is preview at the moment. APFS is also used in iOS 10.3 beta, which I have installed right now, it's actually faster now.

APFS will be fully available in the next macOS release due this year, which has ZFS features such as Snapshot...and it's designed for SSDs in mind.

>>58926450
Bitch I never said you needed it

>>58926450
APFS doesn't do any kind of redundancy (that's supposed to be provided by lower levels, so unlike ZFS and HAMMER, APFS isn't a combined LVM+FS - which it was for very specific reasons, since ZFS is designed to address the problems of traditional RAID) or checksumming last I checked (though supposedly that's not necessary since Apple-sourced NVRAM flash apparently includes ECC), and even includes fsck_apfs despite the fact that it's an atomic copy-on-write filesystem.
As for the 'designed with SSDs in mind', that's not really true since it's specifically made to run on SSDs as Apple sourced SSDs don't have block structure like rotationg disks or other SSDs have. What this does, though, is allow Apple to do proper i/o QoS to avoid the dreaded beachball.
There's also absolutely no compression in APFS, which even NTFS has - but at least they're finally getting rid of HFS+ which has decades of legacy built on top of legacy with multiple forks and an absolutely dreadful journaling.
It's also interesting to note that Apple will have to chance the way Time Machine works, because it can't handle an atomic filesystem with snapshots.

I have the sneaking suspicion anyone trying it on non-approved Apple SSDs are gonna have a BAD time, but that's pretty much par for the fucking course, because nowadays you can't even replace the harddisk or memory in new Apple hardware.

>>58926215
Not sure about Mac, but OpenBSD beats the shit out of Linux.

>>58926225
your post could mean anything, in any case:
https://opensource.apple.com/release/macos-10123.html
ctrl+f xnu, download the archive and check the timestamps yourself.

File: macos9about.png (20KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 800x600px

>>58926652
Mac OS and macOS are two separate things.

>>58926681
They are, but apparently people do have trouble distinguishing them - I'm surprised Apple did something so innane; pretty sure Steve Jobs would've told whoever suggested it to go fuck themselves.

>>58926699
Exactly why I refuse to acknowledge the change, 10.12 is OS X, 10.13 will be, and so on until Apple actually moves to a different OS with a different name.

>>58917639
Wayland is shit though. Where is waylandcalc, waylandedit, waylandclock, Wayland Athena Widgets, etc?

>>58926337
It's rude to lie on the internet. I've never had to do those things on OpenBSD or FreeBSD.

>>58926820
Wayland is a protocol for communicating between the compositor and the clients. If you want those things, go write them.

>>58926954
The thing is, X is good because it comes with enough programs to be considered its own DE. Wayland is nothing useful for me.

>>58927322
That's not what it's designed for, though. X was designed to let terminals without much computing power use a mainframe for the actual computation involved in drawing windows and such, but that's an idea that dates back to when people still used mainframes and terminals. Any modern PC is faster than the mainframes back then, so that model is very outdated, hence Wayland.

>>58927914
What are the benefits to me, as a user, though? Will ssh -X still work?

>>58912986
MacOS is not a free desktop operating system.

>>58928370
It's free in the normal sense of the word, not the freetard definition.

>>58928379
It's free to download if you have a running copy of it. Not FOSS.

>>58928370
Where can I download it?

>>58928390
>It's free to download if you have a running copy of it
You don't even need a running copy, you can put a blank drive in a Mac and use the EFI to download and install it.
>Not FOSS
I never said otherwise.

>>58928316
No, but that's more to do with the fact that X forwarding is easily implimented through ssh, whereas what Wayland needs is VNC. There was some development on making a VNC module for Wayland, but RealVNC apparently didn't feel like doing it afterall.
I suspect it'll be added eventually, though - it's just a question of getting the protocol and compositors stable (protocol is stable, compositors still need work), but that's an ongoing effort.
Remember, xorg builds on many years of code, all the way back to xfree86 (which is why it's had to have many rounds of refactoring) which was an open-source implimentation of x386 that was a closed-source implimentation of the X server running on i386, and the X spec was built exactly for remote clients connecting to a central server.
VNC isn't hard though, bhyve (a hypervisor in FreeBSD) impliments it in 250-300 LoC.

>>58916099
>The filesystem is incredibly slow
So? Implement your own. Do you not understand the point of open source, or something?

>>58928580
Hey beastie, may I ask you, are you a Slav by any chance?

>>58928624
Nope. Why do you ask?

>>58928651
I just know one BSD guy with nickname "beastie", nevermind.

>>58928692
Beastie is the nickname for the BSD mascot, so you're likely to encounter it quite a lot if you're around BSD nerds.

OpenBSD and DarwinBSD have their own, though - they're called Puffy and Hexley respectively.

>>58928580
Then what are the advantages of Wayland, for me?

>>58928432
So you need a computer with a copy of MacOS to download a copy of MacOS. Well great, I can download a copy of Windows if I have a computer with Windows, and that copy will install anywhere, not just on computers made by Microsoft.

>>58930058
Not having to deal with 30 years of legacy code, full support from hardware makers (At least Intel Intel have stated that they'll work with Wayland developers to make sure kernel mode setting is properly supported everywhere, along with many other things, plus they've also said that they'll only fix bugs related to X if a diff is upstreamed, nVidia also seem to be more interested in working with Wayland - but who knows where AMD stands outside of their re-promise to focus on opensource drivers despite already promising and failing on this once), a model that makes sense for modern hardware (as discussed earlier, the client-server architecture of X dates back to pre-UNIX days), faster UI rendering and proper support for UI elements, standardization throughout the whole UI stack.

>>58930301
Microsoft doesn't make computers (outside of consoles, which are a special case) whereas Apple does which is why macOS is licensed to the hardware it's shipped with (that's why you need to jump through hoops to get a Hackintosh running - though I'm told those hoops have since been automated, they're still present), whereas Windows is OEM licensed on a lot of hardware that you buy.
You can download Windows for free, but you still need to pay for the license (assuming you want to stay inside the law).

>>58930361
>Microsoft doesn't make computers (outside of consoles, which are a special case)
Objectively false:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/devices/surface-book/overview

>You can download Windows for free, but you still need to pay for the license (assuming you want to stay inside the law).
Again, false, you can use an unlicensed version of Windows just fine, you just can't change the background:
http://www.howtogeek.com/244678/you-dont-need-a-product-key-to-install-and-use-windows-10/

Both companies share a business model: they sell computers with their own OS on it, and you can download from and install copies of that OS on those computers. Microsoft just has an extra business model of selling their OS for other computers, with a free download that you can use without activating.

>>58930302
>hardware makers
You mean Nvidia will make Wayland drivers for OpenBSD? I use OpenBSD as my desktop, and using VESA graphics sucks.
>proper support for UI elements
What does this mean?
>standardization throughout the whole UI stack
Didn't we already have this with Xaw?

>>58930301
>blank drive
>has an OS installed
How fucking dumb are you? Let's see if I can explain it better for you and your fellow simpletons
>mac has blank SDD (as in no goddamned OS is installed)
>boot to the EFI (like a BIOS since you apparently don't know)
>EFI downloads and installs the OS for you

>>58930767
In any case you need an Apple computer to download macOS for free. You can also download Windows for free from a Microsoft computer.
>oh but UEFI
That's great if you royally fuck up your installation, but it's still only doable from an Apple computer. Meanwhile I can download a Windows .iso from a phone.

>>58930803
>You can also download Windows for free from a Microsoft computer.
Not without an OS.
>but it's still only doable from an Apple computer
Well yeah, only the computers the OS supports are capable of it.

>>58930428
All of that is very recent stuff, though. Plus, Surface-devices are another exception, like XBOX. Microsoft made their fortune and still makes most of their money through licensing Windows on OEM hardware and licensing for Windows Server.

>>58930740
nVidia makes drivers for FreeBSD (and Linux, as well as Solaris) - but since Theo refuses to get anything from FreeBSD nowadays, you're SoL.

>>58930767
That's done through special EFI implimentation, though, and more importantly, it only downloads the version of macOS that your computer shipped with. You still have to upgrade to newer versions (or write mac OS to a USB flash disk and reinstall the newest version). Also remember that once upon a time, new versions of OSX (when it was called that) were not free, just like the fact that once upon a time you couldn't get a Windows ISO from Microsoft directly.

>>58931028
>All of that is very recent stuff, though.
Ok, so?
>Plus, Surface-devices are another exception, like XBOX.
Why? They're personal computers.

>>58931028
>since Theo refuses to get anything from FreeBSD nowadays, you're SoL.
You must not understand the fact that Nvidia makes closed-source drivers rather than opensource ones. Nvidia is a bad company.

>>58931133
It's recent so I can't possibly be expected to know it, since I haven't run Windows for more than the odd bit of gaming (maybe once every 4-6 months) since 2001.
Also, they're still a tiny fraction of Microsofts income.

>>58931193
You must not understand the fact that not everything opensource is GPL zealotry with people insisting that everything made on GPL must be upstreamed. People who like the BSD license tend to have a very pragmatic relationship with closed-source anything, since you also can't get around closed-source for HBAs, WLAN firmware, Intel ME and plenty of other computer components.

>>58931341
>It's recent so I can't possibly be expected to know it
I thought most people knew of its existence.
>You must not understand the fact that not everything opensource is GPL zealotry with people insisting that everything made on GPL must be upstreamed. People who like the BSD license tend to have a very pragmatic relationship with closed-source anything, since you also can't get around closed-source for HBAs, WLAN firmware, Intel ME and plenty of other computer components.
That answered nothing. You're just defending closed-source hardware and closed-source software, instead of recognising that Nvidia isn't interested in actually making drivers for people.
The pragmatic relationship with closed-source is that if it's closed-source, you cannot fucking compile it for your computer or your OS. Closed-source is unusable from even a pragmatic point of view.

>>58931464
Actually, I'd MUCH prefer if everything was opensource, but that's not the reality of things, and nothing I can do can change that. nVidia is interested in making drivers, just not open-source drivers - and while AMD has said that they're interested in it, that doesn't chance the fact that they already commited to opensource drivers once and then completely faulting on that promise.
It's pragmatic in the sense that I'm using something closed-source because there is no alternative (as far as I know, there are no hardware platforms that are fully and completely opensource throughout with blueprints and documentation for the hardware itself, and while there is opensource software, it suffers from systemd to the point that I have to go out of my way to avoid it).

>>58931464
Also, you conveniently ignored propriatary WLAN firmware, HBAs, Intel ME and everythign else I mentioned. Good job.

>>58912696
This is what I wish for, OP. An easy to use Open and free OS with high support from loads of software development enterprises. Actually I just want autodesk and Adobe in linux.

>>58931855
>making drivers, just not open-source drivers
The driver doesn't exist if I can't use it.

>>58932241
Yeah, I just can't bring myself to care that much anymore.

This is part of why I am currently waiting for my first Mac to arrive now. After getting an iPhone on a whim, I've decided to fully embrace the Apple ecosystem

>>58932535
What did you get?

iMac 5k here.

>>58918087
triggered autist detected

>>58932494
When they release perfectly working up to date binaries that work with the latest kernels and Xorg versions for like a decade eventually you just stop giving a fuck.

>FreeBDSM

lmao

>>58931028
>That's done through special EFI implimentation, though
No fucking shit
>Also remember that once upon a time, new versions of OSX (when it was called that) were not free
I never said OS X has always been free.

>>58932836
not autist, just not a scumbag like some asshole making fun of actual suicide

>>58932836
also, maybe you belong in /b/ with rest of cell block 6

File: 1486082448339.jpg (36KB, 720x626px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 720x626px

>>58936136
>>58936145
that quite the virtue signaling you've got there m8

>>58916506
Freebsd and illumos pull from openzfs dumbo

>>58912696
>t. mactoddler

idk if any of you guys have actually taken a look through the xnu source code (it's up on github, just a google away and in plain C) it's pretty shit. It's just a poorly sewn together mishmash of code thats constantly requiring monkey patched fixes because it's running off of an old fork of FreeBSD monkey fucked with an abandoned pile of shit research kernel (mach). Tons of stupid comments, shitty code, bad practices, and yes, 0days.