"Oxford" <colalovesosx@verysmart.com> stated in post
colalovesosx-03F13E.11254711112007@m...inet.qwest.net on 11/11/07
11:25 AM:

> Snit <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Yeah, as if the "Finder" source code is there. You can download XCode
>>>>> with a bunch of samples, but now the Finder. or can you post the URL
>>>>> to the Finder source code? No, you'll tell me how I need to learn to
>>>>> solve problems myself (to hide the fact you are full of shit).
>>>>
>>>> You wouldn't want the Finder to be fully opensource if you did, you end
>>>> up with the mess that is called Linux. Apple was smart to keep the front
>>>> end consistent for everyone.
>>>
>>> WTF? Finder's not open-source because it wants people to pay for
>>> Finder, not because it would somehow degrade if made open-source (it
>>> wouldn't).
>>
>> Well, if it were open source you would end up with a number of different
>> versions - most not designed by interface experts. Some things would be
>> improved (FTP for example) but it would no longer be a general use tool and
>> that is *very* important for Apple. It would make OS X gain many of the
>> weaknesses and few of the advantages of Linux.
>
> Correct Snit... you are one of the few that "gets it"... 90% of the
> people complaining don't "yet" understand these larger concepts.
>
> Bob Campbell is a total fool on this subject. He is completely out of
> touch on how a computer needs to work for BOTH developers and users.
>
> Only Apple and "us" understand the correct methodology.

I do agree that many people just do not get "it"... UI issues are complex
and more important than most people understand.

I will say that in this conversation you should be careful with your
wording. OS X is *largely* open source but it is clearly not "open source"
with no qualifiers. I have not been reading your posts enough to know if
you made this clear - if you have not then those correcting you a right to
do so on that point.


--
God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?