david at usermode.org
Tue Aug 27 03:13:37 UTC 2002
On Monday 26 August 2002 05:55 pm, Steve Mallett wrote:
> Sure, this is a bit off-topic..
> With all the hub-bub surrounding OS X these days I note and ask:
> There are largely few open source mac apps.
> What has or hasn't happened here?
Every platform has its own custom with regards to writing and distributing
software. I believe that these differences are largely due to the compiler.
First, since day one virtually every UNIX and unix-like system installed a
compiler by default. Windows and Mac never did this. Thus, source code was
ubiquitous on UNIX, but an arcane mystery to Windows and Mac users. UNIX
users were distributing software in a quasi open source way long before RMS
nailed his manifesto to the cathedral door. To a Windows or pre-OSX Mac user,
this was unheard of. All my Windows friends today that think I'm stupid for
not distributing my stuff as shareware. All my UNIX friends never give it a
The exception that proves the rule: DOS. DOS was traditionally installed with
a BASIC interpreter. Back in the eighties, it was common to see BASIC
programs distributed in a quasi open source way. In fact, the first time I
ever saw the GPL license was attached to a game written in BASIC.
Under Windows you have to pay to get a compiler. Until recently, the same
thing applied for Macintosh. So you either used shareware to try and recoup
the cost, or your realized that 99.99% of your users didn't have compilers,
and never bothered distributing it with your freeware binary anyway.
This might change under OSX, since it now has gcc as its standard compiler.
But two things still stand in the way. First, the culture has already been
established, and cultures are hard to change. Second, the compiler still
isn't installed by default, and it isn't even (IIRC) on the install CD.
pgp public key on website
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss