The android operating system and UI is a direct ripoff of the iPhone. Before the iPhone was announced, Android was a blackberry styled UI.
Apple contributes very significantly to the open source community. Yet for doing so they are constantly accused of "taking" from the community and never recognized for contributing. For instance, you claim they "took" the kernel, but the reality is the kernel was developed by them based on easrly university research, and they gave the kernel to the community.
Meanwhile, Google steals Apple's work, makes it "open source", steals Sun's work, and you don't care about this theft, because they released it as "open source".
Open source is a two way street, and it is hypocritical to talk about apple "taking" when they've contributed a hell of a lot more than they've received, and then ignore the theft by google, simply because after stealing the goods they "shared" them by making them open source.
This is why I don't contribute to open source project. So many of the advocates of open source disrespect anyone using open source code who also sells proprietary code. (Except google, who gets a pass for some reason)
When the open source community starts giving the respect for rights that they demand from others, then you'll find you get a lot more support.
This is also why Apache 2.0 is on the rise and GPL is in decline, though unfortunately, people seem to steal code from Apache products and then put it in GPL products. (Another example of not respecting the very rights you demand others respect on your code.)
The android operating system and UI is a direct ripoff of the iPhone.
Because having shortcuts on the main screen and a toolbar was never, ever, ever done before on the desktop.
Also, what will happen when iOS will add screen widgets? Will that be a ripoff of Android?
Adding virtual screens in OS X, was that a ripoff of XWindows, Gnome, KDE?
Apple contributes very significantly to the open source community.
I love them for WebKit; but that wasn't even original work, as it's a fork of KHTML. It's also debatable if they would have released it if KHTML wasn't LGPL. It is an achievement nobody can take away from them, but often in big companies the right hand is not aware of what the left hand does, and this release had benefits for them much bigger than for you or me.
you claim they "took" the kernel, but the reality is the kernel
was developed by them based on easrly university research,
While Darwin is based on XNU, it is also dependent on critical pieces taken from BSD / various BSD libraries. Not a bad thing, but you're making a broad statement there that's not accurate.
Google .... steals Sun's work, and you don't care about this theft,
because they released it as "open source".
It is not theft.
Unless you mean that implementing a supposedly "open standard" is theft; or that reverse-engineering (which is perfectly legal) is theft; or that Java is in fact not a standard and Sun just lied about it and we, like "Ovis aries", believe anything instead of reading the fine-print.
I dare you to make a complete analysis of the claims made by Oracle, and tell me what Google stole.
This is why I don't contribute to open source project.
So many of the advocates of open source disrespect anyone ...
Loud mouths don't contribute in general.
The people actually working on open-source aren't the same people that bitch about other people's usage of said open-source software.
When the open source community starts giving the
respect for rights that they demand from others,
then you'll find you get a lot more support.
I always look forward to such pieces of insight. Brightens up my Tuesday morning.
people seem to steal code from Apache products
and then put it in GPL products
You can't make such claims without providing citations.
PS: I have nothing against Apple's usage of open-source, that's what open-source should be about: the freedom to use it / modify it. I also don't like GPL and prefer (such as yourself and Google) Apache 2.0. I also think the parent's remarks are way off mark. That's not the point of my post.
Apple contributes very significantly to the open source community. Yet for doing so they are constantly accused of "taking" from the community and never recognized for contributing. For instance, you claim they "took" the kernel, but the reality is the kernel was developed by them based on easrly university research, and they gave the kernel to the community.
Meanwhile, Google steals Apple's work, makes it "open source", steals Sun's work, and you don't care about this theft, because they released it as "open source".
Open source is a two way street, and it is hypocritical to talk about apple "taking" when they've contributed a hell of a lot more than they've received, and then ignore the theft by google, simply because after stealing the goods they "shared" them by making them open source.
This is why I don't contribute to open source project. So many of the advocates of open source disrespect anyone using open source code who also sells proprietary code. (Except google, who gets a pass for some reason)
When the open source community starts giving the respect for rights that they demand from others, then you'll find you get a lot more support.
This is also why Apache 2.0 is on the rise and GPL is in decline, though unfortunately, people seem to steal code from Apache products and then put it in GPL products. (Another example of not respecting the very rights you demand others respect on your code.)