The year's Big Lie is the assertion that Apple has embraced open source software. Sure, Apple's next generation OS X is based on its Darwin project, which is based on the open source Mach operating system. But the embrace is actually a chokehold. Apple's only interest in open source is what it can extract, both in technology and publicity. Despite appearances, Darwin's dependence on free software doesn't indicate that Apple has changed its self-serving attitude towards the community.
Because Apple is using technology licensed without restrictions, rather than under the GPL commonly found in Linux software, the company can use Mach code, exploit what the open source community has done, make proprietary modifications, and give back nothing of substance. And that appears to be exactly what Apple has done.
While researching last week's column on the problems of font handling within open source systems, I noted that some of those problems have their roots in Apple's orchard. The main reason TrueType isn't supported as well under free operating systems as it should be is that developers fear they might run afoul of Apple's patents on TrueType. The folks at Apple haven't offered any clarification to the FreeType project (which is trying to improve font handling on open source operating systems) or to anyone else. Because of this, TrueType support under Linux and FreeBSD lingers under a cloud of uncertainty.
Another significant area in which Apple's actions hurt the open source community is in its refusal to offer any open source support for its QuickTime streaming video format. While some open source players support AVI files, certain vital components, such as the Sorenson Video Codec that provides QuickTime's data compression, are not supported. Apple has never released a binary player for Linux or a binary module for the XAnim video and animation player, and it has no stated plans to do so. Moreover, the company won't allow open source programmers to make their own Sorenson-aware players.
There have been rumblings from various corners to get Apple to allow the open source community to support TrueType and QuickTime, but so far the only answer has been silence. This matches my own experience with Apple's PR department. Bill Evans, Apple's media contact on the company's open source initiatives, replied to my initial contact with "I will see if we are available for comment." After I sent my questions, asking about Apple's willingness to give back to the open source community by at least allowing support for its proprietary file formats, Evans replied that the company had no position. While he was certainly polite about it, the official silence was nonetheless unsettling.
I can't say I'm surprised. Apple has always been a company of closed software and closed hardware. It was one of the few companies to have been boycotted by the Free Software Foundation. It may be impossible to clue the company in to the advantages of working with the open source community rather than against it.
No one outside the world of Mac advocates actually buys into the myth that exploiting Mach represents a change in Apple's closed corporate attitude. Apple simply found a source of cheap high-quality systems software that it could make its own without needing to give back so much as a bug fix, let alone useful software projects. Apple's approach guarantees that it won't attract as many open source programmers as it would like to advance its causes, such as porting Darwin to Intel CPUs. And the company's distaste for the GPL means that Apple likely won't port most open source GUI applications, as they are based on the GPL- and LGPL-based KDE and GNOME libraries. Such ports may not even be legal, depending on the combinations of licenses involved.
Certainly developers who create software under BSD-type licenses know that their code could be sucked into proprietary systems from which they may never see improvements. But projects based on too much taking and not enough giving won't be able to sustain themselves for long.
Maybe Bruce Perens, while on his quest to convince IBM and HP to help the open source community that in turn helps them, ought to make a stop at Apple in Cupertino. Since Apple plans to leverage open source more than many mainstream computer companies, shouldn't Apple be giving back too?
Do you think Apple will give back to the open source community? Let me know in the TalkBack below.
