Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac OS X UNIX NOT Compliant?

P

projectParanoia

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Here is a quote from this (http://news.com.com/2010-1071-1015624.html?tag=nl) CNET news article:
At this time we do have a legal case of our own against Apple Computer. Apple has been using the Unix trademark on and in connection with its OS X product. This constitutes an infringement of our trademark since OS X is not certified under our Unix system certification program, and Apple has refused to use that program to obtain certification. Apple is obviously a valued member of The Open Group, and we have tried to reach an arbitrated settlement. However, all of our offers have been declined, so we have had no choice but to fulfill our duty to our customers and the industry as a whole to protect the Unix trademark.
Click to expand...
The quote is from The Open Group. The Open Group owns the trademarks related to UNIX. They have a program to certify systems for UNIX compliance.

Apparently, Apple's Mac OS X is not UNIX certified.

This looks really bad for Apple and Mac OS X.
 
no it doesnt. apple just doesnt want to pay $110,000 for the right to say its UNIX. their argument is that UNIX has become a general term and not a name that can fairly be owned by anyone.
 
Re: Mac OS X: NOT UNIX Compliant?

Originally posted by projectParanoia
Here is a quote from this (http://news.com.com/2010-1071-1015624.html?tag=nl) CNET news article:

The quote is from The Open Group. The Open Group owns the trademarks related to UNIX. They have a program to certify systems for UNIX compliance.

Apparently, Apple's Mac OS X is not UNIX certified.

This looks really bad for Apple and Mac OS X.
Click to expand...

Just because its not certified by some group doesn't mean its not UNIX. Apple is suing them back to make unix a generic term. Apple has never said OS X is unix certified, they've used unix as a descriptive term, whcih is accurate. They have a fight on their hands about it, but they also have a good point.

A similar thing is DVD-RW+ its not DVD certified. They can't use the DVD logo I don't believe on such drives and disks, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work. They can't argue that OS X doesn't have its root in unix, and apple has never actually claimed anything more.
 
-projectParanoia

strider42 and sparkleytone are absolutely correct. This is not a technical issue, it's an Intellectual Property issue.

Similar to the SCO madness.

Companies will try to get what they think they can get, and a recession will bring about further impetus for IP lawsuits as an extra income stream.
 
is it just me or have there been a ton of threads on this already. and mac os x is unix compliant. its just since that mac os x is the biggest unix provider out there they feel they should get some money too. its all about money.

iJon
 
Largest Unix Provider?

Are you sure about that iJon? 'Cause I know HP and Sun also have made a large dent in the Unix world, not to mention IBM's AIX. It may be fair to say that Apple is the largest *desktop* unix provider, but I don't think overall they are the largest unix provider.
Although, I couldn't find any numbers, but plenty of articles on a google search each claiming either Sun, HP, or Apple was the largest provider. hrm. What are the real numbers?

:edit:
http://www.esj.com/news/print.asp?editorialsId=576
shows some numbers, where IBM's Unix market share is up about Sun and HP, with no mention of Apple
:edit:
 
Originally posted by iJon
is it just me or have there been a ton of threads on this already. and mac os x is unix compliant. its just since that mac os x is the biggest unix provider out there they feel they should get some money too. its all about money.

iJon
Click to expand...

They're also going after Linux because it supposedly carries some code in it that is copyrighted by this company that Microsoft has backed. They won't let anyone know what the code is unless they sign a NDA and the NDA is just that once they sign it and they see the code they aren't even allowed to tell you if yes it has some of the code or no it doesn't. So it's going to go to court. I think the reason they won't let anyone know what the code is is the last time Linux had an issue like this they just rewrote the code and voila the problem was gone. This company doesn't want it changed they just want money. The funny thing is their is a question on whether or not they actually own the code as there were a few companies that bought into Unix a long time ago and since then it's sold and purchased a bunch of times and this company is just one of many that might hold the rights. It's just a money grab if you asked me and I don't think they really have a leg to stand on it's just Microsofts money that's going to get them what they want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back