Daaammmnn UNIX looks like that!?

MacOS has full POSIX compliance tho

OSX has full POSIX compliance and is certified UNIX

opengroup.org/openbrand/register/apple.htm

It’s literally certified UNIX

Too bad it's still huge pile of shit.

It’s considerably better than Windows 10 you fucking Indian.

If poll is broken then it isn't Unix. We've been over this, pajeet.

t. Rakesh

Attached: F0F3B190-B0B8-4E9A-9FE9-5DAD612AE8CC.jpg (2312x1156, 854K)

In what context is poll broken? MacOS has been certified unix for over a decade.

Started early this time. Report the daily Apple shill threads.

Attached: macshills.jpg (4500x3000, 1.6M)

Can return without a value, and POSIX defines you need a working poll, which means they got certified just by tossing money at OpenGroup.
>but muh piece of paper
Is irrelevant.

Need I remind you what happened to you last time?

This.

Yeah, that user here. Last thread I blew your asshole out and made you cry while calling you ranjeet and racking up 60+ (You)s.

Attached: 1528385180218.gif (272x281, 1.99M)

But that was a cross platform bug that affected several versions on curl, not just OSXs

curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2008-09/0171.html

Also curl having a bug doesn’t mean OSX isn’t POSIX compliant. They have full Open Group UNIX certification, and as they’re the authority that’s all that matters.

Just post a screenshot of the last thread if you're gonna repeat yourself. You're like an assmad broken record.

Attached: m3je6e4j8k2y.jpg (720x1280, 87K)

Zero reading comprehension, as expected from an ifag.

A bug has nothing to do with POSIX compliance kek

Apple has full UNIX certification from the UNIX certifying body, do you deny this?

Just call him a pajeet until he fucks off. He was already proven wrong and no further redundancy is required.

Poo in the loo ranjeet.

Attached: KE26yhx.jpg (680x709, 54K)

Do you deny that millions of Indians defecate in the open? How embarrassing. Imagine not being to wipe your ass with literally anything other than your left hand. Abscheulich.

Attached: Op+is+a++_74292f96372f43b3c45180cbedc620c7.jpg (400x497, 74K)

Read the post you replied to again, call a translator if you're struggling with it.

Based.

>Last thread I blew your asshole out and made you cry
By trying to argue for something as stupid as a poll error that lasted two months disqualifying macOS from POSIX compliance? That was retarded.

Apple has full UNIX certification from the UNIX certifying body, do you deny this?

MacOS is nice it’s just the userbase who give it a bad name.

yes, it does. through the power of capitalism.

Yes, UNIX is a certification that you have to pay for in addition to being POSIX compliant.

Uh, yes. If you have a bug that breaks a spec, then you're not following the spec. Not sure how this was a question to you.
Of course they kept the certification because all OpenGroup cares about is money. I'm pretty sure Microsoft could get Windows certified.

No, that isn't true. A bug, which existed for two months, does not disqualify an OS from being UNIX. Are you high, pajeet?

>A bug, which existed for two months, does not disqualify an OS from being UNIX.
Yes it does. If the UNIX spec says poll must return only when the resource is readable and macOS returns before, then it's not following the UNIX spec. It can still be certified UNIX, the same way I can pay a dude to certify me as President of the United States of America, but it's simply not true, no matter how much you pretend not to understand.
Let me try it this way: I now claim Windows is UNIX, and all the shit that it doesn't follow are simply bugs. According to you, this is a valid statement.

You should try reading what POSIX compliance actually is and looking at The Open Group's actual requirements. You are just being obtuse, using a poor understanding of POSIX, UNIX, and macOS. We get it, Apple triggers you. But your feelings don't change facts.

I did read POSIX and it requires a syscall named poll to return when that condition returns. And UNIX requires POSIX.
But keep calling me names instead of posting arguments.

>arguments
Let me summarise it for you, since you seem to lack comprehension
>bug, not intended
>lasted for only two months
>not even macos specific
Now address this instead of ignoring or diverting the question

What's there to argue with? You just don't know what you're talking about. You think a bug that lasted two months two years ago disqualifies macOS from POSIX compliance? That is just very stupid. The bug wasn't even exclusive to macOS, so your point is just nonsense. You haven't read anything but old curl bug reports. You have to be a shill to still believe the crap you post.

>iPajeets defending their newly discovered status symbol OS

Attached: 1523521433420.jpg (500x307, 39K)

Epic meme.

epic retort

Attached: You.gif (480x238, 415K)

>bug, not intended
Irrelevant.
>lasted for only two months
Then it was only out of spec for two months.
>not even macos specific
Irrelevant, never claimed it was.
Now let me try and explain this to you, using small words: none of that shit matters. If you have a spec-breaking bug for 5 seconds, then you're out of spec for 5 seconds.

For fuck's sake, get better English. And you keep getting hung up on
>MUH TWO MONTHS
What does it matter? Does it say anywhere on the spec that it only invalidates behavior that's been broken for years? While the spec was broken, it wasn't UNIX. If since then they fixed it, then they're following the spec again.
The fact that you're defending a company and calling someone else a shill is ironic, but considering the quality of your English I'm guessing they give you guys a list of generic insults to use while defending Apple online.

Report and hide, lads.

nay thee

Fucking seriously, that's what you're arguing about? Thought you were trying to say that macos isn't posix compliant at all anymore due to that bug

>What does it matter? Does it say anywhere on the spec that it only invalidates behavior that's been broken for years?
No, bugs have no implication on POSIX compliance. You would know that if you actually read the literature.
>Then it was only out of spec for two months.
No, see above.
>Irrelevant, never claimed it was.
I don't care.
>If you have a spec-breaking bug for 5 seconds, then you're out of spec for 5 seconds.
Not in the case of POSIX.

Do you have any idea what you are even arguing for now? Are you trying to say that, contrary to POSIX standard, macOS was not UNIX for two months? Because not only are you very wrong about that, it also isn't an argument even worth having.

>No, bugs have no implication on POSIX compliance. You would know that if you actually read the literature.
>Not in the case of POSIX.
Post evidence of these claims you totally didn't make up.

unix.org/what_is_unix/single_unix_specification.html

It isn't made up. You have clearly read nothing. Just stop this nonsense. You aren't an authority here.

Which line says bugs don't affect POSIX? Ctrl+f "bug" gives 0 results.

Then that proves it, doesn't it. Bugs have no bearing.

>my proof is absence
Oh so you have absolutely no evidence, as expected.
user, let me help: your link details a required spec, therefore if a bug breaks that spec, it does have a bearing. Good job fucking up your own argument and substantiating mine.

Fucking LMAO they don't mention it because it's not exclusive to bugs.
>Ctrl f "computers" has no results
>therefore UNIX doesn't apply to computers
This is how fucking retarded you are.

First you are clearly retarded as a specification includes the parts that are relevant, if bugs aren't mentioned they aren't relevant.
Second you both are retarded spending time on arguing crap.

Do you have a source to back that up? You are the expert here, right? Or is the spec just wrong? Because you really have no clue about this. It is proof by absence. If something is not addressed then it has no bearing on the spec. Are you really so dense that you can't understand that? If it has any bearing it would have been brought up. The feature is still implemented, regardless of a bug. The bug could not exist without its implementation, so it meets the spec. You've been whittled down to a brief two month window and now even that has shut in your face.

Stop samefagging, pajeet.

Ok user, then windows is UNIX and all the things about it that aren't are bugs.
God, I've met a lot of retarded macfags, but you take the cake.

A source for what you moron? Do you need an argument for the concept that if you don't follow the spec, then you're not following the spec? This is something that needs proving?
Like that user said: the word computer has no results, therefore according to your retarded proof by absence UNIX has nothing to do with computers.

>all the things about it that aren't are bugs.
Do you know what a bug is? A bug requires implementation of the feature, you retard.
>Do you need an argument for the concept that if you don't follow the spec, then you're not following the spec?
How is a bug not following the spec? It just means part of it doesn't work as intended. What I would like is a source on your belief that bugs affect POSIX certification. That would be interesting to see.
>Like that user said: the word computer has no results, therefore according to your retarded proof by absence UNIX has nothing to do with computers.
That is retarded, but I can see why you would agree with it. You are also retarded.

Linux is a kernel.
Unix is made by AT&T, not Apple.

Except good *because it isn\t(.

I doubt you have ever used any UNIX OS before.

It's spelled Unix

>How is a bug not following the spec? It just means part of it doesn't work as intended.
That's literally what "not following the spec" means, you fucking retard.
>how is a bug not following the spec?
>it just means it doesn't follow the spec
I can't even keep making fun of how stupid you are. You have zero source of your claims because they are entirely made up. Stay mad that macOS isn't UNIX.

>That's literally what "not following the spec" means, you fucking retard.
No it isn't. What the fuck are you on about? Do you have even a cursory knowledge of this?
>Stay mad that macOS isn't UNIX.
Because of a bug that was fixed in two months and was not exclusive among UNIX to macOS?

he UNIX trademark is owned by The Open Group, which basically uses it as a certification mark for SUS-compliance. OS X has been registered as a UNIX 03-compliant product since 10.5, so it qualifies as UNIX (not just UNX or Unix-like) in that sense. Most GNU/Linux distributions are not registered as SUS-compliant, so they should be called something like UNIX-like or UNX in that sense, even though neither of those terms is used by The Open Group.

OS X could also be considered to be genetic Unix in the sense that Darwin was based on FreeBSD (or it has used FreeBSD as a reference platform), and BSDs are usually considered to be genetic Unix, since the original BSD was based on AT&T code. Both GNU and Linux were rewritten from scratch though, so GNU/Linux platforms are not generally considered to be genetic Unix.

But it was a bug with curl that affected most platforms, including Linux, for a few months. You are retarded if you think that is an issue.

Mac OS X is plain Unix. This is a BSD Unix flavour, and is certified SUS V3 (Single Unix Specification version 3).

This means that everything that a software engineer or system administrator expects to find in a Unix system is present in Mac OS X.

IMHO, this can be interpreted in two ways. At the literal level, Mac OS X gained UNIX 03 certification with the release of Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard), and is as Unix as it is possible to be.

On a more subjective level, Mac OS X is merely a rewrite of replacement for the classic Apple operating system, Mac OS. The interesting aspect of Mac OS X is that it is a POSIX compliant OS that happens to use an XNU kernel, which can trace its roots to BSD. And that it was released as an open-source project, Darwin. The POSIX compliance lets software packages written for Linux or BSD be ported to Mac OS X.

Where did the winjeet go? Is he all out of answers?

I'd say Unix can only be defined by the various Unix flavors out there.

Consider the question: what's Unix like?
The Answer: Try a Unix system to get a feel for it.

If OS X is certified Unix, then what are you really asking?

Are you asking how close is it to the traditional gui-less Unix from the 80's?

Well, in that case, one can ask, how Windows is Windows 7? It's certainly "official" windows, but it doesn't feel anything like Window 95, let alone 3.1, not to mention MS-DOS. Does that make it any less of a Windows?

Just because normal (non-tech) users don't see the Unix underneath the GUI, doesn't make OS X any less Unix than it is.

Classic Jow Forums. Everyone has a vague understanding of tech terms mixed with half-knowledge read on the internet and fights the other guy who got a different vague understanding of tech terms mixed with half-knowledge read on the internet.

You lost, winjeet. macOS is UNIX.

I’m not disputing that, it’s clearly Unix as it has the certification, I’m saying that doesn’t matter and it’s still not as good as Windows 10.

I barely follow smartphone shit, but I really don't understand the apple = pajeet meme, 90% of the YouTube videos I've looked up about Android have all been by indians.

I think it is a lot better than that. Enjoy your Powershell.

OSX has a less than 1% market share in India. I’m assuming that guy is a self hating paki.

UNIX is cancer; the system (proprietary pig disgusting), the trademark (fags suing open source projects for decades) and the standard (POSIX is what matters).
Fuck Unix. Thank GNU it's dead. If you glorify Unix, you're a cum gargling hipster faggot.

Attached: 1543617494682.jpg (565x425, 150K)

Attached: 4F576145-2791-41B5-B240-23C0869DED38.jpg (750x657, 135K)

Without UNIX there would be no Linux.

good

Based progposter.

>$2000 facebook machine
>Worse than literally any operating system when it comes to freedom of choice, customization, security, functionality, etc.

Keep telling yourself that hippie faggot

I don't think that is true. Linus would have written something similar anyway.

Trying to compare things like income level to your smartphone is like trying to compare your income level to your dick size.

The sheer fact is that applel is overpriced trash that's used for brainlets that like to be put into a box by faggot developers in commiefornia

Try harder faggot

Stop conflating hardware with software. I would like to hear why you think macOS has less freedom of choice, customisation, worse security and less functionality. The last two are especially strange, since Windows is known for being insecure and is not POSIX compliant, so functionality is very limited with Windows.

Mobile phones have been aptly described as "Stalin's dream".

>t. Too stupid to use unix

No one cares about UNIX, it's a spec like any other. It's like me saying macOS is garbage because it's not UWP certified, or Debian isn't Red Hat certified. There's nothing inherently good about being UNIX.

digitaltrends.com/computing/macos-mojave-vulnerability-security-bypass/

techcrunch.com/2018/09/24/security-researcher-claims-macos-mojave-privacy-bug-on-launch-day/

v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/3034067/warning-over-apple-code-signing-security-bug-affecting-all-macos-users

dailydot.com/debug/macos-security-bug-blackhat/

extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/NetApplicationsMarketShare.png

POSIX is outdated it seems. I've owned a mac for a couple of years and while I do concede that it looks pretty and it's better than most linux distros, it is absolutely not worth the price tag, especially when you can get windows for free easily but not mac os. It especially doesn't compare to Windows 7 or XP

Unix is a meme. Fuck off macfags.

I find Windows totally non-functional. But you can have your own view, I guess, pajeet.

t. windows incel fucktard

As someone who spent a lot of time working with BSD in the early 00s I disagree. I wouldn’t have made my home computer a Mac if it wasn’t for MacOS.

Windows is fucking horrible to use though.

>Except good *because it isn\t(.
The only thing that could correspond is also on windows old program look and feel

Can someone explain what the fuck this is supposed to mean? Isn't this how a macbook has literally always looked?

What does that have to with what I said?

Is this your first advertisement thread?

>a wallpaper with a grey taskbar and a single ugly icon
yep looks great

Attached: inhales.jpg (500x826, 37K)

Keep simulating windows fags