Compare macOS and Linux for your needs.
Compare macOS and Linux for your needs.
Based on the information provided, it seems UNIX no longer fully defines a specific operating system. It outlines the essential functions it must support, but not the methods or implementations used. This means the underlying kernel can vary without affecting the overall functionality.
The concern I have about the FSF's perspective is... what elevates them above any other developer who helped shape many Linux distributions? If recognition is desired, all contributors deserve acknowledgment. Therefore, I suggest renaming it to include GNU, MIT, BSD, Apache, PSFL, zlib, and more relevant names for Linux.
GNU says that its software accounts for more of the "Linux" operating system than Linux itself does. Here's a direct quote: "So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be “GNU”." I personally think it's unreasonable to mention everyone that technically deserves credit (there are way too many companies), but Linux only accounts for a small part of the operating system and so GNU/Linux is fair IMO. Source
I see their point, yet I also think it resembles Stallman complaining about a Finnish student who gained more attention for his kernel than his own work. Similar reasoning applies to other operating systems as well. Essentially, the OS exists mainly to back up the applications.
Stallman is insane, I have a photo of him at Turin University with socks on his feet.
The core isn't responsible; it's the operating system that handles it.