So there were parts of the kernel taken directly from FreeBSD
That would also be true for Windows NT, and many other systems to be honest, because BSD is where TCP/IP support in Unix originated, it had the best implementation (or maybe not the best, but the de-facto reference one).
and OSX was designed around it
No, that’s not true, you are not paying attention.
It has its userland (that’d be Unix tools like cp, ls and find) from some fossilized version of FreeBSD and not updated a lot since that. It’s not much. How do you think, would FreeBSD benefit from their fixes in ls? It’s the other way around, FreeBSD’s userland is much better.
Their actual kernel (XNU) sources they, despite not being obligated, release from time to time.
But say they used Linux, there still would be nothing to force them to release their drivers’ sources or their GUI’s sources (which are closed).
You could have made your case with Sony (I’m still not sure if that’d be of much use), but not with Apple.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3446231/how-closely-are-mac-os-x-and-bsd-related
That would also be true for Windows NT, and many other systems to be honest, because BSD is where TCP/IP support in Unix originated, it had the best implementation (or maybe not the best, but the de-facto reference one).
No, that’s not true, you are not paying attention.
It has its userland (that’d be Unix tools like
cp,lsandfind) from some fossilized version of FreeBSD and not updated a lot since that. It’s not much. How do you think, would FreeBSD benefit from their fixes inls? It’s the other way around, FreeBSD’s userland is much better.Their actual kernel (XNU) sources they, despite not being obligated, release from time to time.
But say they used Linux, there still would be nothing to force them to release their drivers’ sources or their GUI’s sources (which are closed).
You could have made your case with Sony (I’m still not sure if that’d be of much use), but not with Apple.