Rendered at 18:38:55 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
mcdow 39 minutes ago [-]
from the faq:
> Is this... legally sketchy?
No. Consider projects like ReactOS, a from-scratch effort to create an OS compatible with Microsoft Windows, GNUstep, which provides an open implementation of Cocoa APIs and other things, or Darling, a compatibility layer for running Darwin (macOS) binaries on Linux. ravynOS is similar and stands on the shoulders of many such projects.
as far as i understand it, most companies don’t bother sending cease and desists to projects you’ve never heard of. the fact that the aforementioned projects have avoided the banhammer of Apple should not be an indication that a successful MacOS clone would receive the same treatment.
but on the other hand, maybe that’s a champagne problem. if you can make a macos clone good enough to get the attention of Apple, you’ve already done something incredible.
IsTom 30 minutes ago [-]
I think the core of this is google vs oracle case. I think they'll be in the clear unless they hit some specific (design?) patents.
hnlmorg 7 minutes ago [-]
Microsoft definitely know about ReactOS.
jppittma 32 minutes ago [-]
I think the better example is actually GNU, which endured several challenges as a clean room implementation of unix. I think this is legally sound, but IANAL.
I think any desktop operating systems has to present itself with at least a single screenshot. Why not one in the entire page?
pmkary 55 minutes ago [-]
And now that I have walked over the whole website: Why not a single screenshot anywhere?
WesolyKubeczek 42 minutes ago [-]
I wager that maybe, probably, possibly, perhaps the GUI of this thing looks like ass and feels even worse. There used to be screenshots, you can google them. But maybe don’t.
Bluestein 40 minutes ago [-]
And, perhaps (?), that ties in with the GUI being the most proprietary thing here, thus, them building that last/less or wanting to de-emphasize it?
Imagine the world where open-source is collaborating instead of fragmenting. Single Linux distribution, single compartibility layer for other OSes, single graphics API, single package manager...
pythonaut_16 9 minutes ago [-]
Imagine a world where there's no innovation because everyone just accepts the current standard instead of trying something weird.
travisgriggs 2 hours ago [-]
Everyone gets to name their projects for their own reasons. If the pitch is basically an “alternate apple” macOS, I would have chosen one of the other other (alternate) apple varieties as the root of my OS. Missed opportunity I guess.
laxd 24 minutes ago [-]
Real apple-people would'nt consider this anyways. Open source geeks is were they can get traction. Seems like there is plenty of us that would like fbsd quality and vertical integration to the desktop level. There is effort but no breakthroughs.
tcdent 31 minutes ago [-]
> Developers can port existing Cocoa applications with minimal changes.
I wonder how big the actual gap between close to Cocoa App compatibility and full app compatibility is? Being able to run MacOS apps natively would unlock a huge barrier to adoption here.
soupbowl 2 hours ago [-]
Good luck! There are many attempts at doing something similar. We can't really see anything to judge it by, yet.
CodeCompost 4 minutes ago [-]
Another one? What happened to the other one that was called ... (quick Google) ... Hello System?
masijo 2 hours ago [-]
Would be nice to have a screenshot in the overview page
mixdup 2 hours ago [-]
>but we're not a fan of the ever-closing hardware and ecosystem
What has changed about Apple's ecosystem vis a vis openness, hardware, or the 'ecosystem'?
The macOS ecosystem is pretty much the same as it has been since 1997
reactordev 2 hours ago [-]
a lot of the kernel extensions are closed source proprietary. The core is still open but a lot of what makes modern Mac, Mac, are those kexts.
mixdup 1 hours ago [-]
how has that changed over the past 20 years? the proprietary parts of Mac OS X and now macOS have been proprietary from the beginning
radicaldreamer 1 hours ago [-]
There used to be a bootable Darwin instance that Apple published, which on paper would've made things a bit easier, but they stopped publishing it a while ago. It never resulted in any serious OS with a UI however.
ndiddy 29 minutes ago [-]
There was a community around Darwin for a while, and people released Darwin distros that ran X11 and a variety of ported Unix software. You’re right that it never really amounted to anything serious though. Within Apple, open sourcing Darwin seems to mainly have been a marketing ploy to get Unix/Linux people interested in Mac OS X by tying it to the hype around the open source movement. There’s a good article with more information here: http://www.synack.net/~bbraun/writing/osfail.html
mixdup 17 minutes ago [-]
The premise of that article is way off base. Darwin didn't fail, because the point wasn't to create a robust open source operating system along the lines of Linux. Apple got everything they needed from the OSS community while providing no more than they were required to. Apple got a bunch of tools, utilities, shells, etc as well as a view that this was a Real UNIX Operating System (TM) (they even got it certified) and that inarguably sold millions of machines
Their goal was never to build a community around Darwin or get a bunch of people outside the company using Darwin sans Mac OS X's proprietary bits, or to get a bunch of people outside the company contributing to Darwin
WorldMaker 1 hours ago [-]
By referencing the 90s it is a reminder that Mac started on an entirely closed source kernel. It's a regression towards the Mac mean more than a regression away from it.
reactordev 1 hours ago [-]
Correct, but to dismiss the NeXT contributions from BSD into modern mac and Darwin would be to dismiss Darwin entirely. Macintosh from the System7 days was a dramatically different beast.
01096173741 27 minutes ago [-]
صباح
Select2 25 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
gnuplustoejam 2 hours ago [-]
What, exactly, is the point of this?
The Mac GUI is closed source. You're not cloning it without being sued by Apple's turbo lawyers or at the very least receive a C&D. This is for console applications?
macOS will now be ARM-only. If you buy Apple hardware you already have a license for the real thing.
Why run a TBD meme OS when you could run Darwin, FreeBSD, Linux, etc. or real macOS to accomplish whatever unclear goals are presented here?
*sigh* This is for no one, there is no viable use case. The ReactOS team will be sending a fruit basket.
seabrookmx 1 hours ago [-]
> when you could run Darwin
That's what this is. Darwin isn't installable today. Apple just dumps a bunch of source code. Previous attempts at making Darwin bootable didn't go far and had no GUI.
gnuplustoejam 1 hours ago [-]
Four years and still pre-alpha. Stick a fork in it.
There's also PureDarwin (?) which had been around forever but last I recall the lone developer was seriously ill and the project was not receiving help. I don't see how this would be any different.
To everyone here cheering this on: when will you be contributing? Or are you just waiting to download it, run it once for the lulz, and drag it to the Trash?
jdiff 1 hours ago [-]
> Four years and still pre-alpha. Stick a fork in it.
Who jammed a toe in your cheerios?
gnuplustoejam 52 minutes ago [-]
What will you personally be contributing to the project to help move things along?
Besides accolades on HN of course.
I'm being real here and frankly blind, empty support of open-source projects does zero to support them.
pythonaut_16 7 minutes ago [-]
What? You're the one attacking this project. Or attacking everyone in this thread?
Like seriously, what do you want here? Or are you just mad at everyone and lashing out?
jdiff 49 minutes ago [-]
I'm actually the head lead developer in chief president. Now, your cheerios?
cxr 16 minutes ago [-]
(For those not catching on that the claim was written in jest, the person commenting here is not the creator of this project nor have they committed any code.)
15 minutes ago [-]
cosmic_cheese 1 hours ago [-]
Perhaps the biggest reason is that the existing FOSS OS world has little to offer for people who like a Mac-style desktop. It's possible to customize DEs to have a very shallow visual resemblance but the details are all wrong, with Windows, legacy Linux desktops, and even mobile operating systems (in e.g. the case of GNOME) exerting the greater bulk of design influence.
The question might then, "why not make this a DE instead?" to which the answer is that Mac users also like how the underpinnings of the OS work (or have worked in older releases) and would like to continue to use their favorite Mac apps, which isn't going to happen as long as any traditional Linux distribution is involved. Mac apps also have a design ethos that's rare among current native Linux apps, which drives demand for alternatives.
To do this properly it really needs to be a whole-OS endeavor.
jppittma 25 minutes ago [-]
EndeavorOS. I think it's actually the userspace though, which this aims to emulate. The problem is that if you're using a macbook for final cut pro, then endeavorOS doesn't solve your problem.
cosmic_cheese 11 minutes ago [-]
Hmm, isn't EndeavorOS in the same vein as CachyOS? Mainly a pre-configured Arch variant with a custom point-and-click configurator built in? I don't see where it'd be of particular interest to would-be switchers using macOS.
gnuplustoejam 56 minutes ago [-]
Didn't the Best Koreans rip off the Mac GUI in their home-grown spyware-laden Linux distro? Red Star Linux or whatever it's called.
I wonder if they have a GitHub...
cosmic_cheese 52 minutes ago [-]
I haven't downloaded or played with it because I'd rather not toy with software so obviously full of landmines, but from what I've seen it also falls into the "surface level" bucket. It goes a little further than one might get by e.g. enabling KDE's global menubar and installing one of the Mac-themed Breeze forks, but not much.
efficax 2 hours ago [-]
I dunno you could definitely do a "wine but for macos" kind of implementation, e.g., https://www.darlinghq.org/ without breaking IP laws
baron3dl 1 hours ago [-]
I've always been shocked by the lengths of time people will commit to proving wrong the folks who tell them "you can't do that."
reactordev 2 hours ago [-]
why do anything? why Linux? why FreeBSD? why Mac at all? Why build your own wind turbine when corporations make large ones? Why build a cyclekart when you own a car? Why workout when everyone's going to die?
With that mindset, everything is useless and nothing has a point. Have I made my point?
Bluestein 1 hours ago [-]
> Why workout when everyone's going to die?
I regret to actually say this, and mean no controversy - but, I have been actually asking myself just that - and, not in the "workout or not" sense, alone. In the "does anything have a point", way. Apologies.-
PS. To indeed contribute something: I am a big fan of the "doing things because of the joy of doing things" itself theory of it all, which is, seemingly, an antidote.-
BirAdam 1 hours ago [-]
In general, things have meaning because people assign meanings to them. Nothing inherently has meaning as meaning exists only within the human mind/soul. If you are searching for meaning, you will find nothing.
Bluestein 2 hours ago [-]
... or flowers for the grave? :)
Bluestein 2 hours ago [-]
PS: The FAQ speaks to this somewhat:
"This is a huge effort. Y'all must be crazy!
Yes. Here's to the crazy ones... because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones that do.
In all seriousness, though, it's not my first rodeo. I have no illusions about the scale of building an OS or how long projects like Haiku, ReactOS or GNUStep took to get usable. This is just something I like doing in my Copious Spare Time™ and that I hope will be useful someday.
I've always liked Apple's design and elegance, but am not thrilled with the direction of recent macOS® or how closed the hardware has become. And I'm a big believer in open source. So ... let's build something that feels as elegant, without all the lock-in, and maybe (just maybe) I can get it to a point that reasonably useful Mac apps build & run on it. And if not, we'll build a lot of cool pieces along the way and learn a ton. I'm OK with that."
as far as i understand it, most companies don’t bother sending cease and desists to projects you’ve never heard of. the fact that the aforementioned projects have avoided the banhammer of Apple should not be an indication that a successful MacOS clone would receive the same treatment.
but on the other hand, maybe that’s a champagne problem. if you can make a macos clone good enough to get the attention of Apple, you’ve already done something incredible.
New OS aims to provide (some) compatibility with macOS - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45997212 - Nov 2025 (165 comments)
RavynOS Finesse of macOS. Freedom of FreeBSD - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38485596 - Dec 2023 (176 comments)
RavynOS – Finesse of macOS, freedom of FreeBSD - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32492514 - Aug 2022 (366 comments)
I wonder how big the actual gap between close to Cocoa App compatibility and full app compatibility is? Being able to run MacOS apps natively would unlock a huge barrier to adoption here.
What has changed about Apple's ecosystem vis a vis openness, hardware, or the 'ecosystem'?
The macOS ecosystem is pretty much the same as it has been since 1997
Their goal was never to build a community around Darwin or get a bunch of people outside the company using Darwin sans Mac OS X's proprietary bits, or to get a bunch of people outside the company contributing to Darwin
The Mac GUI is closed source. You're not cloning it without being sued by Apple's turbo lawyers or at the very least receive a C&D. This is for console applications?
macOS will now be ARM-only. If you buy Apple hardware you already have a license for the real thing.
Why run a TBD meme OS when you could run Darwin, FreeBSD, Linux, etc. or real macOS to accomplish whatever unclear goals are presented here?
*sigh* This is for no one, there is no viable use case. The ReactOS team will be sending a fruit basket.
That's what this is. Darwin isn't installable today. Apple just dumps a bunch of source code. Previous attempts at making Darwin bootable didn't go far and had no GUI.
There's also PureDarwin (?) which had been around forever but last I recall the lone developer was seriously ill and the project was not receiving help. I don't see how this would be any different.
To everyone here cheering this on: when will you be contributing? Or are you just waiting to download it, run it once for the lulz, and drag it to the Trash?
Who jammed a toe in your cheerios?
Besides accolades on HN of course.
I'm being real here and frankly blind, empty support of open-source projects does zero to support them.
Like seriously, what do you want here? Or are you just mad at everyone and lashing out?
The question might then, "why not make this a DE instead?" to which the answer is that Mac users also like how the underpinnings of the OS work (or have worked in older releases) and would like to continue to use their favorite Mac apps, which isn't going to happen as long as any traditional Linux distribution is involved. Mac apps also have a design ethos that's rare among current native Linux apps, which drives demand for alternatives.
To do this properly it really needs to be a whole-OS endeavor.
I wonder if they have a GitHub...
With that mindset, everything is useless and nothing has a point. Have I made my point?
I regret to actually say this, and mean no controversy - but, I have been actually asking myself just that - and, not in the "workout or not" sense, alone. In the "does anything have a point", way. Apologies.-
PS. To indeed contribute something: I am a big fan of the "doing things because of the joy of doing things" itself theory of it all, which is, seemingly, an antidote.-