That OS X relies heavily on open source has nothing to do with this. It only involves your strange, contradictory views on open source.
I take it you still haven't figured out #39.
Of course it does, since you specifically brought it up before, but now are attempting to argue it was in fact best for Apple to keep their O/S proprietary.
It only involves your strange, contradictory views on open source.
You're the one with the contradictory views, arguing for years on behalf of open source even in the specific case of Apple, now to basically admit Apple was smart to keep their best intellectual property private. It's also extremely contradictory for you to argue in support of free open source software for Chinese government fronts, such as those that rename "Red Hat" to "Red Flag", but feel that it is unfair for US corporations such as Microsoft to use someone else's software or ideas.
You're going to have to decide once and for all if you're in favor of US companies and intellectual property protections, or if you're instead still in favor of free US intellectual property transfers to the entire world, including when it's illegally obtained by foreign hackers. Your first post ever to FR was arguing against US copyright law, you've been defending foreign hackers ever since including those that cracked Apple's OSX to run on cheap PC's, called DRM encryption quote "pointless", so to now appear somehow thankful that Apple's OSX wasn't duplicated by someone else is hilarious. You've been pointing out much of OSX is free software for years, even endlessly defending the pirates that hacked the rest of it here recently, but now you're supposedly relieved it wasn't legally copied by someone else here in the US? LMAO!