You're still clutching at straws.
Your claim was that Mac OS is based on Linux. That's plain wrong. Nobody here ever argued that Mac OS isn't more similar to Linux that Windows. Linux is classified as "Unix-like" (or *nix) for their similarities and even said that earlier. The old quote doesn't prove anything; it's a joke. It's like saying Windows is an unstable, crash-prone piece of garbage and then quoting the Gates and GM CEO conversation as a proof.
Wow they're completely unrelated.Even at the Linux Mint wiki, it describes BSD in its antecedents list. This means family. It also means BSD has been around longer.
Brilliant, now we're equivocating too.
I meant "unrelated" as in "not based on". Given the context and how I said that they have no common code base or ancestry, that should have been obvious. I never ever claimed that they are completely "unrelated" in the sense that they have no common ideas or influences. I already referred to Linux as a "Unix-like". NyxCharon said that both BSD and Linux derive ideas from Unix. DMG said that linux and BSD operate similar. Nobody's keeping it a secret, much less ignoring it, even less still disagreeing with it. We all agree with that. Yes, all "Unix-like" system share some basic ideas and concepts and are in that sense related; that's why they're called Unix-like. That doesn't change the fact that Mac OS is not in any way based on Linux.
And yes, Linux was loosely based in Minix, which is derivd from Unix. Note, though, that both "based" and "derived" here are used in tho context of "sharing common ideas and concepts"; they were both independently developed from ground up with vastly different goals in mind and with vastly different architectures / implementations (such as microkernel vs monolithic). Again, though the wiki of any one distro isn't an authoritative source on Linux in general, the fact that BSD is an "antecedent" means more or less the same - they share a fair bit of philosophy and ideas, and they are in the family of "Unix-like systems". I say again, nobody has denied this (and not all members of this "family" share a common ancestor).
And yes, Linus did say that. He created Linux out of need for a fast, free Unix-like system for his 386; if there had been one (e.g. 386BSD), he wouldn't have made his own. Not a very informative statement. It doesn't really said much at all about Linux's relation to Unix/BSD; it definitely doesn't say anything at all about Mac OS being based on Linux.
I do still maintain that there is so much more common in design etc between MacOS and Linux than with Windows.
It sounds as if you are implying that someone here has argued against that; nobody has, and please let the goal posts be. If you didn't mean to imply that, please accept my apologies and let me just say that I'm glad you maintain a position just about every Linux user who has posted in this thread so far also maintains.
Practially the difference is minimal. They'll run the same programs and some drivers etc.
In practice, there are significant differences to an everyday user; even for power-users who work beneath the hood (where the most commonality acress Unix-like systems is; the specs and philosophies have little relevance to an everyday user who doesn't care which one of bash or dash implement the more standard-compliant echo) there are numerous non-trivial differences. They run some of the same programs, sure, but in just about all cases any non-trivial programs have to be ported; at which point you might as well say that Windows runs all the same programs too, since they either have been ported to Windows or can be compiled against cygwin (which also, by the way, allows you to run a full GNU userland and just about any Linux application natively under Windows [which, ironically, you can't do with Mac applications]; does that make Windows "Unix-like" too?) The differences for drivers are even greater; at least one of the current BSDs (I forget which one) can run Linux drivers with a compatibility layer, but the driver binary interfaces (and consequently, drivers themselves) are quite different. You won't ever be running the same driver natively under a BSD and a Linux system.
And though I hate to pester you about this, would you (pretty please?) tell me what point the wikipedia article to a mental disorder was meant to make, and why did you post a cropped screenshot of a picture of *nix ancestry as opposed to, say, the original?
