We've been over this multiple times now. You are refusing to let reality interfere with your fantasy world and fanaticism.
I don't know, I'm not a FreeBSD developer. My educated guess is: They use whatever desktop OS they are most productive with. Would you prefer that they use something they are less productive with? Do you want a FreeBSD developer waste his time installing a desktop OS he doesn't actually wish to run? Just to make a political point, or just to make a fan-boy happy?
You keep spouting that nonsense, without offering any evidence for it to be true. Are there a lot of FreeBSD committers and developers that are Apple employees? Is Apple paying a lot of the expenses of the FreeBSD foundation? Do lot of developers get orders from Apple? None of those things are true.
If you think Apple is directly benefiting from current FreeBSD development, think again. As far as I know, Apple has stopped taking kernel code from the *BSD branches somewhere in the mid-1990s. That's a long time ago.
...I really do not understand why it is not in use by its developers, on their presentations, meetings etc, while it is really pretty easy to do so, 5 minutes are only needed to install Xorg and WM.
I don't know, I'm not a FreeBSD developer. My educated guess is: They use whatever desktop OS they are most productive with. Would you prefer that they use something they are less productive with? Do you want a FreeBSD developer waste his time installing a desktop OS he doesn't actually wish to run? Just to make a political point, or just to make a fan-boy happy?
My guess it is because FreeBSD project is heavily influenced by Apple,
You keep spouting that nonsense, without offering any evidence for it to be true. Are there a lot of FreeBSD committers and developers that are Apple employees? Is Apple paying a lot of the expenses of the FreeBSD foundation? Do lot of developers get orders from Apple? None of those things are true.
Then please stop spreading lies about it.And I really dislike this situation very much, because I like FreeBSD much
Yes, it is obvious. If you look at the market share for desktop operating systems, all free operating systems together are about 1% or so. Of that, the lion's share is Linux. The market share of FreeBSD on the desktop is a tiny fraction of a percent. It is simply not worth it for a corporation (in particular for one such as Apple, which is interested in its products to be close to perfection) to release its consumer software (such as iTunes) in FreeBSD versions. Note that iTunes is available for Windows ... not because Apple loves Microsoft (nothing could be further from the truth), but because Windows has a big market share on the desktop (around 90%).For example, try to connect your iphone to FreeBSD (or to any other Free OS) laptop and try to upload some music,
it is impossible, why? Because Apple (as Adobe, for example) do not support their products on Free operating systems.
Why? I think it is obvious why.
If you think Apple is directly benefiting from current FreeBSD development, think again. As far as I know, Apple has stopped taking kernel code from the *BSD branches somewhere in the mid-1990s. That's a long time ago.