Read a rumor that DTrace will be in OS X Leopard. 3216

Snit

There are significant parts that were lifted from FreeBSD, but those are mostly limited to the userspace. This does not establish a relationship strong enough to justify a term like 'based on', which has specific system. It would essentially mean that you think that OS X is a fork of FreeBSD, but it clearly isn't.

You have yet to point out a single technical example of OS X's origins in FreeBSD. All you've been able to do is point to other people making the same claim as yourself. Just because many people use a term incorrectly does not mean the term itself is the right one to use. Prove your buttertion that OS X is based on FreeBSD. I've provided many examples of areas that would usually indicate that this operating system includes many technologies that are found in FreeBSD, but that it was not actually based on that operating system. Your claim is like saying that a diesel engine is 'partially based on' a conventional gasoline-fueled internal combustion engine because both turn a drive shaft. OS X is clearly *not* based on FreeBSD, but it does include technologies from FreeBSD. This easily qualifies it as an operating system that includes FreeBSD code, but it does not meet the specific connotations that are implied by something like 'based on' (in this context).

Show technical examples, not buttertions made by others. They should be easy to find, given the amount of documentation that would have been left over from such a tradition.

Say that, I don't disagree. What I disagree with is your use of the term 'based on' to describe this. OS X was not based on FreeBSD. It includes technology from FreeBSD. There is a difference there.