You think BSDs are next-in-line? Why is that?
I have the distinct impression BSDs will remain niche. Something radical (like MotorOS?) seems more likely.
Nintendo is using a custom OS but with a huge chunk of user space borrowed from FreeBSD. Sony on the other hand just went and forked FreeBSD outright.
You might also want to look into what OS are being used for server environments. A lot more BSD there than you might have initially guessed.
unless it's a steamDeck, ofc. No love for consoles, though.
Also: the SteamDeck is by any reasonable standard a console. It just happens to run a windowed environment out of the box. Don't be that guy. If you want to pump Valve, focus instead on their contributions to the Wine project.
Are you saying that Arch gets its userspace and drivers from FreeBSD?
Same applies to clang/LLVM port to the Playstation, regarding everything that would expose console implementation details without an NDA.
So saying corps that use BSD code never give anything back because of license is not true. And an awful lot don't do any more or even hide their use of gpl licensed code anyway.
GPL works similarly to a patent pool: every participant sees that openly contributing to the pool is more profitable than being a renegade, as long as everyone else plays by the rules, too. MIT/BSD, while as open as possible, can easily promote a trade-secret type of environment, where any enhancements are never heard of, except under an NDA, and perish if their creators go under or lose interest.
Any sources on this, and on what parts were borrowed specifically?
I was under the impression that Nintendo did away with most of the Unix layers we know and love and went all-in on custom code and APIs, is that not the case?
Having some BSD userland binaries doesn't make your OS a BSD. Otherwise Windows is just a fork of curl.