It's really sad that the only way to get macOS running in a virtual machine is with hacks and tweaks. I'm working on a cross platform desktop app written in Qt and while it should theoretically work on macOS I haven't had a chance to actually try it, because I don't own any Apple computers. Apple is shooting themselves in the foot.
It's how they enforce their monopoly. To the point of driving their market share down below mainstream.
Virtualize OS X on Linux
121–130 of 143 posts
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#122It's really sad that the only way to get macOS running in a virtual machine is with hacks and tweaks. I'm working on a cross platform desktop app written in Qt and while it should theoretically work on macOS I haven't had a chance to actually try it, because I don't own any Apple computers. Apple is shooting themselves in the foot.
> Apple is shooting themselves in the foot. How is that exactly? A huge majority of developers in your situation go out and buy a Mac; another hardware purchase in their pocket. This is part of their business strategy: developers are forced to participate, and by and large they do just that. It hurts you far more than it does Apple by refusing to participate. If you believe you're "hurting Apple" by not developing fo…
Haha, joke's on them - I simply won't test[1] my web apps against Safari!
1. But our QA does :(, so I guess they won. Fortunately Apple decided to create 1st-party webdriver support as of Safari 10, so they at least recognize that assisting developers test on Safari is important. Hopefully someday we'll get macOS disk images to test Safari à la modern.ie
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#123Google cached it before it disappeared: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pcBDnIR...
http://grodola.blogspot.com/2016/10/virtualize-osx-on-linux_...
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything you said is very true. I think the only way it hurts Apple is that no one runs OSX Server anywhere. I'm willing to bet Apple doesn't have data centres filled with MacPros, but instead has proprietary internal hardware for servers running OSX. OSX is terrible to run your services on compared to any other Linux/BSD variant out there with build-in package management. Apple is not tapping into that particular…
Or simply use one of the BSDs on commodity hardware for internal server needs. At this point in time OSX/MacOS/iOS and Android/ChromeOS is pretty much the same thing. A basically proprietary platform (yeah yeah, i know about AOSP. But good luck using most apps without having Google's services installed) living on top of a vestigial _nix.
At least Google's stuff generally works from a Linux desktop; Apple's just refuses (including iCloud: apparently I am required to use a Mac or Windows machine to view pictures my mom posts; Apple seem to think that Linux browsers are incapable of displaying pictures and text).
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
If everything is using cmake, and you don't need any inline assembly or fortran for scientific code, then maybe. But you end up in a parallel universe where everything that touches MSVC is just needlessly different than every other platform. If mingw gcc is working for you, then it's much easier for dev skills to transfer between building for Windows and building for unix. If you do need inline assembly and/or Fortra…
Actually Fortran works best if you combine Visual Studio with Intel Fortran compiler. You can freely call C from Fortran and viceversa, furthermore Intel's versions of BLAS and LAPACK are seriously faster than the reference BLAS and LAPACK you will build yourself on Windows. It is also possible to link gfortran compiled dll's with C and C++ in Visual Studio. A few years ago I even called a gfortran dll from C# using…
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't you use a virtual machine, if it is just for testing? You find a lot of tutorials on the web, how to install macOS. It is not much harder than to install Ubuntu.
Yeah, sure, it's possible. It's also against their EULA and they could break it (just like Hackintoshing) at any point in time and then bam; half of your customer base is receiving untested software because you no longer have access to your virtualized OSX until you fix it (just like every time an OSX/xcode update is rolled out). Is that worth saving the $500? For most of us, it's not. Sure you can mitigate it by not…
As someone who is interested in OSX testing like this - ie, not arguing with you - would it be possible to have a mac mini use virtualbox with real OSX installations running in parallel?
From what i've heard in this thread, Virtualbox/etc support OSX just fine, on OSX machines. Hypothetically, you could parallel-ize on a single machine via virtualbox, no?
I understand Apple is still making it a PITA though. Not disagreeing, just learning why you were only running a single instance per box. :)
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple wins this battle every time. Welcome to the ecosystem. :) Yes, that's true, but we can also start being sincere about the fact that the whole story is BS. I've been recently assigned a mac by my university (never used one before) and I have to say that the ecosystem is at least unhealthy. Maybe mac users don't really care, but having to install a third party software for common tasks like reverse scrolling, k…
Reverse scrolling? It's an option on the touchpad / mouse settings to scroll naturally/unnaturally isn't it? Going to sleep - it's under power options in Settings. Also writing to NTFS is not a problem they care about. When's the last time you wrote to ext4 or HFS+ on Windows natively without extra tools? It's exactly the same here - they support HFS, HFS+ and FAT32 and VFAT. Windows supports NTFS and FAT32 and VFAT.…
Yes, but do you want to have different setting for your trackpad and mouse at the same time? You need a third party software. It's not as bad as I told the story
> Going to sleep - it's under power options in Settings
But I don't want to open the settings and change the behavior of the whole system if I right now need to have it awake for 10 minutes. Sure I could launch `caffeinate` on a terminal, but a clickable applet would be better. But of course it's either paid or buggy.
> writing to NTFS is not a problem they care about.
As to say, they don't care about something very basic that their users might need and don't need much implementation.
In fact I think you can simply `mount -t ` your drive or add a line to `/etc/fstab`, but you won't have it in finder.
> When's the last time you wrote to ext4 or HFS+ on Windows natively without extra tools?
This just makes windows a worse OS. If you compare it to a real OS, like your favorite linux variant, you can.
> Do we get upset with Microsoft because they don't support HFS+?
Actually I do. This is exactly what I'm talking about: it's just a business practice to enforce their own standards, since the whole implementation wouldn't be so hard: they could just add a pop up upon installation that says "This software is not guaranteed to work, use at your own risk".
In the end, it is clear that a OS which support more FSes (especially the most widespread ones) is better than the same OS without that feature, and I say we should complain that we can't get it.
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, sure, it's possible. It's also against their EULA and they could break it (just like Hackintoshing) at any point in time and then bam; half of your customer base is receiving untested software because you no longer have access to your virtualized OSX until you fix it (just like every time an OSX/xcode update is rolled out). Is that worth saving the $500? For most of us, it's not. Sure you can mitigate it by not…
> but we used to have to run farms of mac minis because we couldn't have jenkins/bamboo trigger more than one xcode test/build run at a time. As someone who is interested in OSX testing like this - ie, not arguing with you - would it be possible to have a mac mini use virtualbox with real OSX installations running in parallel? From what i've heard in this thread, Virtualbox/etc support OSX just fine, on OSX machines.…
Our initial goal was to have one OSX system running multiple xcode builds/tests. I think at some point we may have gotten it working by having different targets set up but I don't recall the specifics.
Sorry I can't be of more help. We worked with 3-4 other app developers and it seemed like all of us were doing completely different work arounds to reach the same goal. I'd love to know how King or any of the other huge (number of apps) developers deal with these things. It doesn't seem like it's talked about much.
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple wins this battle every time. Welcome to the ecosystem. :) Yes, that's true, but we can also start being sincere about the fact that the whole story is BS. I've been recently assigned a mac by my university (never used one before) and I have to say that the ecosystem is at least unhealthy. Maybe mac users don't really care, but having to install a third party software for common tasks like reverse scrolling, k…
It is that market of small utilities that puts money in the pockets of developers that care about the desktop experience, and that isn't exclusive of Apple systems.
By the way, there is an ecosystem of excellent small utilities developed open source for linux that are, in my opinions, superior to the ones on OSX, or at least, the one I work and am familiar with. Of course open source produces many useless tools, but I've also found unusable applets for mac, so...
Windows is of course out of the equation.
Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple wins this battle every time. Welcome to the ecosystem. :) Yes, that's true, but we can also start being sincere about the fact that the whole story is BS. I've been recently assigned a mac by my university (never used one before) and I have to say that the ecosystem is at least unhealthy. Maybe mac users don't really care, but having to install a third party software for common tasks like reverse scrolling, k…
open a command line and type "caff ". comes built in.