21–30 of 204 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Need to start somewhere.
Relevant I guess since, besides the GPU, I'd expect one of the hardest parts of porting to the M1 would be full support for its very non-standard storage interfaces. Still impressive, but installing on or booting off the internal storage will be a big milestone for an prospective OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like djrogers, I can't honestly say that I've seen a comment like that. I recall ones more like "I'm not interested in running another OS on my Mac" and "if you wanted to run Linux, why would you buy a Mac," but those really aren't the same sentiment.
Maybe you are more accurately describing it. Some of them also say that free OSs are often behind on Mac hardware anyway, even on Intel. But the implication that I read into it is there's little reason to do it.
I'm personally interested in Linux on the Mac as a curiosity and as an alternative in case Apple ever screws up MacOS so much I feel desktop Linux is the least bad alternative.
Is there something about multi-user that makes it harder than single-user? If it boots, it's all software at that point, no?
Implies a level of stability greater than getting to the "press enter for sh" prompt. Virtual memory is working, filesytems are working, etc.
So much for the many remarks made on HN claiming that Apple would use the M1 to further exert control over users’ ability to boot an alternative OS. Between this and Asahi Linux, I’d say things are off to a good start. Btw, Asahi has a Patreon page for anyone who wants to contribute. I’m tossing twelve bucks a month and recommend any Mac users with interest in booting alternative OSes support such projects. Now I’m g…
That wasn't an assumption or knee-jerk reaction. Apple went on record as saying other operating systems wouldn't boot on Apple Silicon. Admittedly there's enough vagueness that they didn't 100% rule it out completely, but I think it was a fair interpretation of what they said at the time. Craig Federighi said this when talking to John Gruber: "We're not direct booting an alternate operating system, it's... purely vir…
Apple documented how people could boot alternative operating systems.
So much for the many remarks made on HN claiming that Apple would use the M1 to further exert control over users’ ability to boot an alternative OS. Between this and Asahi Linux, I’d say things are off to a good start. Btw, Asahi has a Patreon page for anyone who wants to contribute. I’m tossing twelve bucks a month and recommend any Mac users with interest in booting alternative OSes support such projects. Now I’m g…
> Now I’m gonna see if there’s an option to throw money at this. Even if I were God I wouldn't stop anyone doing it, but does it not leave a bad taste in your mouth that Apple charge the best part of 2 thousand dollars for a laptop with a basically brand-new (so not rotted) stack but utterly refuse to document anything beyond the absolute basics - this is the world's largest tech company, from which I conclude that t…
Computers are tools to get a job done. I buy a computer so I can write software on it. While I am happy that we can get Linux and OpenBSD on a Mac, it's not a deal breaker. Regardless of whether OpenBSD or Linux boots on it, I can get my job done quickly and effectively.
If they did something that got in the way of building the software I need to build? Then I'd punch out in a heartbeat.
Not everyone is interesting in fiddling with the internals of the tools they buy. Even if that tool is a computer.
So much for the many remarks made on HN claiming that Apple would use the M1 to further exert control over users’ ability to boot an alternative OS. Between this and Asahi Linux, I’d say things are off to a good start. Btw, Asahi has a Patreon page for anyone who wants to contribute. I’m tossing twelve bucks a month and recommend any Mac users with interest in booting alternative OSes support such projects. Now I’m g…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Relevant I guess since, besides the GPU, I'd expect one of the hardest parts of porting to the M1 would be full support for its very non-standard storage interfaces. Still impressive, but installing on or booting off the internal storage will be a big milestone for an prospective OS.
Isn't the internal storage NVMe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now I’m gonna see if there’s an option to throw money at this. Even if I were God I wouldn't stop anyone doing it, but does it not leave a bad taste in your mouth that Apple charge the best part of 2 thousand dollars for a laptop with a basically brand-new (so not rotted) stack but utterly refuse to document anything beyond the absolute basics - this is the world's largest tech company, from which I conclude that t…
> but does it not leave a bad taste in your mouth that Apple charge the best part of 2 thousand dollars for a laptop with a basically brand-new (so not rotted) stack but utterly refuse to document anything beyond the absolute basics Computers are tools to get a job done. I buy a computer so I can write software on it. While I am happy that we can get Linux and OpenBSD on a Mac, it's not a deal breaker. Regardless of…
Sadly I don't do it for a living, but the stuff I like to write is all tuned for performance, they don't tell me anything about the CPU, so even if I was in the market for one I still wouldn't buy one as I couldn't have any fun using it.
And Computers stopped being mere tools years ago - the phone has now supplanted the laptop and desktop in this regard, but it remains true that many people are in terms of knowledge and purchasing power completely at the whim of (in this case) Apple to go about their lives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't see it on the M1 threads but there have been some bizarrely "Corporations are not only people, but my friend"-ish arguments about "sideloading" (i.e. running software on a device you paid for!) on Apple products in general. In short, "But think of my Grandma" as opposed to think of the children.
Can no one even be bothered to debate the point?
nobody thinks apple is doing it because they're their friend. And they know apple is making money off it. Some people prefer having apps with limited, audited permissions over a more wild-west approach where you could install anything and apps could demand anything or prevent you from using the app.
(and if you don't that's fine, Android exists and no apple users mind that. Market choices are good, stop trying to shut down Apple's ability to provide a different experience.)
if you really really want to sideload an app on an apple phone, pay the $50 a year for a developer account and you can compile and sideload whatever you want. Same for xbox btw, you can run any UWP app on an Xbox if you have a developer account.
Is there something about multi-user that makes it harder than single-user? If it boots, it's all software at that point, no?
It goes from "it boots as a toy" to "actually useful"