Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

marc.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 204 posts

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#171

Post by fsflover »

zepto wrote: post #170
fsflover wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are conflating the concept of commercial software with the concept of a walled garden. Commercial software is the software for which developers get money. It can include free software, too. It has nothing to do with the license or the topic we are discussing. You are conflating the concepts here. Walled garden in general is a convenient system, from which a user can hardly escape when the users wants to. This i…

That seems to be just false. The Wikipedia article does mention Mac OS, but does not, anywhere, use it as an example of a walled garden. Here is the definition from the page you link: “A closed platform, walled garden, or closed ecosystem[1][2] is a software system wherein the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applicants or c…

Did you even read the article I linked? I quote for you:

A 2008 Harvard Business School working paper, entitled "Opening Platforms: How, When and Why?", differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects and gave example platforms.

Platform provider (hardware/operating system (OS) bundle), Mac OS: closed

Platform sponsor (design & intellectual property (IP) rights owner), Mac OS: closed

Tl;dr:

It's not a walled garden in all aspects, but it definitely restricts users in a significant way, depending on your use case.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#172

Post by zepto »

fsflover wrote: post #171
zepto wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems to be just false. The Wikipedia article does mention Mac OS, but does not, anywhere, use it as an example of a walled garden. Here is the definition from the page you link: “A closed platform, walled garden, or closed ecosystem[1][2] is a software system wherein the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applicants or c…

Did you even read the article I linked? I quote for you: A 2008 Harvard Business School working paper, entitled "Opening Platforms: How, When and Why?", differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects and gave example platforms. Platform provider (hardware/operating system (OS) bundle), Mac OS: closed Platform sponsor (design & intellectual property (IP) rights owner), Mac OS: closed Tl;dr: It's not a…

I did read it. What you are quoting has nothing to do with the definition of a walled garden on that page.

Notably for some reason you chose not to include the part where they also say about Mac OS:

Demand-side use (end-user): open

Supply-side user (application developer): open

It is not a walled garden in any way that they define a walled garden.

Here is the definition from the page you link: “A closed platform, walled garden, or closed ecosystem[1][2] is a software system wherein the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applicants or content. This is in contrast to an open platform, wherein consumers generally have unrestricted access to applications and content.“

It doesn’t apply to Mac OS.

Restricting installation of the operating system itself on other hardware just isn’t part of the definition.

No matter how much you selectively copy and paste from a Wikipedia page, it will not say what you claim it is saying.

Trying to say any restriction of use means a walled garden is akin to saying any software that isn’t completely free is a walled garden.

That just isn’t what the term means.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#173

Post by fsflover »

zepto wrote: post #172
fsflover wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you even read the article I linked? I quote for you: A 2008 Harvard Business School working paper, entitled "Opening Platforms: How, When and Why?", differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects and gave example platforms. Platform provider (hardware/operating system (OS) bundle), Mac OS: closed Platform sponsor (design & intellectual property (IP) rights owner), Mac OS: closed Tl;dr: It's not a…

I did read it. What you are quoting has nothing to do with the definition of a walled garden on that page. Notably for some reason you chose not to include the part where they also say about Mac OS: Demand-side use (end-user): open Supply-side user (application developer): open It is not a walled garden in any way that they define a walled garden. Here is the definition from the page you link: “A closed platform, wal…

By the definition you quoted, Mac OS is also not an open platform. This is exactly what I am saying: in some aspects, it's a walled garden. Depending on your use case, it may be essential.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#174

Post by ac29 »

aborsy wrote: post #115
etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CPU performance is a funny argument for a router as the hardware reqs on a home router are already so low. My current router is gigabit, has best in class WiFi, is smaller than a mac mini and is fanless. I got to say though: PF, multiple vlans, cross vlan firewall roules, mdns repeating do not sound like something a home user should be setting up. The only reason one would play with these things in a home environment…

Security. EdgeOS is proprietary and closed source, and not updated as frequently as OpenBSD.

EdgeOS is mostly just vanilla debian with some proprietary configuration tools on top.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#175

Post by mjg59 »

webmobdev wrote: post #135
mjg59 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel refuse to document significant portions of their technology, and Linux works less well on their platforms as a result. They definitely do a better job of documenting things than Apple, but I'd really frame this as a difference in degree rather than in kind.

Can you give some examples - I thought Intel was pretty involved with the Linux foundation and have released a lot of open source code?

They release plenty of open code, but then you also end up with situations like them not documenting DPTF and so laptops running slower under Linux than under Windows (https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/54923.html has more on this), failing to document the requirements for entering deep power saving states and so laptops consuming more power under Linux than under Windows (https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/41713.html), not doing any upstream work on the IPU4 camera platform so the webcam doesn't work on various laptops - instead this ends up with random people outside Intel having to reverse engineer stuff or do integration work on Intel's behalf. Is it better than Apple? Yeah. Is it good? No.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#176

Post by etaioinshrdlu »

tiew9Vii wrote: post #119
etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CPU performance is a funny argument for a router as the hardware reqs on a home router are already so low. My current router is gigabit, has best in class WiFi, is smaller than a mac mini and is fanless. I got to say though: PF, multiple vlans, cross vlan firewall roules, mdns repeating do not sound like something a home user should be setting up. The only reason one would play with these things in a home environment…

Yeah for a router you wouldn’t use the M1, it has one Ethernet port and overkill. I use one of the Pc Engines APU2 board’s. The reference to the router was in regards I used OpenBSD and found OpenBSD a great server OS. I have multiple vlan’s as have a guest wifi for visitors, all iot devices like tv, soundbars on a private vlan with restricted network access, dns ad blocking, dns over tls, wireguard for remote access…

Again, nothing wrong with it, but your home network is far more complex than most small (10-20 person) offices I've ever seen. It's the kind of thing you do because you're interested, not because of a practical reason. I guess you mentioned it was for learning purposes which is a good reason.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#177

Post by bubblethink »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #169
bubblethink wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This statement is a bit presumptuous It's not. Anyone who has followed the last 10 years of Apple devices knows what works and what doesn't.

"Presumptuous" meaning it presumes what a user will want to do with a computer. In this case, the computer comes with no display, no keyboard, no mouse, no trackpad, etc.

I'm not following. Are you saying that one can use an Apple router with an alternate free operating system and it still functions as a router ? I'm not aware of any such project. At least openwrt does not support the Apple router. As for what users would want to do, that is a moot point since there are common expectations for devices based on the specs and form factors. So, why would you buy a $2k laptop to use it as an inefficient, buggy, and underpowered headless linux server (assuming you get networking working)?

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#178

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

bubblethink wrote: post #177
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Presumptuous" meaning it presumes what a user will want to do with a computer. In this case, the computer comes with no display, no keyboard, no mouse, no trackpad, etc.

I'm not following. Are you saying that one can use an Apple router with an alternate free operating system and it still functions as a router ? I'm not aware of any such project. At least openwrt does not support the Apple router. As for what users would want to do, that is a moot point since there are common expectations for devices based on the specs and form factors. So, why would you buy a $2k laptop to use it as…

"I'm not following."

I agree.

The "alternative OS" is the OS that Apple used for its AirPort Extreme router, and which it borrows heavily from for the MacOs userland. Apple writes some software itself, but it also takes a significant amount of source code straight from "alternative OS" projects. To be clear, the OS projects I am referring to are not Linux nor is the computer that is the subject of this thread a "$2K laptop".

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#179

Post by zepto »

fsflover wrote: post #173
zepto wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did read it. What you are quoting has nothing to do with the definition of a walled garden on that page. Notably for some reason you chose not to include the part where they also say about Mac OS: Demand-side use (end-user): open Supply-side user (application developer): open It is not a walled garden in any way that they define a walled garden. Here is the definition from the page you link: “A closed platform, wal…

By the definition you quoted, Mac OS is also not an open platform. This is exactly what I am saying: in some aspects, it's a walled garden. Depending on your use case, it may be essential.

No. You are simply misreading the definition, or perhaps misunderstanding it.

By the definition I quoted MacOS is an open platform. The provider of MacOS (Apple) doesn’t have control over access to applications and content.

It is not a walled garden in any aspect, even by the definition you yourself provided.

Installing OS itself is restricted by commercial license. But the platform is open.

You are trying to make the definition fit, but it just doesn’t.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#180

Post by [deleted] »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #178
bubblethink wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not following. Are you saying that one can use an Apple router with an alternate free operating system and it still functions as a router ? I'm not aware of any such project. At least openwrt does not support the Apple router. As for what users would want to do, that is a moot point since there are common expectations for devices based on the specs and form factors. So, why would you buy a $2k laptop to use it as…

"I'm not following." I agree. The "alternative OS" is the OS that Apple used for its AirPort Extreme router, and which it borrows heavily from for the MacOs userland. Apple writes some software itself, but it also takes a significant amount of source code straight from "alternative OS" projects. To be clear, the OS projects I am referring to are not Linux nor is the computer that is the subject of this thread a "$2K…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN