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

191–200 of 204 posts

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#191

Post by moistbar »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #59
kitsunesoba wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, virtualization _already_ lets you run whatever arm64 BSD, Linux, or Windows that you want. The trackpad and everything else will work flawlessly thanks to guest additions. Yes, you make some tradeoffs -- you sacrifice a core, a few GB of RAM, some disk space for an OS you don't _really_ want to be running. But I'm skeptical that these are not better tradeoffs than constantly using a hacked-togeth…

Really, that goes for any guest OS other than maybe Windows, and Windows is different only because VM developers have poured an enormous amount of time and money into it. You can get rid of the sluggishness with GPU passthrough... but then the guest OS would still need GPU drivers.

You'd also either need two GPUs or some way to mux the guest output into the host output, so it's almost assuredly not happening.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#192

Post by adamcstephens »

ogre_codes wrote: post #58
rgovostes wrote: post #51

Running an alternative OS "natively" on a Mac doesn't seem very appealing to me. It's almost guaranteed you will never fully get Wi-Fi, audio, graphics acceleration, the trackpad, etc. working flawlessly, especially on the M1 where almost every component is Apple proprietary and it's not a matter of loading, say, some common Intel graphics driver. On the other hand, virtualization _already_ lets you run whatever arm6…

> Running an alternative OS "natively" on a Mac doesn't seem very appealing to me. It's almost guaranteed you will never fully get Wi-Fi, audio, graphics acceleration, the trackpad, etc. working flawlessly, especially on the M1 where almost every component is Apple proprietary and it's not a matter of loading, say, the right Intel graphics driver. It's not appealing to me now . In 9 or 10 years when Apple has stopped…

I wouldn't be so sure that wifi/graphics/audio will ever be solved. It's possible, but not guaranteed. There are whole generations of Intel Mac systems that have never received support for these.

https://github.com/Dunedan/mbp-2016-linux

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#193

Post by amelius »

ogre_codes wrote: post #186
amelius wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Apple fans seem to be forgetting that the ones in power at Apple are business people, who care as much about customers as any other company. And being business people they don't have sympathy for developers either and in fact would rather see their power reduced. In their best scenario, all developers become low-wage employees but without the benefit of employees. A bit like Uber drivers.

How on earth does this make "business sense"? You can't sell $10,000 Mac Pros and $6,000 displays with a neutered operating system. Nobody is buying the 16" MacBook Pro if they can only buy apps in the App Store. Overnight they would lose pretty much every (non-iOS) developer, most video editors, every podcaster and audio engineer, most photographers, every single scientist, most engineers, mathematicians, and many a…

You seem to be assuming that everything which makes business sense is also good for the customer.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#194

Post by zepto »

fsflover wrote: post #188
zepto wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Are you suggesting that the Wikipedia page should not mention Mac OS in the table, because it has nothing to do with the topic? But it comes from the cited paper. You should probably read it. I cannot access my OS and all my applications after changing the hardware or using a VM. Do you call it “unrestricted access to applications”? How is this unrestricted if there are restrictions? This is not an open platform by t…

> Wikipedia page should not mention Mac OS in the table, because it has nothing to do with the topic?

No - why would you imagine that?

The article mentions MacOS and by it’s own definition the conclusion is that MacOS is not a walled garden.

It would be weird to think that merely mentioning an operating system in a discussion about walled gardens makes it into a walled garden.

> I cannot access my OS and all my applications after changing the hardware or using a VM.

This is obvious bullshit. Your application and OS still work just fine.

Nobody is telling you what you can and can’t run on the operating system, or on the hardware it is running on.

That’s what the Wikipedia article defines as a walled garden, and has nothing to do with the licensing conditions of the operating system itself.

As to needing to pay certain people for hardware repair, that is also simply not true, and is not relevant to the discussion about walled gardens.

There is nothing preventing you from having your SSD repaired or replaced by anyone with the capability to do it.

By your definition, Linux is a walled garden because you can only run Linux binaries on Linux.

See how this makes no sense?

There’s nothing wrong with you preferring GPL’d software. But that doesn’t mean that everything else is “walled garden”.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#195

Post by fsflover »

zepto wrote: post #194
fsflover wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that the Wikipedia page should not mention Mac OS in the table, because it has nothing to do with the topic? But it comes from the cited paper. You should probably read it. I cannot access my OS and all my applications after changing the hardware or using a VM. Do you call it “unrestricted access to applications”? How is this unrestricted if there are restrictions? This is not an open platform by t…

> Wikipedia page should not mention Mac OS in the table, because it has nothing to do with the topic? No - why would you imagine that? The article mentions MacOS and by it’s own definition the conclusion is that MacOS is not a walled garden . It would be weird to think that merely mentioning an operating system in a discussion about walled gardens makes it into a walled garden . > I cannot access my OS and all my app…

> There is nothing preventing you from having your SSD repaired or replaced by anyone with the capability to do it.

This is just bullshit (if one uses your wording). Every new Apple laptop comes with glued SSD.

> By your definition, Linux is a walled garden because you can only run Linux binaries on Linux.

This is absolutely not what I am saying. The problem is not in the compiled binaries. The problem comes when I want to escape the Mac OS walled garden. I can run Linux or Windows in a VM on any operating system and escape its ecosystem any moment in this way. All apps will work in the VM. Not so for Mac OS. I don't think you are even trying to understand my reasoning. Instead you are finding every possibility for a tangential reply having nothing to do with my point.

>It would be weird to think that merely mentioning an operating system in a discussion about walled gardens makes it into a walled garden.

Then please tell me what the example of Mac OS with word "closed" nearby is doing in that Wikipedia page? Does it indicate that Mac OS is an open ecosystem?

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#196

Post by adamcstephens »

mrweasel wrote: post #122
linuxhansl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand what Apple contributed here. It's not supported, helped, or encouraged by Apple. And Apple does not document their H/W in ways that allow reuse. Hence these are all reverse engineering projects. Apple _is_ a walled garden ecosystem. That has many obvious advantages, things just work, etc. Personally I happen to not like it, but it's a choice folks have to make by themselves. I buy my H/W fro…

What would Apple even have to lose by proving the specification and documentation needed to boot alternative operating systems? People would still need to by the hardware from Apple and the number of people who even consider this option is so small that the PR it would bring easily outweight any potential cost. How many bought the Intel Macs initially because: If it doesn’t workout, I just install Windows. Linux user…

It's not about risk, it's about philosophy. They want to control the entire stack, and it's been in their DNA for decades. Most internal documentation also generally isn't public-level quality, so it's a non-zero amount of effort to release docs.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#197

Post by zepto »

fsflover wrote: post #195
zepto wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wikipedia page should not mention Mac OS in the table, because it has nothing to do with the topic? No - why would you imagine that? The article mentions MacOS and by it’s own definition the conclusion is that MacOS is not a walled garden . It would be weird to think that merely mentioning an operating system in a discussion about walled gardens makes it into a walled garden . > I cannot access my OS and all my app…

> There is nothing preventing you from having your SSD repaired or replaced by anyone with the capability to do it. This is just bullshit (if one uses your wording). Every new Apple laptop comes with glued SSD. > By your definition, Linux is a walled garden because you can only run Linux binaries on Linux. This is absolutely not what I am saying. The problem is not in the compiled binaries. The problem comes when I w…

> Then please tell me what the example of Mac OS with word "closed" nearby is doing in that Wikipedia page?

In the sentence “Mac OS is not a closed system”, the word ‘closed’ is near the words ‘Mac OS’.

I assume you don’t think that sentence means that Mac OS, is a closed system.

Generally, when words are ‘nearby’ other words you have to read the context to understand why they are there.

> Does it say that Mac OS is an open ecosystem?

Yes, it does say that it’s an open ecosystem.

In the parts of the table describing the ecosystem it has the word open in the rows for MacOS.

Obviously you can see that.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#198

Post by fsflover »

zepto wrote: post #197
fsflover wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is nothing preventing you from having your SSD repaired or replaced by anyone with the capability to do it. This is just bullshit (if one uses your wording). Every new Apple laptop comes with glued SSD. > By your definition, Linux is a walled garden because you can only run Linux binaries on Linux. This is absolutely not what I am saying. The problem is not in the compiled binaries. The problem comes when I w…

> Then please tell me what the example of Mac OS with word "closed" nearby is doing in that Wikipedia page? In the sentence “Mac OS is not a closed system”, the word ‘closed’ is near the words ‘Mac OS’. I assume you don’t think that sentence means that Mac OS, is a closed system. Generally, when words are ‘nearby’ other words you have to read the context to understand why they are there. > Does it say that Mac OS is…

> Generally, when words are ‘nearby’ other words you have to read the context to understand why they are there.

You are absolutely right. Let me quote it for you, so that you understand the context:

"Harvard Business School working paper... differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects and gave example platforms".

Then, in the table you can see that in 2 out of 4 aspects Mac OS is a closed ecosystem according to the published research. I am astonished by Apple fanboys who cannot accept flaws in Mac OS, even if it's clearly explained by respectful independent researchers.

>In the parts of the table describing the ecosystem it has the word open in the rows for MacOS.

All four points describe the ecosystem, not just those which you choose. Again, quote: "differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects".

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#199

Post by ogre_codes »

amelius wrote: post #193
ogre_codes wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How on earth does this make "business sense"? You can't sell $10,000 Mac Pros and $6,000 displays with a neutered operating system. Nobody is buying the 16" MacBook Pro if they can only buy apps in the App Store. Overnight they would lose pretty much every (non-iOS) developer, most video editors, every podcaster and audio engineer, most photographers, every single scientist, most engineers, mathematicians, and many a…

You seem to be assuming that everything which makes business sense is also good for the customer.

There is zero reason Apple would do what you suggest. You haven’t provided one, you just assume if you utter the phrase “Business Sense” enough that people will agree with you.

shrug

There is zero sense or logic in these assertions, business or otherwise. It’s baseless nonsense.

Re: OpenBSD boots multi-user on Apple M1 hardware

#200

Post by zepto »

fsflover wrote: post #198
zepto wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then please tell me what the example of Mac OS with word "closed" nearby is doing in that Wikipedia page? In the sentence “Mac OS is not a closed system”, the word ‘closed’ is near the words ‘Mac OS’. I assume you don’t think that sentence means that Mac OS, is a closed system. Generally, when words are ‘nearby’ other words you have to read the context to understand why they are there. > Does it say that Mac OS is…

> Generally, when words are ‘nearby’ other words you have to read the context to understand why they are there. You are absolutely right. Let me quote it for you, so that you understand the context: "Harvard Business School working paper... differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects and gave example platforms". Then, in the table you can see that in 2 out of 4 aspects Mac OS is a closed ecosystem…

> All four points describe the ecosystem, not just those which you choose. Again, quote: "differentiated a platform's openness/closedness by four aspects".

The two on which Apple is rated as ‘open’ are the criteria which the article’s definition uses to determine whether a platform is a walled garden.

You are using a definition of walled garden to mean ‘any level of closedness’.

This is not what a walled garden means, and not what the article says.

If you want to use a private definition, by all means do so, but the article doesn’t have anything to do with your private definition.

For the third time - here is the definition from the article:

“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.”

The table shows that Mac OS is open when it comes to applications, content, and media.

The definition is clear, and Mac OS is not a walled garden by the definition. The table supports this conclusion.

Glued components are common and do not prevent repair - what has that got to go with anything?

An emulated VM obviously doesn’t allow a binary to escape the platform because of course you still need the platform, and the binary is still running on the platform so nothing has ‘escaped’.

As I say, your point is just about what hardware you want a license to run MacOS on, which is nothing to do with whether it is a walled garden.

Post reply on HN