Live data from Hacker News

Lima: Linux-on-Mac

github.com

211–220 of 366 posts

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#211
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's why I moved away from Linux to macOS: - I'm sorry, but no Linux DE I've ever used beats macOS in terms of stability. The file explorers are also a joke and frequently changing. - I've never booted to a black screen when upgrading macOS. - 99% of the work I do never needs anything that has to be virtualized under macOS. - Macbooks are solid laptops. Every other laptop I've owned hasn't stood the test of time as…

> I'm sorry, but no Linux DE I've ever used beats macOS in terms of stability. Been running Xfce since 2004 with no stability issues whatsoever. > Macbooks are solid laptops. Every other laptop I've owned hasn't stood the test of time as well as my Mac. Oof, I guess you never got a Mac during 2016-2020 or so. They've been gradually declining in build quality. I owned Mac laptops continually from 2005 until 2019, and…

These are all just anecdotes. From you, OP, and me...

> Been running Xfce since 2004 with no stability issues whatsoever.

I ran Linux (and was a _fierce_ OSS fanatic) from ~2002 to 2012. I've been a mac user since 2012. I moved around, using LXDE, Xfce, Gnome, KDE, no DE at all (openbox...)... I used Ubuntu, Mint, Gentoo, ADIOS, Crunchbang, Fedora...

Linux DEs were solid, but they never felt sufficiently polished. When I first touched a Mac, everything just felt better -- drag and drop worked like a charm, and the visual queues and feedback were amazing. Often we'd realize that some things also worked in Linux, but they just weren't visually advertised as such -- cursors wouldn't change, things wouldn't slightly fade. It looked like a jumbled mess with no coherent design team behind it.

> Oof, I guess you never got a Mac during 2016-2020 or so. They've been gradually declining in build quality. I owned Mac laptops continually from 2005 until 2019, and they've been going downhill pretty much the entire way, especially since 2012 or so.

The quality of apple laptops has indeed been far from stellar in recent years, but I'm pretty happy with my 16' beefed-out Macbook Pro. It is undeniable, though, as you say, that they have been going downhill. Nevertheless, going downhill from where they were still means they're quite close to the highest peak you can find, IMO.

> > More [actually good] software supports macOS. It's just a fact. > > That's pretty much the definition of an opinion, not a fact.

Agreed, it is a matter of opinion. For what it's worth, if we exclude games (most of which I can play perfectly fine in a VM in parallels anyway), in my opinion, indeed more actually good software supports macOS. There are very very very few things I miss from my linux days, and I heavily customized everything I had.

> It really isn't. The problem is that everyone already has a laptop when they decide they want to switch, and then get frustrated when their existing laptop doesn't work well with Linux. These days there are quite a few laptops that work perfectly or near-perfectly with Linux, and they're not hard to find.

I completely disagree with the sentiment of this paragraph. While, yes, many laptops work flawlessly, and you may actually be able to google them somewhat quickly, the experience of finding a linux compatible machine that one wants to use and fits their needs is still a perilous road of doubt and uncertainty. This is a consequence of the many different choices one has, because while we can find reports that someone's favourite distro ran on a particular laptop at version X, we might not want that distro, or that particular version, and things instantly go south. Finding linux-compatible hardware and having to "jump into it with our money" is an extremely risky and stressful move -- one which can leave anyone with buyer's remorse pretty quickly if anything fails to work properly. Worse, "failing to work properly" can be as innocuous as "feeling that the laptop is running out of battery too fast" or "is running too hot". While all of these things definitely also happen on a Macbook, it is much easier to simply know that the hardware will be supported, much like we know that most games built for a console are sure to work on that console. If money is not an issue, and if there are no particularly clunky software requirements or vendor-lock-in issues (these are big ifs, I know), then buying a Mac is by far the easiest decision, because it lifts weights off of your mind, and puts them in Apple's hands -- to make sure that things work.

Many of my friends run Linux, some of them as a daily driver. Some of these people are among the smartest I've ever known with computers, and some even make hundreds of thousands of dollars in the IT world, be it in cybersecurity fields or other such areas -- yet, most of them, too, do not really know which laptop to buy when upgrading, ever. They choose Linux _in spite of this_, but they most definitely see this as an annoyance and problem. Linux has to work everywhere and, so, it is only natural that there are pieces of hardware where it doesn't work -- or it works poorly. I would expect nothing less.

> That's a fair opinion, but I've found my experience to be the opposite. Every time I go back to macOS, I get frustrated with the inflexibility of it all. I get that it's a pain to feel like you have to customize everything to get something usable for you, but macOS goes too far in the opposite direction for me: Apple just does not give me enough knobs to turn to make me feel comfortable in their environment.

I can perfectly understand this sentiment. I don't really feel like there are things I can't configure on my mac, but I can recognize that I had more configurability on the Linux side of things. I used to be the guy who had dozens of scripts and wrappers for everything, and the one crazy guy who got pulseaudio to play along with ALSA before it actually worked, all while getting the latest games to run on Wine with custom patches made for them. My computers always looked "slick" to other people, and I used to have this amazing feeling of having tailored it all to myself. Then, at some point in my life, I realized I was spending more time adjusting my configurations than actually doing stuff with them. Ever since circumstances led me to a Mac, I've never looked back. I've migrated data from my first Mac all the way to the latest always through Time Machine, and it feels magical.

I'm a big fan of Linux. I think it's an incredible achievement. I'm not the OSS fanatic sending e-mails to RMS that I used to be, but I still feel the OSS cause deeply. I also think linux on the desktop is much more usable today than it was before (when I used it). It certainly fits the needs of many people. To me, though, the mac strikes a perfect balance for everything I do in my life. It literally just works. Everything just works. I airplay to my TV and it works. I migrate it with time machine across the span of 10 years and it works. I upgrade it and everything (mostly) works. Things don't change _too_ much in between updates. Stability has its ups and downs. Apple's decisions sometimes might leave one a bit infuriated (cough cough 32 bit support), but I've never been this happy with a computer as I am with the mac. In fact, even though I have theoretically less to configure, my mac feels like it's "more configured to me" than my Linux machines, because things just work like I want them to. It's like my mental model of a computer is better represented by the mac. Whenever I touch Linux and have to use it for a couple of days or in a VM, things are always out of place (this also happens a bit with Windows, but Windows feels coherent and I can instantly tell that after a couple of days I'd get used to it). Drag and drop doesn't do what it should. Things don't respond for no reason. Work is being done but no loading icon is present, leading me to do double-clicks and other shenanigans. I'm sure the right combination of tools and software for me is out there in the Linux world -- and the hardware too (I love the macbook trackpads -- they're actually the original reason why I started thinking of moving to the mac) --, but I have more to do with my life than keep tinkering with linux nowadays to make it work with me. I do that with my raspberry pis, as a fun thing.

I have nothing against people running Linux on the desktop. The more, the better -- maybe one day I'll come back. I never thought I'd use a Mac -- I despised them -- and yet, here I am, 10 years later.

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#212
post #13

It's just a "better integrated" virtual machine: "Lima launches Linux virtual machines on macOS" This might be a controversial opinion, but I find developers flocking to macOS really bewildering. As a developer, why do you want to fight your operating system to get basic things done? This Lima thing, docker running in a virtual machine, Apple being actively hostile with the default coreutils requiring you to layer mu…

I kind of think similarly on the subject. They make some beautiful hardware, but I've never been able to get comfortable on macos. I love linux, but that also has some drawbacks when running that as your desktop or laptop. I have been really liking WSL on windows 10. I don't need to worry about installing stuff on windows, but having linux as my shell has been pretty great. I wouldn't call it just a better integrated…

I found the start up time for powershell to be quite noticeable in WSL for scripts like that.

If copying is all you're after you can invoke `clip.exe` instead.

Honestly though I just caved and ended up using an xserver with WSL for really smooth copy and paste support. Paste requires a powershell invocation without an xserver.

Definitely recommending X410 (paid) or VcrXsrv (free) -- let's you launch x11 apps too!

Once WSLu is released everything will be even more seamless though.

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's why I moved away from Linux to macOS: - I'm sorry, but no Linux DE I've ever used beats macOS in terms of stability. The file explorers are also a joke and frequently changing. - I've never booted to a black screen when upgrading macOS. - 99% of the work I do never needs anything that has to be virtualized under macOS. - Macbooks are solid laptops. Every other laptop I've owned hasn't stood the test of time as…

> - I've never booted to a black screen when upgrading macOS. My wife got bit by the Big Sur bug, 2 weeks ago, were the installer doesn’t check if there’s enough disk space available before starting the upgrade. Reached out Apple whom, had I not been next to her, wanted her to create a new volume on her disk and reinstall Stopped her. Jumped in. Asked what the plan was and it was to format. The initial question was i…

Have you written a post somewhere about how you got her data back, or what was something online that helped you?

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#214
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"why do you want to fight your operating system to get basic things done?" Depends on the developer. How many developers use awk and grep? Most web developers probably have touched them once and never used them again, and prefer using MacOS compared to fighting Windows to do their web dev. Making a blanket statement that doing any development requires "fighting MacOS" is silly.

That was just an example though. My point was that you're constantly fighting an operating system that's clearly not designed for you ( the developer ).

The people who develop macOS, iOS, et al are also users of those systems. It’s pretty awesome actually.

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homebrew is more transparent and approachable, I can easily customize what is being installed, it's versioning, and control it's dependencies better than apt. Apt, more often than not, acts as a gatekeeper for the latest version of whatever software packages I'm trying to install. I end up just having to adding various libraries and repos to my sources list to get the version I need, or go to an outside dependency ma…

You're extrapolating from Debian's packaging concept to other distros, though your argument does not apply to most of the rolling distros out there. On a rolling distro (e.g. using pacman, or say yast2 and others for sake of argument) you typically ship the header files included with the libraries, so that you don't need multiple versions of the same library installed. On Debian/Ubuntu, however, it will always end up…

That's the problem isn't it? Whichever problem you point at in Linux, the answer is invariably the same: "you're holding it wr^W^W^^W you're using the wrong distro, the wrong package manager, the wrong DE, the wrong version of any of those things".

And, invariably, for any problem the one true combination is different.

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They even hide # behind a special alt key combo. That's way worse than removing the escape key.

It's things like this that make me say that Macbooks aren't for developers rather than running Linux in a VM.

I'm baffled how a developer ever assumes that whatever's on the keyboard is hardcoded and can never be changed.

Yes, for some reason (tradition, history) Macs prefer typewriter layouts on their keyboards. But... have you ever even tried looking into System Preferences - Keyboard - Input Sources and changing the layout to "US (PC)"?

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#217
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finder still can't handle SFTP connections. In 2021. I feel like I'm going insane, or I've missed some sort of critical update, but no, it's just sitting there.

This. It's incredibly useful basic functionality that both Finder and explorer inexplicably lack. This alone makes Linux desktops far more friendly even for novice users who want to do something beyond sharing gifs on web forums.

SFTP.

Novice users.

Why would a novice user want SFTP built-in to their file manager?

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#218
post #111
post #13

It's just a "better integrated" virtual machine: "Lima launches Linux virtual machines on macOS" This might be a controversial opinion, but I find developers flocking to macOS really bewildering. As a developer, why do you want to fight your operating system to get basic things done? This Lima thing, docker running in a virtual machine, Apple being actively hostile with the default coreutils requiring you to layer mu…

"As a developer, why do you want to fight your operating system to get basic things done" After 10 years of linux it took me 1 month with a macbook to decide that i just dont have the time to keep my linux running the way i want to, play the hardware lottery and fear every major update (or every update after a vacation with arch).

For the most part hardware lottery can be summarized in one word - Nvidia. Don't buy laptops with Nvidia card if you want to use Linux. Optimus is crap, prime offloading is crap and often laptop manufacturers hardwire external hmdi to Nvidia GPU.

I have been running the latest Thinkpad t14s with fedora 33 and it is perfect in almost every possible way compared to MacBook. I also have Thinkpad extreme gen2 with Nvidia card and I had nothing but trouble with it.

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I just don't understand the fascination with rolling update models for the core os. I've got other things to worry about than playing with config files, so I just install a new LTS distro every couple years or so and amortize the pain to less than the yearly macos updates.

I, too, dislike rolling updates for my workstation OS. I don't like using anything OS- or package-manager-provided on my dev workstation for per-project development dependencies, since usually it's much less painful (sooner or later) to manage those with a special tool for that purpose, or to vendor them, or to pick some OS that you might not like for your workstation as your deployment target (Alpine, say, or a very…

My solution for this on linux has been to run Linux Mint Debian Edition while using Nix for package management of stuff I want to stay reasonably up to date.

Re: Lima: Linux-on-Mac

#220
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A package manager with up to date packages (granted there are Linuxbrew and things like Snap now for Linux.) On what planet is is homebrew better than Linux package managers? I agree with many of the other items in these lists, but this makes literally no sense to me. Homebrew is probably one of the worst things about doing dev on a mac.

Homebrew is more transparent and approachable, I can easily customize what is being installed, it's versioning, and control it's dependencies better than apt. Apt, more often than not, acts as a gatekeeper for the latest version of whatever software packages I'm trying to install. I end up just having to adding various libraries and repos to my sources list to get the version I need, or go to an outside dependency ma…

> Apt, more often than not, acts as a gatekeeper for the latest version

It's a distro policy issue, not a package manager issue. There are rolling distros using apt - for example https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable which is updated every 6 hours.

The same way rpm is just a packaging format - you can have both the stable (fosilised) CentOS and the fresh Fedora / CentOS-Stream using it.

Post reply on HN