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

Airyx OS

airyx.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 258 posts

Re: Airyx OS

#21

Post by chaostheory »

shortformblog wrote: post #17
chaostheory wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably missed a lot of things, but didn’t Gnome already achieve this? Weren’t most of the people behind its design from Apple?

The developer of Hello would disagree with you: https://medium.com/@probonopd/hellosystem-three-layer-ux-des...

That's a good sign. Gnome has only become practical for me in recent years. I believe it's because its designers were from the original Mac OS era (pre OSX) where they favored too much simplicity at the cost of functionality. Maybe Hello designers are trying to get the balance of usability & functionality of OS X / modern Mac OS? If so, that's a great goal and I look forward to trying out what they have to offer in the near future.

Re: Airyx OS

#22

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

cercatrova wrote: post #16

Can I compile iOS apps on this? That's honestly the only thing holding me to macOS, I really wish Apple didn't force every iOS developer to use macOS to do so.

Isn’t that dependent on your private key stored on Apple’s equivalent to a TPM?

That said, lots of IDEs let you build on Windows/Linux, they just use a daemon running on a headless Mac on your LAN (or a rented “cloud” Mac) to do the code-signing part.

Re: Airyx OS

#23

Post by eropple »

cercatrova wrote: post #16

Can I compile iOS apps on this? That's honestly the only thing holding me to macOS, I really wish Apple didn't force every iOS developer to use macOS to do so.

They make references to a Darwin compat layer somewhere down the line.

Re: Airyx OS

#25

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

shortformblog wrote: post #10
vzaliva wrote: post #9

Projects like these will be always one step behind the thing they are trying to replicate (MacOS in this case). It is better to spend one's creative energy innovating and coming up with better solutions rather than re-implementing what Apple is doing.

Given that there’s 20 years of “behind,” and many of those machines are no longer getting updates, what’s the harm? The dev learns something and the community gains knowledge from the project. I was once critical of ReactOS for similar reasons, but I’ve realized just how beneficial that project has been to OSS as a whole. Even if they fail they will uncover a lot of interesting stuff if the project continues long-ter…

I’d argue that Wine has been of far greater utility than ReactOS - both to users and as contribution to open-source.

Re: Airyx OS

#26

Post by foerbert »

DanAtC wrote: post #18
chaostheory wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably missed a lot of things, but didn’t Gnome already achieve this? Weren’t most of the people behind its design from Apple?

Ubuntu's Unity was a lot more macOS-like with the default global menu bar, then they gave up on it :( Gnome doesn't even have a menu bar anymore, preferring apps use a single hamburger menu.

Wow. I believe you, but I really don't want to.

I always figured that whole branch of design came out of dealing with mobile limitations, with some amount of side benefit from more screen space to do useless but flashy things to make the boss/client happy.

Why would you ever go that route for a general purpose desktop?

Re: Airyx OS

#27

Post by aeoleonn »

vzaliva wrote: post #9

Projects like these will be always one step behind the thing they are trying to replicate (MacOS in this case). It is better to spend one's creative energy innovating and coming up with better solutions rather than re-implementing what Apple is doing.

Eh, I don't see much difference between older MacOS versions such as Mountain Lion compared to Big Sur.

Similarly, I don't see much difference between Ubuntu desktop distros in terms of differences across versions , say from 16 to 20.

Therefore... I don't see a being "one step behind" as any kind of issue. I've never run into an issue with past versions (such as those menntioned above) of OSes not running what I need them to run.

Personally, I'd like to see a Linux version which is very close to Apple so I can use it (such as OP's), instead of expensive Apple computers.

Re: Airyx OS

#28

Post by HomeDeLaPot »

vzaliva wrote: post #9

Projects like these will be always one step behind the thing they are trying to replicate (MacOS in this case). It is better to spend one's creative energy innovating and coming up with better solutions rather than re-implementing what Apple is doing.

It could be argued that just by being community-driven and open source, projects like these are in fact better. It all depends what "better" means to you. (E.g. not phoning home to Apple every time you open a program...)

Re: Airyx OS

#29

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

3np wrote: post #4

More information and motivation in the git repo[0], the link to which I didn't spot easily in the site header. The main design goals are: * source compatibility with macOS applications (i.e. you could compile a Mac application on Airyx and run it) * similar GUI metaphors and familiar UX (file manager, application launcher, top menu bar that reflects the open application, etc) * compatible with macOS filesystems (HFS+…

> source compatibility with macOS applications (i.e. you could compile a Mac application on Airyx and run it)

Hard to see how this can be done legally. The libraries (sorry, Frameworks) that make up the user-space runtime for macOS are all proprietary. There's no replacement for the most important parts of it.

Re: Airyx OS

#30

Post by orionblastar »

DanAtC wrote: post #18
chaostheory wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably missed a lot of things, but didn’t Gnome already achieve this? Weren’t most of the people behind its design from Apple?

Ubuntu's Unity was a lot more macOS-like with the default global menu bar, then they gave up on it :( Gnome doesn't even have a menu bar anymore, preferring apps use a single hamburger menu.

Unity was designed more for touchscreens, so that Ubuntu could make smartphones based on it. It didn't work out apparently.
Post reply on HN