Live data from Hacker News

Asahi Linux on M3

asahilinux.org

41–50 of 358 posts

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#41
post #17
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can contribute support for it

Indeed, not sure why you are being downvoted. Contribute to open source with the energy you have to call out missing features.

Because it's a lazy response. OP might not be a software developer. Should they learn complex software engineering to try and contribute or should they call out a missing feature that's important to them so the actual developers have some data on what to prioritise?

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#42
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, not sure why you are being downvoted. Contribute to open source with the energy you have to call out missing features.

Because it's a lazy response. OP might not be a software developer. Should they learn complex software engineering to try and contribute or should they call out a missing feature that's important to them so the actual developers have some data on what to prioritise?

It's no lazier than saying "Still no support"

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#43
post #33
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why Apple does not at least provide the specs to the community? Because then they'll have to compete with Linux, which opens them up to someone else making a cheaper computer that does the same stuff. I mean, I'm typing this on a junky Raptor Lake laptop I found on eBay for $220. Would I buy a Neo or MBP to replace it just to run the same software stack? Probably not. If you believe OS X is the best environment and…

Apple silicon is winning in performance and power consumption. It's not quite the same as the old Intel based generation, where they were more like premium/well built machines with good screens and hardware. Now some people would like to use that top of the line Apple silicon but without MacOS that comes with it. I doubt this is a huge threat to apple but it's also not a huge market for them. From what I understand t…

I'm in the same boat.

Hell, I was given a bunch of old iphones recently, all of which are newer and better hardware than my phone. I wiped them and donated them to charity.

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#45
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's hypervisor.framework lets other OS instances run very very fast with the UTM app (open source on github, but i use the prebuilt version from the App Store). In my case i've used arm native linuxes (arch with various compositors, kde, gnome, fedora) all on M2, M2 Max, M5 and the experience is indistinguishable from native. MacOS is running too. I think hardcore graphics folks might want direct accelerator acce…

What is the purpose here? You are still stuck with a full blown MacOS running the system no? That is what Asahi tries to replace, not the other way around.

It serves the exact same purpose that WSL does in Windows.

You can run any flavor of Linux you like in a virtual machine, while booted into the native OS.

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This misses the point entirely. What happens when apple inevitably discontinues support for this hardware.

i have no idea how you think apple silicon will discontinue support for itself. the hypervisor framework documentation, that i linked above, is pretty clear; the linux builds for arm run extremely fast on apple silicon because hypervisor framework gives them hardware access, in some subsystems directly (memory mapping for example), in other systems through a shim (graphics hardware).

Apple discontinues support for this HW, not Apple discontinues support for running Linux in a hypervisor.

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#48
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple made some changes specifically for Asahi Linux to make it more robust. I believe it was Hector Martin who discussed it on Mastodon a while ago.

Source? It's a welcome thing but very much not like Apple.

Apple has a long long history of supporting open source.

Re: Asahi Linux on M3

#49

Why Apple does not at least provide the specs to the community? So much wasted effort when they can just share a pdf.

I expect they don't actually care whether or not people run Linux on macs. I mean they used to let you run Windows! Probably the real reason is just that it's extra work - both in terms of producing the docs, and in dealing with complaints when they change things. From their point of view it's extra work with no benefit to them.

Yep, I suspect the goal is to reduce support footprint/burden to the absolute minimum possible, which is also why they don't maintain their legacy virtualization/translation layers indefinitely (Classic mode, Rosetta 1 (PPC → x86), Rosetta 2 (x86 → ARM)). The benefit is being able to make major changes, refactors, etc with relatively little delay and encumbrance.

This applies on both the software and hardware layers. In the past, CPU suppliers dragging their feet and/or being unable to deliver on promises were the chief motivation for switching architectures, and now that they're their own supplier they can banish that issue entirely so long as they're not beholden to any kind of external behavioral contracts or expectations.

If the OS teams need some new capability or discover substantial benefit from redesigning some part of the SoC, the SoC/hardware team can just implement it and not have to care about breaking anything. That's a major competitive advantage that practically nobody else in the computer or mobile device industries has.

Post reply on HN