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

Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 548 posts

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#211

Post by dev_tty01 »

macintux wrote: post #192
wmf wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like the M1 does run all out all the time (maybe because it never turbos that much to begin with).

When plugged in, perhaps, but when on battery those slower cores are going to get used more.

No, if you run a heavy computational load on a battery powered Macbook Pro it runs all out on all cores. Lots of reviewers looking at this. Battery life is worse of course under heavy load but still incredible relative to x86 for identical tasks. Faster and less battery usage.

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#212

Post by tambourine_man »

dorfsmay wrote: post #210
squarefoot wrote: post #94

No, I wouldn't, not even if I could print billions in a snap. I'd rather help funding the port to a 10 times slower but open platform, rather to a technically superior but proprietary close one whose owner would make it incompatible two seconds after they would smell competition from Linux in any of their core business fields. No thanks, I'll send my small quid to whomever appears to be really in favor of openness, n…

Will Apple sell M1s to other laptop manufacturers? I already pay for closed source Intel and AMD, I wouldn't mind being able to use M1s, but, I just don't like Apple laptop hardware.

That’s not how they roll

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#213

Post by comex »

heavyset_go wrote: post #200
comex wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don’t run unsigned binaries, but they run self-signed binaries (to the same extent that Intel Macs run unsigned binaries) and the linker automatically does the signing. It’s an architectural simplification, not a substantive tightening of the screws.

Self-signed applications are treated as if they're radioactive by macOS, too[1]. [1] https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/unsigned.html

Yes. My point is that blocking truly unsigned applications on Apple Silicon is not a substantive change from the status quo on Intel Macs.

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#214

Post by Wowfunhappy »

I wonder—how certain are we that Apple would be unwilling to assist with a project like this? They've said that Windows support is "up to Microsoft"[1], and they explicitly demonstrated Linux VM support at WWDC. Apple's primary mission is to sell hardware, and they know that Linux is important for certain consumers.

I wouldn't expect Apple to write or finance any code, but I could certainly see them providing documentation, and making an engineer available to answer questions, if the request came from a suitably professional source.

1: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/20/craig-federighi-on-wind...

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#215

Post by mixmastamyk »

mch82 wrote: post #183
ddingus wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As spiffy as Apple mobile devices are, I never found the locked down environment worth it. Nice hardware, too bad about the OS/App model... This new hardware is awesome! I could care less overall though. Frankly, open computing can be done fast enough to not be a worry. I will stick with all that and see where this new path leads. And my mind is open. Who knows? Maybe it all ends up in a good place. I am quite happy…

I don’t understand why people complain instead of taking FOSS they like, packaging it as an app, distributing it on the App Store & publishing the source. Does Apple prohibit that? I remember the days of very little Apple compatible software on the shelf at retailers, and no games. I was probably one of the first students to use a MacBook with OSX for CSCI 101 because many classes required Windows. That was lack of f…

It costs time and money to do that. Who is gonna port, pay, and gonna do it?

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#216

Post by solraph »

kepler1 wrote: post #178
squarefoot wrote: post #94

No, I wouldn't, not even if I could print billions in a snap. I'd rather help funding the port to a 10 times slower but open platform, rather to a technically superior but proprietary close one whose owner would make it incompatible two seconds after they would smell competition from Linux in any of their core business fields. No thanks, I'll send my small quid to whomever appears to be really in favor of openness, n…

Now here, children, is an example of someone you should never get married to. Someone who would inconvenience you for his mistaken beliefs, and would rather spend money to make sure you get less, than give in and let it be shown he might be wrong. Your mother warned you!

An more charitable explanation is the parent poster is someone who puts their principles and a long term view above short term convenience. Seems like good marriage material to me.

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#217

Post by heelix »

voltagex_ wrote: post #205
hvis wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You turn it off in the BIOS before installing your system, and that's it.

Which is what I've done when installing Linux. Am I losing performance? Power efficiency? Features? It also makes dual booting trickier if you don't plan it beforehand. It frustrates me that there's not that many reviews that cover this kind of stuff, so it's hard to avoid silliness like this when making a substantial purchase like a laptop.

It is simple enough to set up windows to use the normal boot rather than the RAID one. I've got my XPS set up with one drive in Linux, one in Windows - and boot into the drive I want to be in.

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#218

Post by mch82 »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #204
mch82 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand why people complain instead of taking FOSS they like, packaging it as an app, distributing it on the App Store & publishing the source. Does Apple prohibit that? I remember the days of very little Apple compatible software on the shelf at retailers, and no games. I was probably one of the first students to use a MacBook with OSX for CSCI 101 because many classes required Windows. That was lack of f…

> I don’t understand why people complain instead of taking FOSS they like, packaging it as an app, distributing it on the App Store & publishing the source. Does Apple prohibit that? Apple does not, but the GPL does.

If the source of the app is released by the author, what about GPL prohibits this?

Edit: I ask because I’m curious to learn and because many systems run apps that are GPL without the whole system being GPL. For example, I love using GIMP on Windows.

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#219

Post by Wowfunhappy »

mch82 wrote: post #218
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t understand why people complain instead of taking FOSS they like, packaging it as an app, distributing it on the App Store & publishing the source. Does Apple prohibit that? Apple does not, but the GPL does.

If the source of the app is released by the author, what about GPL prohibits this? Edit: I ask because I’m curious to learn and because many systems run apps that are GPL without the whole system being GPL. For example, I love using GIMP on Windows.

Section 6 of the GPLv2 states:

> You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.

This conflicts with the App Store's Terms of Service, particularly it's "Usage Rules". https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store...

This is of course different from merely running GPL software on a proprietary OS. In fact, iOS ships with GPL software on board.

Re: Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?

#220

Post by ddingus »

ironmagma wrote: post #203
ampdepolymerase wrote: post #162

Most of the solutions in this thread are simply not viable. Stuff like the Pinebook and Raspberry Pi are several magnitudes away from Apple's M1 SoC. No amount of hackerish imitation will bridge that gap, the laws of physics are not kind to consumer product hardware hackers. It is very obvious that most of the people commenting here has never held a soldering iron, nor taken a single computer architecture class. The…

> This is the Sputnik moment for open source Does it need to be? x86 had every opportunity to become a locked-down, exclusive standard too, and it grew the way it did, into a cross-vendor standard, for a reason. Why will a similar trajectory not apply to the M1?

Because M1 / Arm has a locked down base to draw from, unlike Intel / AMD.

Way different roots in mobile when compared to PC

Post reply on HN