Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

341–350 of 548 posts

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

#341
post #121

No. Because (in no particular order): - it shouldn't be the community's (or a crowd-funded dev's) responsibility to provide software support for hardware produced by one of the largest companies out there (bonus: with zero hardware specs); - Apple could make all this futile with a push of a button (SecureBoot can be disabled for now, but what guarantees are there this won't change?); - other arm64 machines will be av…

For the record, I disagree with some of your points, but the one point I agree with is really important. There's no clear guarantee that there will be other performance-competitive arm64 CPUs in laptops anytime soon. I don't think anyone has as much incentive as Apple does. Who else is as incentivized to make a laptop/desktop-class arm64 chip? Maybe ARM themselves ... but without a mainstream OS to run it on (with ma…

Fujutsu have made some arm chips which could be interesting for servers if they ever get out of the HPC segment which I think they are in exclusively for now. Specifically the A64FX.

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

#342
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just one datapoint - there are plenty more. Simply speaking, when they are the underdog and have to attract developers, they open up; and when they don't need it, they close doors. That's just what they do, it's a perfectly rational strategy (if cynical). They are hardly the only ones at this game, Microsoft does it too. I am just pointing out that promises of openness with Apple typically come with an expiry da…

Apple and Microsoft have never pretended to be “open” and their behaviour is quite predictable - Apple most of all. You might not like their behaviour but they haven’t tried to trick anyone. Contrast with Google and the infamous tweet about Android: https://mobile.twitter.com/Arubin/status/27808662429

[deleted]

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

#343
post #85

Cant a $2 trillion dollar company fund this by itself??

Yes, but they make macOS not Linux. The amount of HW sales generated by Apple putting people on writing code to support Linux on their HW will be less then the Apple sales teams collective bar tab.

> Yes, but they make macOS not Linux.

And why is that? Instead of maintaining an entire PC OS themselves they could build macOS XI as a desktop environment on Linux and benefit from the vast ecosystem. But they don't, because...? Presumably because they value total control.

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

#344
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Webkit was likely "saved" by the original KHTML license being GPL. At the time, Apple were wise enough (or desperate enough) to figure that they could work with such a license, although they were eventually careful to chisel out anything they could into BSD-licensed modules. And still they had to be dragged into the light more or less kicking and screaming (e.g. they had no public VSC until KDE people kicked up a sti…

KHTML is LGPL, isn’t it?

If i remember correctly KDE used to be GPL when webkit started, and was later relicensed. The difference is relatively irrelevant anyway, the way they used KHTML they would have had to release sources even under LGPL. Had KDE used BSD, MIT, or Apache, back then, we likely wouldn't have had webkit.

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

#345
I am absolutely willing to contribute to such an effort, even if I am happy to run Linux inside a VM on my mac. The M1 is the breakthrough CPU ARM needs to get truely established on the desktop and consequently gain more momentum on the server. As Linus said, developers need to develop on the architecture they want to deploy on.

Having Linux natively run on the M1 would bring more Linux devs to the platform. Linus himself would be one of them. Also it means that if Apple deprecates older machines, there is a second life, even if one preferred MacOS in the first life of the machine. Especially, as Linux for most tasks can be run well on older hardware, just look how much is done with the PIs.

Yes, this seems to be an uphill battle, but that is the reason funding is needed. And while there are many obstacles, there is a chance that it can be done and I am willing to take it with some of the funding.

Apple supports Bootcamp on their Intel hardware. They don't seem to be fundamentally opposed to people running an other OS on their hardware. The best way to get any support from Apple for this, be it some documentation or some binary drivers, would to show clear interest and an existing community.

P.S.: Any larger motion on running Linux on the M1 also would help pushing other vendors towards offering ARM-based systems for running Linux, as it shows a fundamental interest in such a platform.

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

#347

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?

As far as I understand, x86 is a duopoly, and AMD is allowed to produce it because antitrust litigation resulted in Intel being required to allow a second party to implement their instruction set.

Also Intel is a very different entity than Apple. They produce commodity hardware, where Apple creates consumer experiences. Apple's incentive is to keep M1 closed to give their software ecosystem an edge vs. competitors.

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

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As some one else said, every spare dollar I have is going to fund a company that values open source hardware, open source software, right to repair and own. What is this whimsical company, and how exactly does it make money? > You know why open source hardware is expensive for lower quality? Because Apple pays the premium on the premium quality stuff. But I'm that process they also drive up the prices. Apple is not…

> What is this whimsical company, and how exactly does it make money? I mean, Olimex isn't exactly poor. https://www.olimex.com/

Olimex makes low end development tools, not consumer products; and it’s not a large company by any means.

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

#349

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!

Yes, having no will power and giving up after being forced to is a strength...

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

#350
No. I appreciate the effort and the skill this would take, but since the bulk of the work would be reverse-engineering the custom GPU to get a driver working, I’m not super-interested in a solution that in an ideal world (assuming this takes months and not years), still won’t be as performant as a native driver (and performance is the whole reason to do this, so getting substandard performance confuses me — maybe focus on more open ARM-based machines and chipsets).

There is also the ongoing work. Apple currently releases a new iOS AX chipset every year. It’s reasonable to expect something similar for the M series. That means additional work to reverse-engineer. I’m not trying to be negative, but the amount of money required for that kind of ongoing work really doesn’t seem ideal for crowdfunding. Someone downthread made a point that most of the good Linux hardware support in recent years has come from Intel. That’s a great point. For the work this would need to be really viable and not just a fun toy, this needs to be backed by a corporation or by Apple itself.

If this were explicitly stated to be a toy/proof of concept goal, I might chuck $50 as a one time thing at it. Because why not. But for an ongoing thing with real support, I’m sorry, I don’t think this is feasible to undertake. I would love to be wrong about this, but I’ll add that expectations are a lot higher when you start out charging.

And here’s the real thing: As happy as I am that people want to explore this and as open as I will be to experimenting with this stuff when people inevitably reverse-engineer the M1 enough to get X11 running (because that will happen without any crowdfunding campaign — we’ve had people successfully get Android and other versions of Linux running/booting on older iOS devices), the real future of Linux on M1 and macOS will continue to be through virtualization. QEMU and other hypervisors (including the native HyperKit) are how most Mac users interact with Linux anyway — and QEMU is quite performant.

I get the appeal of doing something because you can. I get the appeal of wanting to use really nice hardware for other purposes. I don’t necessarily understand the appeal of running a Linux distro on bare-metal in a hacky way when running it virtualized is likely going to offer better performance than a reverse-engineer job funded by the potentially small Venn diagram of people who both care enough about Linux on the desktop to fund this sort of project AND who don’t have a problem buying hardware from a company that really gives zero fucks about FOSS ideals and is literally the antithesis of open hardware. (For the record, I’m not in that union because I personally don’t care about Linux on the desktop on modern Apple hardware (I do actively support people building PPC Linux distros for obsolete hardware).) Especially when macOS IS Unix and will be able to run most of the same userland packages as Linux once they are ported to ARM, albeit with a much prettier windowing system and much better commercial software support.

If you’re someone who really loves KDE or GNOME or Xfce or whatever DE, well, you do you bro — happy for you. But you’re likely going to be way happier on a machine that doesn’t cost $1500 and isn’t designed in ways that actively discourage you from replacing that DE or make booting to another kernel more difficult.

Post reply on HN