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

Linux on the Mac – state of the union

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 142 posts

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#81

Post by digi_owl »

WWLink wrote: post #14
matt4077 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from being wrong, that narrative doesn't even make sense as an intro to this article: the criticism was directed at the new MBP hardware – so why would these super-professional uber-users buy it and then replace the OS? (Not to mention that, if I understood it correctly, Linux currently doesn't even support the keyboard, and is otherwise probably in its usual desktop mode of "WLAN, Sound, or functioning sleep –…

I wouldn't necessarily blame the "WLAN, sound, or sleep" thing on linux. I'd blame that on cheap parts manufacturers that refuse to distribute open source drivers for fear of releasing company secrets and lack of profit margins to operate on.

And don't want to reveal the number of ugly hacks they have implemented to get things working in the first place.

the reason Linux drivers are a "mess" is that the hardware they are trying to support are a mess, and said mess is papered over in Windows by the OEM drivers.

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#82

Post by digi_owl »

coldtea wrote: post #77
gommm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well people who are lamenting the lack of the 32GB ram bought a 16GB ram a while ago and are looking to upgrade. Apple could have kept the previous form factor and not made the battery 20% smaller which would have allowed them to have an energy sucking 32GB option. Plus the new form factor is useless anyway, since we end up having to carry adapters which take as much space and weight as what was saved. Anyway, I've d…

> Apple could have kept the previous form factor and not made the battery 20% smaller which would have allowed them to have an energy sucking 32GB option. More people like thinness though, than 32GB RAM (which would have been a built-to-order option that few would have clicked). Remember, Apple has those numbers too. To quote a programmer on thinness: "I’m have to admit being a bit baffled by how nobody else seems to…

Iirc, Intel shipped custom CPUs to Apple for the Macbook Air. Once those CPUs became more generally available other brands followed suit quite quickly.

This has been a repeating pattern with Apple since the iPod success fattened their wallet. They would routinely single out parts they wanted, and then basically order the factory capacity for that year in one go.

Palm/HP execs lamented this fact when they unveiled the Pre 3 and Touchpad, as they often wanted to use the same parts but found Apple had gotten there before them.

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#83

Post by willvarfar »

l1k wrote: post #56
matt4077 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from being wrong, that narrative doesn't even make sense as an intro to this article: the criticism was directed at the new MBP hardware – so why would these super-professional uber-users buy it and then replace the OS? (Not to mention that, if I understood it correctly, Linux currently doesn't even support the keyboard, and is otherwise probably in its usual desktop mode of "WLAN, Sound, or functioning sleep –…

Author here. As explained in the intro, folks like antirez are considering moving back to Linux and in his linked HN comment he specifically talks about trying Linux on the MacBook he's currently using to see where he's headed. The article seeks to give these folks in particular a helping hand in understanding what works and what doesn't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12820490 That said, the kernel developers…

Really liked the article.

Quickly jotted down my own progress as a user http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/154376389528/linu...

Really appreciate people making this stuff work, and hope I can use my retina MBP in the long run.

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#84

Post by s_dev »

If Linux could utilise battery as well as MacOS or OS X I'd switch in a heartbeat. Obviously Apple have some proprietary battery magic as neither Linux, BSD or Windows can seem to get 50% of the battery life out of MacBook Pros and this is a significant cost on a laptop - otherwise dual booting for me will remain the best compromise.

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#85

Post by coldtea »

digi_owl wrote: post #82
coldtea wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple could have kept the previous form factor and not made the battery 20% smaller which would have allowed them to have an energy sucking 32GB option. More people like thinness though, than 32GB RAM (which would have been a built-to-order option that few would have clicked). Remember, Apple has those numbers too. To quote a programmer on thinness: "I’m have to admit being a bit baffled by how nobody else seems to…

Iirc, Intel shipped custom CPUs to Apple for the Macbook Air. Once those CPUs became more generally available other brands followed suit quite quickly. This has been a repeating pattern with Apple since the iPod success fattened their wallet. They would routinely single out parts they wanted, and then basically order the factory capacity for that year in one go. Palm/HP execs lamented this fact when they unveiled the…

>Palm/HP execs lamented this fact when they unveiled the Pre 3 and Touchpad, as they often wanted to use the same parts but found Apple had gotten there before them.

Isn't that how economies of scale and bulk ordering is supposed to work?

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#86

Post by manyxcxi »

toodlebunions wrote: post #5

>>> "the realization that Apple no longer caters equally to casual and professional customers as it had in the past [YouTube video]. Instead, the company appears to be following an iOS-focused, margin-driven strategy that essentially relegates professionals to a fringe group." Ouch

What I don't get from the article, if I'm pissed about the hardware change why am I trying to run Linux on it/my old one?

A) You keep your old laptop and continue to run macOS for as long as possible

B) You're shopping for a new laptop and don't buy Apple, then run Linux

If you keep your old hardware why run Linux on it? I've been looking at who else is out there are making decent laptops that run Linux well (open to suggestions, especially if they have more than 16GB RAM), as I have a feeling my 2015 Retina will be my last MBP.

The hard part for me is that I've gotten used to a certain look and feel with the MBP. That nice solid, rigid body, and the display hinge that just stays. When I pick up a ThinkPad and it creaks and flexes when I open the display or casually pick it up by the corner it makes my skin crawl.

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#87

Post by l1k »

s_dev wrote: post #84

If Linux could utilise battery as well as MacOS or OS X I'd switch in a heartbeat. Obviously Apple have some proprietary battery magic as neither Linux, BSD or Windows can seem to get 50% of the battery life out of MacBook Pros and this is a significant cost on a laptop - otherwise dual booting for me will remain the best compromise.

First of all, macOS power manages devices too aggressively: I've noticed that if I ssh from another computer into my MacBook Pro (booted into macOS and connected to wired Ethernet), the connection becomes unresponsive after a few seconds of inactivity. I have to ping from the MacBook Pro to a machine on the LAN to make the ssh connection responsive again. It looks like macOS suspends the BCM 57765 Ethernet controller and doesn't resume it upon reception of packets from the LAN. Apple seems to consider macOS purely a client OS from which one ssh's to the outside world but not the other way round.

Second, there's no proprietary battery magic in macOS, as stated in the article I already achieve 10.5W idle power consumption on my Ivy Bridge MacBook Pro with discrete GPU, Thunderbolt and AirPort suspended, wheras macOS achieves 7W. I've noticed a GPE in the ACPI tables for the Firewire controller which presumably signals hotplug when the controller is asleep. We're not using that on Linux yet, we keep the Firewire controller active all the time. Adding that would probably save another 1W.

So we're inching ever closer to macOS levels of battery life, and I think eventually we may be able to surpass it because of the sophisticated CPU pstate management that Intel developers continue to tweak with every new release.

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#88

Post by verandaguy »

I want to extend thanks to the diligent developers and engineers doing work on this. I'm running Arch on a 2012 Retina MBP with a GNOME desktop, and ignoring the shortened battery life -- which in my situation is generally possible -- this is an amazingly streamlined and refined experience.

I'd gladly contribute to the work being done if I had the background, (which I'm currently working on)!

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#89

Post by fornever »

coldtea wrote: post #33
rev12 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> "Meanwhile, the audio/video-engineer types still seem to like the MBP" I can't speak to the professional video world, but that's absolutely false in the professional audio world. My experience is in the world of composition and sound design; the attitude towards using Mac for that shifted a while back, due to the lackluster and non-existent upgrades to the Mac Pro. No one in the professional audio world that I kn…

> I can't speak to the professional video world, but that's absolutely false in the professional audio world. Depends on what you mean "professional audio world". If you mean heavy old style studios, the kind Led Zeppelin might have recorded on back in the day, yes, but these are on the go (profits and usage wise) anyway, as the industry shifts. Musicians, producers, DJs, etc most carry laptops and have home studios…

That's more a case of the MacBook Pro being "good enough" and Apple, and PC manufacturers too for that matter, have successfully segmented the market (with things like ports). Even Macworld will tell you these days that "whether you choose a Mac or PC for music production is largely down to the platform you prefer and who you’re collaborating with. There’s little inherent advantage to using Macs, beyond familiarity with the system, and the general robustness of the hardware" [1].

[1] http://www.macworld.co.uk/feature/mac-software/best-mac-maki...

Re: Linux on the Mac – state of the union

#90

Post by navait »

l1k wrote: post #87
s_dev wrote: post #84

If Linux could utilise battery as well as MacOS or OS X I'd switch in a heartbeat. Obviously Apple have some proprietary battery magic as neither Linux, BSD or Windows can seem to get 50% of the battery life out of MacBook Pros and this is a significant cost on a laptop - otherwise dual booting for me will remain the best compromise.

First of all, macOS power manages devices too aggressively: I've noticed that if I ssh from another computer into my MacBook Pro (booted into macOS and connected to wired Ethernet), the connection becomes unresponsive after a few seconds of inactivity. I have to ping from the MacBook Pro to a machine on the LAN to make the ssh connection responsive again. It looks like macOS suspends the BCM 57765 Ethernet controller…

> Apple seems to consider macOS purely a client OS from which one ssh's to the outside world but not the other way round.

I'm not knowledgeable enough, but this seems a pretty reasonable assumption for 90% of use cases. And if this assumption holds, is it fair to say. I think what you're trying to say is "First of all, macOS power manages devices too aggressively for me"

> It looks like macOS suspends the BCM 57765 Ethernet controller and doesn't resume it upon reception of packets from the LAN.

What are the trade-offs of this decision? Could apple not do this and not change the battery life for anyone? Or would it benefit this case and adversely affect other cases?

Post reply on HN