Ha ha, I laughed so hard. Hard core *nix nerds are full on hey!It could have been worse. You could have said “vim” instead of “emacs”. The you’ll have known real pain 😂
Ha ha, I laughed so hard. Hard core *nix nerds are full on hey!It could have been worse. You could have said “vim” instead of “emacs”. The you’ll have known real pain 😂
"Some people also just hate well built, fast, reliable software" - oh wow, if only that described macOS lately!!!!!! And you're actually comparing that with Linux, the software that most of the worlds servers run on, because it's well built, fast, and reliable, oh the irony!There's a little bit of "because I can".
Some people don't like software that they can't see the source code to. The fact they can't understand it, don't have the time to audit it, and don't compile it themselves doesn't matter; they just want to know they could.
Some people also just hate well built, fast, reliable software and like quirky, hard to use and ugly apps.
"Linux" is a kernel, effectively useless to almost anyone. Operating systems build around the Linux kernel, generally, are based around the GNU family of software which now also has its own kernel and is a full OS.
Brief history: for years rms and GNU aimed to build a free OS. They started with the tools (compilers, editors, terminal emulators, etc.) and intended to build the kernel last. Linus came along and said 'I want to build and OS', started with the kernel and scooped up the other 95% of the OS from GNU's stuff and called it Linux.
Yeah, but he is aiming for a minimum just to get it rolling, knowing that the money will come one way or another. That's the nature of owning or contributing to open source software, if it goes well, you become famous, and get high paid contract/job/speaking/book offers, and if you're running a project then companies will pay you for support, and so on. He started his Patreon yesterday, and already reached the minimum, so no doubt he will end up earning a motza just from the Patreon alone. Which also means he will hire other devs and get it working even faster, which will make it more valuable, and so on. I'd say he's hit the jackpot with this project. And it comes off the back of all his years of nerdy hard work with porting Linux to gaming consoles. Winner.Doesn’t $4000 per month ($48,000 per year) seem low for “full time” development by a developer who apparently has such a unique skill set?
Eh, one’s a great text editor, and the other’s a halfway implemented OS that lacks a decent text editor.It could have been worse. You could have said “vim” instead of “emacs”. The you’ll have known real pain 😂
I never even bother using proper terminology anymore. You wanna get replies forever, try and say anything definitive about what GNU is, or call Linux an OS.I guess I’ve been schooled on this. I should have said “Unix” instead of “Linux”. Oops...
My hunch as a dev is a couple hundred hours for a proof of concept, and then thousands of hours for something decent. Hopefully folks can join on to speed up the calendar time with that.Forgive my ignorance, but how long does a project like this take?
Yep. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution#/media/File:Unix_history-simple.svgIsn't MacOS based on Unix which came originally from Bell Labs?
I used linux for years but finally left it because it seems almost impossible to get everything one wants on a distro.
That market is so fragmented its a quagmire.
Wow...sounds like this post was funded by an anti-Linux Super PAC:There's a little bit of "because I can".
Some people don't like software that they can't see the source code to. The fact they can't understand it, don't have the time to audit it, and don't compile it themselves doesn't matter; they just want to know they could.
Some people also just hate well built, fast, reliable software and like quirky, hard to use and ugly apps.
"Linux" is a kernel, effectively useless to almost anyone. Operating systems build around the Linux kernel, generally, are based around the GNU family of software which now also has its own kernel and is a full OS.
Brief history: for years rms and GNU aimed to build a free OS. They started with the tools (compilers, editors, terminal emulators, etc.) and intended to build the kernel last. Linus came along and said 'I want to build and OS', started with the kernel and scooped up the other 95% of the OS from GNU's stuff and called it Linux.
Can you imagine the goodwill (and sales) that would be generated if Apple not only allowed but supported a Linux port? Apple hardware would be hotter than hotcakes.Interesting tech discussion.
But where’s the business case for Apple? I don’t see one that makes sense.
No they're not. The MACH kernel is a custom version of BSD. The only thing they have in common with Linux is POSIX compliance.Of course the irony is that Macs ARE running Linux, just a heavily customized version.
What I cannot imagine is apple supporting linux.Can you imagine the goodwill (and sales) that would be generated if Apple not only allowed but supported a Linux port? Apple hardware would be hotter than hotcakes.
On the other hand, maybe Apple believes they can be more successful keeping customers penned inside the walled garden ecosystem. I wish them luck.
What I cannot imagine is apple supporting linux.
Independence, get things to work.I'm probably going to regret this but what would be the purpose of running Linux?
I tried it out years ago, before I switched to a Mac, and couldn't see the purpose of it.
The Mach kernel is NOT “a custom version of BSD”. macOS uses a Mach kernel (which was developed at Carnegie Mellon University, as a replacement for the kernel in the BSD version of Unix) along with a (largely) FreeBSD userland (everything of the base OS outside of the kernel). FreeBSD is a descendent of the BSD versions of Unix developed at UC Berkeley, using further developments of BSD’s kernel and userland. Mach is a microkernel, though the version Apple used (called XNU) is before much of the microkernel direction.No they're not. The MACH kernel is a custom version of BSD. The only thing they have in common with Linux is POSIX compliance.
Linux is a really good Unix (alike/clone) that is tremendously well supported, it just lacks a good GUI (no arguments), while macOS is a good Unix (and it’s actual Unix™, not a clone), with a fabulous GUI and extremely good 3rd party commercial software support.I'm probably going to regret this but what would be the purpose of running Linux?
I tried it out years ago, before I switched to a Mac, and couldn't see the purpose of it.
Apple hardware already is hotter than hotcakes. Adding some sales to Linux developers isn’t going to move the needle much. And I don’t expect that they want to “keep customers penned inside the walled garden”, so much as simply that their near exclusive focus is making that garden as nice as possible. They’re not looking to trap customers, they’re looking to offer such a nice experience that customers don’t want to leave (and I say this as someone who spends all day using Macs running macOS to do Linux development - and I’d much rather interact with macOS’s GUI than any of the GUIs available for Linux).Can you imagine the goodwill (and sales) that would be generated if Apple not only allowed but supported a Linux port? Apple hardware would be hotter than hotcakes.
On the other hand, maybe Apple believes they can be more successful keeping customers penned inside the walled garden ecosystem. I wish them luck.
Oh come now, Macs and Raspberry Pi’s are hardly equivalent as desktop systems. Plus that $70 you quote doesn’t account for the case, power supply, monitor, keyboard, mouse, or storage - “all io needed” is incredibly disingenuous. Add a decent monitor and an SSD and it’s no longer anything even slightly resembling $70. try configuring both up to roughly equivalent specs and then quote the price differential - your “10 times as expensive” borders on a lie.A complete multicore 64bit arm board with all io needed costs $70. Macs equivalent is 10 times as expensive and has a much bigger footprint than a creditcard.
Yep. I spent a few years in the mid-2000s beating my head against YDL. Sadly not a pleasant experience.Yellow Dog Linux
Terra Soft Solutions was a company that was licensed by Apple to sell PowerPC based Macs pre-installed with Yellow Dog Linux.
-----Well, it was, anyway. Unfortunately, they closed-sourced it when they rewrote on top of libxpc back in OS X v10.10 'Yosemite.' (Sources: the last slide/page of this presentation PDF, as well as the opening words of this article by the same author.) (Also, that's not the only attempt at forcibly re–open-sourcing launchd I've seen; here are some others: 'jceel/libxpc,' long dormant; the slow-moving PureDarwin project's 'XPC' repository; and AndromedaOS's libxpc, also somewhat dormant.)As I recall, Apple's launchd is also open source... released under the Apache license IIRC?
I had no idea that happened. Good to know!Not all that hard, as it has happened before ...
MkLinux - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I actually ran it back in the day.
Because Apple has stopped innovating macOS and turned it instead into a locked down walled garden where I can't even stop its connection to the mothership with a VPN--on MY COMPUTER.
That's why.
When the biggest feature of a major version is "dark mode" you know that's the end of it.
Also, all the software I need is available on Linux, often in a better version.
And make certain it is from approved developer. Then disable SIP if you wish to do anything to the system files. Or enable booting from an external drive, the list goes on....Why do you say locked down? I’m on HS or Catalina but I can install whatever I want, I just need to type on my password.