And the beauty of non commercial software is that we don't actually have to care about that. If people choose performance increase over freedom, you can't really chose for them.
Now I'm not saying that we should not port free software to the M1. I'm saying that the good reason to do so is because the people porting it want to have it there, rather than thinking in term of user retention.
If that's really true, then why are so many so intent on increasing Linux Desktop adoption? Popularity means more people working on it, more people making software for it, more hardware having drivers, etc.
Back in the glory of more universal general computers this was perhaps a lesser spoken requirement of the system.
Today, it's clear to me that we are slipping back into chaos.
EDIT: Seems like FSF's "freedom to run" might fit the definitional benchmark for me. I'm not really sure how people are going to react to that though ;)
> Free software is software that gives you the user the freedom to share, study and modify it. We call this free software because the user is free.
Not the same meaning of "free". But anyway, for now, you have to pay Apple prices to have a computer with an M1 chip on it. If the price is a string requirement, one probably won't buy Apple hardware and rather get something that less expensive and is already well supported by free software :).
So even if you could get all the hardware drivers working properly, Linux/Gnome still will lose out to macOS because that hardware simply wasn't designed for that software, and that software simply wasn't designed for that hardware, while macOS and M1 were both designed to work together.
But Gnome was originally designed to run on X-Windows, whose hardware model is a MicroVAX framebuffer on acid.
https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398...
The color situation is a total flying circus. The X approach to device independence is to treat everything like a MicroVAX framebuffer on acid. A truly portable X application is required to act like the persistent customer in Monty Python’s “Cheese Shop” sketch, or a grail seeker in “Monty Python and the Holy Grail.” Even the simplest applications must answer many difficult questions:
WHAT IS YOUR DISPLAY?
display = XOpenDisplay("unix:0");
WHAT IS YOUR ROOT? root = RootWindow(display, DefaultScreen(display));
AND WHAT IS YOUR WINDOW? win = XCreateSimpleWindow(display, root, 0, 0, 256, 256, 1,
BlackPixel(
display,
DefaultScreen(display)),
WhitePixel(
display,
DefaultScreen(display)));
OH ALL RIGHT, YOU CAN GO ON. (the next client tries to connect to the server)
WHAT IS YOUR DISPLAY? display = XOpenDisplay("unix:0");
WHAT IS YOUR COLORMAP? cmap = DefaultColormap(display, DefaultScreen(display));
AND WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE COLOR? favorite_color = 0; /* Black. */
/* Whoops! No, I mean: */
favorite_color = BlackPixel(display, DefaultScreen(display));
/* AAAYYYYEEEEE!! */
(client dumps core & falls into the chasm)
WHAT IS YOUR DISPLAY? display = XOpenDisplay("unix:0");
WHAT IS YOUR VISUAL? struct XVisualInfo vinfo;
if (XMatchVisualInfo(display, DefaultScreen(display),
8, PseudoColor, &vinfo) != 0)
visual = vinfo.visual;
AND WHAT IS THE NET SPEED VELOCITY OF AN XConfigureWindow REQUEST? /* Is that a SubstructureRedirectMask or a ResizeRedirectMask? */
WHAT??! HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT? AAAAUUUGGGHHH!!!! (server dumps core & falls into the chasm)If that's the case why is Chrome able to put benchmark Safari on my M1?
Not to mention the OS shouldn't be the bottleneck for anything performance related in a desktop type system anyways.
And what is a "put benchmark"? Why would you only benchmark a web browser's HTTP "PUT" method?