Now if they could just produce a touchpad as good as a MacBook's, give me 8-10 hours of battery life, and make the construction feel slim and solid, and not like it's going to get crushed in my backpack, and I'd be satisfied.
Day to day macOS driving to me is an absolute joy (granted, I'm still on Sonoma).
I do a lot of work in terminals but I also enjoy other apps, where that uniformity of Cocoa comes into play. And if you go deeper into Mach/Darwin, it's extremely powerful. On the userland .. from the launcher to dtrace and dynamic linker tricks and low level hooks. A lot of cool macOS APIs to experiment with, public or private. AppleScript/Automater, private frameworks like SkyLight (nifty!)
Oh and don't get me started on MLX...
To me, as a developer and as a power user, macOS delivers everything - and more.
Some developers suddenly realize that X system is old, and then they try to redo it from zero.
And when they do that, they throw decades of feature development down the drain:
- Xorg: Was Wayland worth the 10+ years of manpower needed to catch up?
- Synaptics: Now we have libinput, less configurable and with way fewer features
- Gnome: Something that happens when the devs think "If Apple can, then we can too" but without the money to invest in good UX (Gnome2 had actual UX research done by Sun)
- Systemd: I'll concede that nobody liked SystemV. But we also had OpenRC and strangely got ignored.
Sometimes "developercracy" is terrible, and we spend years arguing if Rust or Not, instead of trying to make good software
1) I am a bonafide systemd hater, and I am bent out of shape about the fact other init systems (more akin to SMF) were (and are) routinely ignored when discussing what was available. But: I feel like Linux desktops are better now for systemd. Even if I can’t tolerate how it spiders into everything personally.
2) Wayland was a “We have pushed X as far as it will go, and now we’re going to have to pay down our tech debt” by the X11 developers themselves.
I know it was “baby with the bathwater”, but in theory we don’t need to do that again for the next 50 years because we have a significantly better baseline for how computers are actually used. The performance ceiling has been lifted because of Wayland; consistent support for multiple monitors and fractional scaling are things we have today because of Wayland.
I won’t argue about security, because honestly most people seem to want as little security as possible if it infringes on software that used to work a certain way, but it should be mentioned at some point that a lack of security posture leads to a pretty terrible experience eventually.
So, yes, Wayland was worth the 10y cost, because the debt was due and with interest. Kicking the can down the road would most likely kill desktop Linux eventually.
It's fine. Maybe a bit more of a departure UI wise and not as polished as the previous release but whatever, I don't see how this would cause anyone to throw in the towel on Apple and move to Linux. I've used both for years and would never chose to use Linux exclusively or even primarily.
I know this seems like a down side to you but the person you are replying to notes this as something they love about the platform. It not changing over time "just to change" is the point.
I've got my dev environment set up on my new Macbook Pro and everything is working perfectly and I'm very happy.
Point taken, but that is exactly the quality I said I liked about it. I hope that 20 years from now my desktop will be exactly the same. The disjoint UI bothers me to an extent. I mostly use KDE apps or things built with Qt, but you're right that nothing is uniform. That said, I'd take disunity if it means stability. I don't care if the buttons in different apps look different, but don't take them away. Just look at what they did to Mail.app--in 2010 it was beautiful. Last I used it in 2020 it seemed like all the power user features of it were gone or hidden and everything was under a dot dot dot menu instead of out on the toolbar.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. What DE are you talking about? Or are you talking about something else?
Your pittance Apple gives you because they refuse to sign CUDA drivers? That MLX?
Like visually? I personally don't care much for animations, transitions, rounded corners (this one I actually hate, because you can't even disable them on mac). I'm not a florist, I am programmer. I want efficiency not the looks, bells and whistles. Although I recently started using Hyprland, and oh my, those window animations and transitions are super nice, not to mention that you can completely control every aspect of them.
Wasn’t true when they switched to systemd, or when KDE 4 came out, or when the new Gnome came out, or when the kernel renamed Ethernet interfaces to enps-whatever.
you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
It is my conviction that very few should go down the Arch route. If you want to sysadmin Linux or learn how to do so, fine. But if you want to do something else with your computer I'd strongly recommend looking into one of the https://universal-blue.org images (I use https://getaurora.dev btw).
These are based on atomic Fedora and my experience is that they offer extreme stability while still staying on the edge of development. Could we call it NixOS for mere mortals? Probably not if you ask the Nix peeps. :)
I don't think sysadmin is fair, but certainly it's true that a lot of 'how do I do the equivalent of Windows/macOS built-in foobar' questions will have the answer 'well this is a non-exhaustive list of possible things you could install to do that'.
Which is to say that first time around it's almost inevitably going to be a lot of setup. But then it won't change, or when it does it will just be whichever puzzle piece changed - not 'Arch reimagined everything with Liquid Glass'.
These were my hopes. Up until a new update introduced something that broke my nvidia drivers "integration".
After a few days I decided to try to update the system once more (which killed the oldest snapshot) and I was left with the system that can only be run in 1024 mode. I've tried every suggestion from the web to no avail.
Immutable is definitely the future.
While Arch might make you safer by virtue of choice, some of the more "beginner friendly" distros aren't immune to changing things seemingly overnight. Ubuntu for instance dropped GNOME for Unity which I still have bad memories of to this day.
You're right. Locking yourself into a distro, especially the more user-friendly ones, can get you into just as much of a dictatorship as macOS.
I use i3 on X11 like a neanderthal and mostly Qt/KDE apps. I'll switch to Sway and Wayland when things stop working.
I tried so hard to find reasons to like macOS, but frankly, if workspaces didn't force Macs, I would've totally chosen to use Linux. The only thing I miss in Linux is JXA/Applescript automation engine and Hammerspoon, nothing else - I don't use their web browser, or their mail app, GarageBand, and other crap like iTunes because frankly, they never felt to me like good solutions to solve specific problems, more like freeware before transitioning to better alternatives. Even the built-in terminal I use only to bootstrap Homebrew. Another good thing I should mention is that macOS really does set a good standard for accessibility features, even though I'm lucky not to have to rely on them, I'm sure many people do.
I honestly don't know how Apple has been getting away with so much crap for years - software developers are probably one of the biggest demographics of Mac users, and Apple keeps screwing them over, yet they stay loyal - partly because businesses force them to use Macs, partly because the alternatives suck even more - Linux ain't perfect and Windows is outright evil (really, I can't even rebind Win+L key on my computer? Fuck you MSFT!).
I'm fairly serious about photography and spend a lot of time editing and post-processing photos. This is a major shortcoming of my desktop and I may end up getting a MacBook just for this purpose. digiKam is just okay for organizing photos, and RawTherapee is barely okay. I don't mind it's ugly UI, but I'm discovering that even aside from UI considerations it just can't produce the results that Adobe can. Things like noise reduction are just not there.
The only thing from macOS I truly miss when in Linux is JXA/Applescript automation engine. That's the only thing I miss.
