[HN Gopher] Return of the Mac (2005)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Return of the Mac (2005)
        
       Author : jnieminen
       Score  : 92 points
       Date   : 2021-07-04 10:14 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (paulgraham.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (paulgraham.com)
        
       | gogopuppygogo wrote:
       | MacOS was a breath of fresh air to those of us who wanted Office,
       | Adobe, and a more polished experience than Microsoft or Linux
       | offered at the time.
       | 
       | My friend bought one of the last G3 iBooks. It ran Mac OS X 10.2
       | that was arguably the first "stable" release of Mac OS X.
       | 
       | I had such a great experience I bought a 15" October 2005
       | PowerBook as my first Apple laptop.
       | 
       | It was under performant compared to Intel offerings of the day
       | but I badly wanted Mac OS X. I was thrilled when I could buy a
       | 2007 MacBook Pro to replace it with a Core2Duo processor.
       | 
       | Now, the M1 MacBook Air is so unbelievably fast and power
       | efficient.
        
         | zabzonk wrote:
         | > MacOS was a breath of fresh air to those of us who wanted
         | Office, Adobe,
         | 
         | I used both MS Word, Excel and Adobe Framemaker on Windows in
         | the 1990s (much less 2005) with very few problems - I was
         | really impressed at how well such a complex piece of software
         | as Frame ran on Windows, and I don't think it now supported on
         | the Mac.
        
       | pvtmert wrote:
       | What motivates hackers like me is not the freedom. Quite opposite
       | actually. Hacking the device require some kind of lock-in.
       | 
       | So, when you achieve something, it will worth the effort.
        
       | willswire wrote:
       | The timing of this article is interesting - I feel that the same
       | thing is happening again with the advent of Apple Silicon.
        
         | LucidLynx wrote:
         | I do not agree on this based on what I saw generally on the
         | web.
         | 
         | The article was about *hackers* moving from a platform to OS X.
         | With M1, I saw a lot of content producers, web devs, ... to go
         | to the M1, but not so much hackers... especially as the
         | platform is *very* restrictive in terms of APIs / apps / etc.
         | 
         | A lot of my friends moved from macOS to a GNU/Linux
         | distribution recently, especially as the hardware in general is
         | more and more "as good" as a macbook.
         | 
         | But, again, this is my own opinion based on what I read and saw
         | - I do not have stats to show how many hackers just passed from
         | macOS to anything else (or stayed on an Intel powered macbook).
        
           | zepto wrote:
           | > especially as the platform is _very_ restrictive in terms
           | of APIs  / apps / etc.
           | 
           | This is utterly false.
        
             | ficklepoet wrote:
             | Nope, it's completely true. I left MacOS when they ditched
             | support for 32-bit software, and was delighted to find that
             | 95% of my software "just worked" on Linux. If you're
             | looking for a true Unix box, you're shooting yourself in
             | the foot by buying a Mac, especially today.
             | 
             | "the hacker" wants a suite of coreutils that are updated
             | constantly. They want a package manager and an extensible
             | system. They don't want their computer to second-guess
             | them, and they don't want a large corporation to decide
             | what's right for them.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | > when they ditched support for 32-bit software
               | 
               | This has nothing to do with the false claim about
               | restrictive APIs.
               | 
               | > If you're looking for a true Unix box, you're shooting
               | yourself in the foot by buying a Mac, especially today.
               | 
               | This has nothing to do with the false claim about
               | restrictive APIs.
               | 
               | > "the hacker" wants a suite of coreutils that are
               | updated constantly. They want a package manager and an
               | extensible system. They don't want their computer to
               | second-guess them, and they don't want a large
               | corporation to decide what's right for them.
               | 
               | This is an ideological statement that has nothing to do
               | with the false claim about restrictive APIs.
               | 
               | All of what you said may be true, but it doesn't make the
               | claim about restrictive apis any less false.
        
               | aenis wrote:
               | I agree. I used to do low level windows kernel-level
               | hacks such as rootkits, custom memory and network
               | sniffers, and this stuff does not travel because macos is
               | much better designed. But for pretty much any other type
               | of hacking, the good or the nasty stuff, one can make do
               | with just about any platform. People make the mistake by
               | assuming that if the OS is restrictive then they cant
               | hack. Literally the opposite is true. If you want to
               | truly hack, get an OS that tries to resist it :-) and for
               | anything more common, like network-based hacking, using
               | custom peripherials and the like - macos is just fine.
               | Nope. Choosing a platform for hacking is mainly a matter
               | of personal preferences.
        
               | jlokier wrote:
               | Just a note that 32-bit support was also ditched in
               | popular Linux distributions (Ubuntu, Fedora, Red Hat) in
               | the same year as MacOS.
        
           | aikinai wrote:
           | > especially as the platform is _very_ restrictive in terms
           | of APIs  / apps / etc.
           | 
           | What's restrictive about it?
        
             | Jetrel wrote:
             | Nothing, really. There's plenty that's restrictive about
             | one of several app stores on the platform (the one offered
             | by apple), but - that's a store.
             | 
             | Actually using the OS; you can do pretty much anything you
             | want - up to and including installing practically
             | everything ever written for linux (including entire window
             | managers and the whole lot - I've seen full GNOME installs
             | on top of MacOS). About the only thing you _can 't_ do is
             | modify the proprietary binary blobs they give you, but
             | that's just commercial software 101.
             | 
             | This dark idea of an "authoritarian apple" is the same sort
             | of "conspiracy fantasy" that people project onto the
             | motives of political parties they don't like. It's the same
             | sort of "leaps of logic" to assume "oh, yeah, they restrict
             | app store apps from adding kernel extensions, so -- they
             | must hate the idea of you having control over anything, so
             | obviously you don't have root access to your own machine.".
             | "Or okay, yeah, you still have that, but obviously they're
             | about to rescind that, any decade now." They're not.
             | 
             | The prediction is wrong, because it's an extrapolation from
             | a bad starting point -- which is a total misread of their
             | motives. The motive isn't about authoritarian control; it's
             | about eliminating footguns.
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | For example, it's awful nice to be able to have a power
             | failure, have my machine boot back up, and see all of my
             | windows from the prior session right where I left them, and
             | even have all the data in them refreshed from an autosave.
             | As a system API, not just a per-app thing. Or, it's nice to
             | install a program, and know that doing so is totally self-
             | contained; it's not barfing a bunch of (potentially
             | incompatible) new library dependencies into /usr/ or
             | whatever that could screw with something else I've got
             | installed. That I don't have to sweat over it "altering
             | something" in my system when I do the install process.
             | There are a lot of things like this; things where I
             | basically feel like I've got a "wingman" or someone
             | watching my back, because the folks who wrote it were
             | primarily concerned about designing it so I'm highly
             | unlikely to screw myself (i.e. the polar opposite of `rm
             | -rf`).
             | 
             | It's just way lower stress to be able to focus on the
             | actual problem I'm working on instead of also having to
             | second-guess if my machine's going to betray me. That peace
             | of mind isn't just a fluffy emotional thing; it also
             | reduces cognitive load so I can work more effectively.
        
       | atlgator wrote:
       | Great. Now I have that song stuck in my head
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB1D9wWxd2w
        
       | user3939382 wrote:
       | I wonder if the title is an homage to the Mark Morrison song
       | https://youtu.be/uB1D9wWxd2w
        
         | vincentmarle wrote:
         | I was certainly hoping so but seems very doubtful
        
       | GameOfKnowing wrote:
       | Correct me if I'm misreading the article, but it's interesting
       | that the differentiators Graham is citing are relatively low-
       | level, (ie keenel stuff, cpu architecture, and OS hacking),
       | whereas almost everyone in these comments is making statements
       | about GUI elements and even display switching. Kinda goes to show
       | just how abstracted away the concerns of even 16 years ago have
       | become to today's ~devs~
        
       | ianai wrote:
       | Chock full of golden material and contrast/comparable points to
       | today:
       | 
       | "If you want to know what ordinary people will be doing with
       | computers in ten years, just walk around the CS department at a
       | good university. Whatever they're doing, you'll be doing. "
        
         | AlexanderDhoore wrote:
         | Your point being that this is completely untrue? Normal people
         | have absolutely not learned how to program/automate using
         | computers. All companies I've seen from the inside either use
         | excel for everything or have dedicated personnel for
         | automation. Excel is a good step but it still requires a lot of
         | manual work.
        
           | samcal wrote:
           | I think it's true, just meant to be a little less literal.
           | Things like communicating over the internet, taking notes and
           | yes, automation are all useful. However, when they start, the
           | UX is academic and inaccessible to a "normal person". The arg
           | is that it takes ~10 years to construct the correct
           | abstractions so that the normal people can do those useful
           | things.
        
         | danybittel wrote:
         | It would have been better to walk around a Visual Effects
         | facility.
         | 
         | Lots of 3D. Face swapping / face filters. Photo / Video
         | retouching. Background Tracking, face tracking, motion capture.
         | 3D scanning (with photos).
         | 
         | It is quite interesting that Weta / ILM were at the forefront
         | of what happens in general computing.
        
       | nvella wrote:
       | Before the inevitable comments regarding Apple's moves with macOS
       | and how the hacker 'tide' is supposedly turning back against
       | Apple, I think I'll chime in with my two cents. I switched from
       | my 2015 MBP to a Surface Book 2 at the end of 2019, and switched
       | back to my same, six-year-old MBP just a few months ago. To keep
       | things short, whilst WSL puts Windows miles ahead of where it
       | once was, I find that the same old rough-edges still remain.
       | 
       | I often dock between standard-DPI displays and portable mode
       | (with the high-DPI/'retina' display.) I first noticed that
       | Windows doesn't correctly handle DPI switching with window
       | borders, Explorer, and notifications back in 2019 (the old 2x
       | scaling level remains when switching from portable to docked),
       | and filed a feedback with the built-in app on Windows. I worked
       | around this by killing dwm.exe and explorer.exe every time I
       | docked my Surface. This issue was still present earlier this
       | year, and deciding I had enough of dealing with all these little
       | Windows 'quirks', wherever they arose, I switched back to my old
       | Mac.
       | 
       | It turns out that SIP and Gatekeeper aren't nearly as much of a
       | problem as I was led to believe, neither of these features have
       | hampered me once. The Big Sur interface changes, whilst I thought
       | I'd never get used to them, have actually grown on me. Since
       | switching back, I've discovered a lot of quality native apps that
       | simply have no analog on Windows-OmniFocus stands out here. And
       | as always, Homebrew still exists and works just as well as it
       | always has for most of my *nix related tasks.
       | 
       | Hearing about the M1 performance improvements, I can see myself
       | staying on Mac for quite some time yet-I'll upgrade to an M1
       | MacBook Air once this 2015 MBP (six years old!) kicks the bucket.
       | 
       | Edit: For some context, I'm mainly a .NET developer. .NET Core/5
       | is a game-changer for cross-platform and development is first
       | class on really any system nowadays. I've settled on JetBrains
       | Rider for my IDE and find myself generally happier than I was
       | with VS on Windows.
        
         | zepto wrote:
         | I've made a serious effort to switch away - using a retina Mac
         | pro with Ubuntu, and a bunch of raspberry PIs.
         | 
         | I love Linux, and I love the PIs, but it can't see any reason
         | to stick with the Ubuntu desktop. When a pro level M1 or M2
         | iMac is released, I will be moving back.
        
           | smoldesu wrote:
           | > i can't see any reason to stick with the Ubuntu desktop
           | 
           | Then don't. Linux has hundreds of alternative desktops that
           | you can install and try out in minutes. KDE, i3, Awesome,
           | bspwm, Openbox and many many more are all at your fingertips.
        
             | zepto wrote:
             | I have experimented with this stuff for decades.
             | 
             | It's all frankly half baked and clunky, and the time
             | investment in configuration is insane.
             | 
             | Yes, you can find individual features that are better than
             | MacOS spread across them, but you can't get good design,
             | aesthetics and features in any single one of them.
             | 
             | You can certainly get by with it, but why would I want to
             | just 'get by'?
        
               | ficklepoet wrote:
               | It's a two way street. Why would I want to "get by"
               | without a package manager, or "get by" without 32-bit
               | libraries, or "get by" without a functional graphics API?
               | I'm the user: the choice should be mine. If Apple doesn't
               | present that choice, I don't consider Apple an option.
               | Simple as that. As a developer, these points are non-
               | negotiable. Apple has built computers for 30 years now,
               | they should be well aware of that.
        
               | hughrr wrote:
               | Oh yes so much this. 20 years here being told that today
               | is the day of Linux on the desktop. Like hell.
               | 
               | Apple stuff is _consistently good_. It 's not perfect but
               | there's not really anything that kicks you in the balls
               | every day to the point it makes you want to burn all your
               | technology and live in the woods. About 5 minutes with
               | any recently Gnome release on a Linux laptop makes me
               | want to do that.
               | 
               | Linux is always 50% done. That last 30% to get it to
               | Apple's 80% done is boring so they just rewrite
               | everything again or fork some new clothes for the
               | emperor.
               | 
               | The worst experience is windows. There's several layers
               | and each one gets to about 33% done and is replaced with
               | a new one. All the old layers sit there like rings in a
               | tree, occasionally having to be gouged out to fix an
               | obscure issue.
        
               | smoldesu wrote:
               | You'd probably be surprised to hear that I mostly agree
               | with what you're saying. But here's the difference: MacOS
               | will never feel like home to me. I've used it for months,
               | and tried my hardest to make it's workflow feel natural.
               | Every time I tried to rationalize a concern with the OS
               | though, I'm buried by workarounds/paid apps/subscription
               | services that will supposedly fix the issue for me.
               | Unfortunately, that makes the last 20% of MacOS feel so
               | frustrating to fill: you're always taking one step
               | forwards and two steps back, fighting against a company
               | that wants to take control away from you with every
               | update.
               | 
               | On Linux, I just have a script that I run that sets
               | everything up the way I want it. I'll admit, it took a
               | few hours to make (and has received a few updates over
               | the years), but it feels much closer to that "100%" mark
               | than a fully-customized Mac to me. Plus, I'd rather not
               | rely on the whims of yet another "move fast and break
               | things" company jockeying to take over more and more of
               | my digital life. I'm good here.
        
               | rewgs wrote:
               | Yup, could not agree more.
               | 
               | My approach with Linux has been to not even try to make
               | the Linux desktop try and compete with macOS or even
               | Windows. Instead, I really like the "OS as IDE" approach,
               | which has caused me to settle into using most of the
               | Suckless stuff -- dwm, st, dmenu. Live in your terminal
               | and keep each application's function and jurisdiction as
               | small as possible, and Linux is really great. For
               | programming. Only.
        
               | hughrr wrote:
               | Agree also. I do a lot of Linux dev work and use
               | basically vim and tmux. From macOS!
        
         | tomxor wrote:
         | > how the hacker 'tide' is supposedly turning back against
         | Apple [...] To keep things short, whilst WSL puts Windows miles
         | ahead of where it once was, I find that the same old rough-
         | edges still remain.
         | 
         | This feels like a bit of a false dichotomy, WSL isn't the only
         | alternative.
         | 
         | We are so very far from limited to windows vs mac for desktop
         | today, it's easier than ever to use Linux or even a BSD as a
         | daily driver on a PC laptop. Even the article in 2005 noted
         | hackers switching to intel boxes (not mac intel boxes) for
         | FreeBSD and Linux at the time.
        
           | jhbadger wrote:
           | Well, if you are self-employed maybe. Or for your own
           | personal home machines, sure. But most employers with IT
           | departments wouldn't be too happy if you had a "nonstandard"
           | OS on your work machine because they wouldn't know how to
           | secure it. Heck, many of them don't even allow Macs.
        
             | tomxor wrote:
             | I know what you mean, and that is probably still true for
             | the majority, for the US at least, and in large
             | corporations, but I think the world is changing.
             | 
             | Linux is the standard OS at my work. We use it on servers,
             | so it makes sense to use it on the desktop too for maximum
             | dev familiarity and compatibility, since it now works well
             | there... it's even started to be used by some of the non-
             | devs to reduce windows/mac update fatigue and general
             | performance issues even though they only need office
             | apps... I'm at a small company but I know of other large
             | companies with big IT depts applying the "locked down OS
             | image" approach to Linux for desktop too.
             | 
             | I find the concept of "windows" as the only safe OS image
             | IT depts are willing to use, as fairly antiquated. Much
             | like IE used to be the only browser you were allowed to use
             | in many big old corps and gov agencies for "security"
             | reasons.
             | 
             | Although this is an aside, the original context of the
             | article was only "hackers" machines, and whatever your
             | interpretation of that is, it probably doesn't involve
             | fortune 500s.
        
               | danieldk wrote:
               | _We use it on servers, so it makes sense to use it on the
               | desktop too for maximum dev familiarity and
               | compatibility, since it now works well there..._
               | 
               | I am always surprised by these things. I mean, even
               | trying to use something widely-used (nowadays) as Zoom,
               | basically gives me two options (on a HiDPI screen):
               | 
               | - Use X11, but when I share a window and use drawing
               | tools, whatever I draw is displaced by a seemingly
               | constant offset. It's caused by scaling for HiDPI,
               | because if I disable scaling, things work.
               | 
               | - Use Wayland, but I can only share _the whole screen_.
               | Drawing works, but the overlay is incredibly flaky and
               | often incorrectly registers clicks.
               | 
               | Besides that on both Wayland and X11, doing video call
               | makes the fans blow at full speed and quickly drains the
               | battery when a laptop is not hooked up (probably no
               | hardware acceleration of video encoding/decoding). Oh,
               | and I probably want to use a wired headphone, because
               | using a BlueTooth headsets regularly dropout.
               | 
               | Zoom is just a single example, but there are just so many
               | paper cuts if you want to work outside a solo developer
               | context.
               | 
               | (Windows has a lot of issues as well, but at least basic
               | workflows generally work.)
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | Zoom does seem to be a piece of crap, but it lets you use
               | the browser which seems to be less bad on linux. At my
               | work we all use google meets and only zoom for some
               | external customers, the experience seems to be much worse
               | with zoom in general regardless of the OS - that said it
               | seems to work ok on Linux in the browser - once you
               | actually get into the meeting, that's the hardest and
               | worst UX experience ever (getting into the meeting).
               | 
               | I haven't used HiDPI monitors on linux yet, being able to
               | use linux easily is more important to me for dev, it's a
               | known area of weakness, and I just don't need the extra
               | pixels for dev so it's easier to just avoid it. If you
               | are doing graphics linux is probably not the best OS for
               | the job tbh, and that's a shame but just the way it is
               | currently.
               | 
               | > Zoom is just a single example, but there are just so
               | many paper cuts if you want to work outside a solo
               | developer context.
               | 
               | I suppose it depends upon how much crap software the
               | workplace forces upon their workers, I understand that
               | it's often mandatory to use a bunch of proprietary
               | software for various types of communication and
               | management stuff.. i.e stuff that's not central to actual
               | dev work. If you can get away with a browser, then it's
               | not bad at all... and when there is an option for a
               | native version, use the browser, because usually it's
               | some horrific electron thing that's even worse.
        
               | danieldk wrote:
               | _At my work we all use google meets and only zoom for
               | some external customers, the experience seems to be much
               | worse with zoom in general regardless of the OS_
               | 
               | I strongly disagree. Zoom on macOS and macOS works very
               | well (I currently use it for a remote course). My
               | experiences have been _far far_ better than Teams, Google
               | Meet, Skype, Jitsi etc. Most of which I have had to use
               | for work or private. My wife is hoping that her employer
               | will relent sometime and offer Zoom, because she prefers
               | it so much over Google Meet, whatever Blackboard uses,
               | etc.
               | 
               | It could be that your experience is colored by the Zoom
               | web interface, which I only used once on Linux and it was
               | terrible then.
               | 
               |  _I haven 't used HiDPI monitors on linux yet, being able
               | to use linux easily is more important to me for dev, it's
               | a known area of weakness, and I just don't need the extra
               | pixels for dev so it's easier to just avoid it._
               | 
               | For me it's one of those things that can't be unseen. I
               | have happily used lo-DPI screens for decades, but since I
               | can't really stand lo-DPI screens anymore since I had my
               | first retina MacBook. Even though I am doing development
               | 80% of the time, I want my fonts to be crisp.
               | 
               |  _If you can get away with a browser, then it 's not bad
               | at all... and when there is an option for a native
               | version, use the browser, because usually it's some
               | horrific electron thing that's even worse._
               | 
               | I guess that's true on Linux. Unfortunately, very few web
               | apps beat native applications like OmniGraffle, the
               | Affinity Suite, or even PowerPoint.
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | ok, but all of your use cases and priorities are so far
               | away from the original premise of the article that's it's
               | clear your needs are more inline with a regular mac or
               | windows user than a "hacker" or dev... (just saying) it's
               | not for everyone.
               | 
               | Also which video conferencing app "is the worst" seems to
               | be pretty subjective, but tbh they are all pretty crappy
               | and replaceable, i'm not really sure what this has to do
               | with OS choice.
        
           | swiley wrote:
           | When Lion came out I switched to Debian after it corrupted
           | the rootfs twice. Installation my MBP was pretty easy.
        
             | tomxor wrote:
             | Same here, 10.6 was my last MacOS, it felt like it lost
             | direction and focus after that.
             | 
             | For a 2009 MBP it was a nice experience trying out FreeBSD
             | and various linux distros before settling on Debian. The
             | only stumbling block on that machine was the macEFI, which
             | there were eventually plenty of solutions for - I hear the
             | later machines are a bit of a nightmare to run anything
             | other than MacOS though.
        
         | Wowfunhappy wrote:
         | > It turns out that SIP and Gatekeeper aren't nearly as much of
         | a problem as I was led to believe, neither of these features
         | have hampered me once.
         | 
         |  _They can also both be turned off!_ Gatekeeper in 30 seconds
         | and SIP in less than five minutes. I legitimately understand
         | why people get worked up about optional features.
        
           | wayneftw wrote:
           | Any problem I've had in Linux was fixed in 5 minutes too.
           | 
           | There are too many things in macOS which can't be fixed. You
           | can't even change the color of your mouse pointer if you want
           | to.
        
             | Wowfunhappy wrote:
             | ...actually, if SIP is off, you _can_ , they're just PDF
             | files! But yes it's certainly not a real feature!
             | /System/Library/Frameworks/ApplicationServices.framework/Ve
             | rsions/A/Frameworks/HIServices.framework/Versions/A/Resourc
             | es
        
         | Causality1 wrote:
         | Windows has a particular knack for giving the user the
         | impression it doesn't care about them at all. The things that
         | irritate me now are the same things that irritated me last
         | year, five years ago, and in a few cases twenty years ago. They
         | make you go "Jesus is everybody asleep over there?"
         | 
         | For example, if you want a notification icon to always be
         | shown, you have to open a menu, open another menu, scroll to
         | find the one you want, open an option list, and finally hit
         | "show icon and notifications". Why can't you just right click
         | an icon and hit "show icon and notifications"? Because Windows
         | doesn't give a shit about you.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | MarkSweep wrote:
           | All the ads, the file search that searches Bing and can't be
           | disabled, the telemetry that sends the websites you browse to
           | Microsoft. There must be some product manager over there
           | whose bonus is based on how much ad revenue they can get out
           | of Windows, no matter the cost. Installing the Windows 11
           | preview is just depressing, like you say it really makes me
           | feel like they don't care and expect people just to take it.
           | 
           | For your specific notification icon issue, I thought you can
           | just drag the icon from the pop up tray to the main system
           | tray to keep it always visible?
        
           | read_if_gay_ wrote:
           | The insanely deep nesting of little configuration windows is
           | probably the number one thing that makes Windows feel old to
           | me. The new settings app is an improvement, but sadly one
           | that lives in isolation.
        
             | herbst wrote:
             | Or the point that many of these configurations can ONLY be
             | accessed by GUI. That's one thing that makes windows (and
             | even MacOS to some degree) so awkward to use sometimes.
        
               | aikinai wrote:
               | Almost every setting in MacOS can be accessed by the
               | command line, and many things only there. Actually I
               | don't think I've found anything so far that can't be set
               | from the command line and I do a fair amount of that kind
               | of tweaking.
        
               | herbst wrote:
               | Xcode license agreements? Took me literally more than a
               | hour the first time I installed something on the terminal
               | but refused to finish because I never heard of xcode or
               | that you need to open it manually in order to confirm a
               | license agreement. When I was just installing the ruby
               | stack and it needed some compilers via xcode I guess?
               | 
               | That was on a MBP like 2015 or so. The error message was
               | not helpful at all, I had to ask someone with experience
               | or I would still be installing ruby to this day.
               | 
               | (Given I don't remember anything else)
        
               | aikinai wrote:
               | sudo xcodebuild -license accept
               | 
               | Google actually autocompleted "in the terminal" when I
               | started typing out the question and this was answered by
               | the first link.
               | 
               | I have tons of development environment software installed
               | and I've never opened the Xcode GUI.
        
               | herbst wrote:
               | This was not the case in 2015/14. These stack overflow
               | answers easily confirm that you needed to open it at
               | least once, and that there have been related bugs in that
               | time:
               | https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/175069/how-to-
               | acce...
               | 
               | Good they fixed it. Still made a bad impression on me
               | back then coming from using Linux for over a decade.
        
             | leoc wrote:
             | And often that's because MS decided not to replicate some
             | capabilities of the old WinNT-vintage configuration GUI in
             | the pretty new touch-friendly interface. Probably the
             | classic example is the trek you have to make, through two
             | or three dialogs of nice-looking but most often useless new
             | GUI, to a cryptic "Change adapter options" button and on to
             | where Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network
             | Connections survives, still the vital dialog and still
             | largely in its original late-'90s form. Oh, and then
             | there's the decision that having separate default devices
             | and default communication devices for audio is too nerdy,
             | so hip young Windows 7 kids don't need to see anything
             | about any default communication device in the shiny new
             | sound GUI. Hilarity then ensues when the VR headset somehow
             | automatically becomes the default-comms-device microphone
             | and you mysteriously become barely audible on voice calls.
             | Of course other big, important sections of the GUI (file
             | permissions?!) seem to have been junked completely without
             | any replacement.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Those settings windows are part of the API and windows
               | has to provide them for legacy software in many cases.
               | 
               | What was absolutely insane was not replicating the
               | functionality into the new control panel setup leading to
               | _power users_ feeling dumb because they can't find
               | network settings under network settings.
        
           | johnwalkr wrote:
           | Window 11 goes a long way towards fixing this. There's still
           | multiple ways to change things, but all of the touch screen
           | settings are gone and the new settings app is laid out
           | logically.
        
           | awiesenhofer wrote:
           | > For example, if you want a notification icon to always be
           | shown, you have to open a menu, open another menu, scroll to
           | find the one you want, open an option list, and finally hit
           | "show icon and notifications".
           | 
           | Or, you know, just drag and drop it into the always shown
           | area.
        
         | orf wrote:
         | > It turns out that SIP and Gatekeeper aren't nearly as much of
         | a problem as I was led to believe, neither of these features
         | have hampered me once
         | 
         | Woah, even after the "it's literally 1984" hacker-news
         | groupthink? You're telling me they might have massively
         | inflated perceived issues without even trying them? No way.
         | Never.
        
         | mciancia wrote:
         | It's funny that it has been around 9 years now since Apple
         | introduced retina macbooks and their implementation of HiDPI is
         | good from the start but, while it's getting better, windows and
         | linux still need to catch up.
        
           | tonyedgecombe wrote:
           | HiDPI has been a nightmare on Windows. I have wasted so much
           | time making it work on a Windows Forms application.
        
           | FreakyT wrote:
           | I feel like Apple's approach to hardware made their job much
           | easier -- they just ensured that every retina Mac had a
           | display with exactly 2x the pixels as its pre-retina
           | equivalent, so they never had to deal with fractional scaling
           | like Windows often does.
        
             | solarkraft wrote:
             | Yet that too works very well.
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | They deal with lots of fractional scaling - at first they
             | may have done simple pixel doubling but now the screens are
             | often at non integer ratios.
             | 
             | In fact you can speed it up slightly by making sure the
             | display resolution is exactly "half" the actual resolution
             | so to prevent MacOS from scaling 8x internally first.
        
               | Kwpolska wrote:
               | The only scales supported by Apple software are integer
               | scales (1x, 2x, 3x). The iPhone 6 Plus had a 2.6x screen
               | -- iOS would render at 3x and then scale the image down
               | to fit.
               | https://www.paintcodeapp.com/news/iphone-6-screens-
               | demystifi...
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | See https://9to5mac.com/2016/12/02/15-inch-macbook-pro-
               | screen-re... - it renders at 8x or something and scales
               | down inexactly.
        
           | tootie wrote:
           | Funny enough I did a bunch of projects that required pushing
           | like 16K output (video wall, not a personal setup) and at
           | that point Windows becomes the only option because it
           | requires high end GPU and an array of outputs.
        
           | BeFlatXIII wrote:
           | They've had wonderful trackpads for even longer and PC laptop
           | OEMs still have yet to catch up. No, I'm entirely
           | uninterested in the touchscreen gimmick of the week.
        
           | pavlov wrote:
           | It's because Apple was very forward-looking in 1999 and
           | decided to use floating point coordinates for the
           | CoreGraphics API. Nothing on the Mac draws using exact
           | integer pixels (since the death of the transitional Carbon
           | API anyway). Scaling was built in from scratch.
        
             | dTal wrote:
             | What exactly is wrong with "scaling" on Linux? I use Qt
             | apps on Plasma and everything just works. Nearly all my
             | displays are HiDPI now.
        
               | vladvasiliu wrote:
               | > Nearly all my displays are HiDPI now.
               | 
               | Well, that's the whole thing. HiDPI in and of itself
               | works well. I use it with a 24" UHD monitor and I
               | absolutely love the setup.
               | 
               | But the main issue with Linux, at least with X11, is that
               | it doesn't handle multiple displays with different DPI
               | settings.
               | 
               | As you noted, QT seems to work fine, as do some other
               | toolkits that have dynamic scaling according to the
               | monitor size. Alacritty does this too, for example (don't
               | know what toolkit they use, though).
               | 
               | But GTK in particular is terrible. Yes, you can configure
               | it to use scaling, in which case it works well, IF you
               | don't need fractional scaling (though recent versions of
               | Gnome seem to support it somehow).
               | 
               | But now, if you're going to use, say, a HiDPI laptop with
               | a "regular", larger external monitor, you're gonna have a
               | bad time. If you enable scaling, the widgets will be huge
               | on the LoDPI display. If you disable it, widgets will be
               | teeny tiny on the HiDPI one.
        
               | badsectoracula wrote:
               | Note that the problem isn't really with X11 (or at least
               | Xorg) since it does provide the necessary information via
               | RandR to perform per-monitor scaling.
               | 
               | The issue is really with window managers and toolkits.
               | What needs to happen is that window managers ask the
               | applications (the top level windows really) to scale
               | themselves -this can be done not just for DPI purposes-
               | and then the applications should apply that scaling.
               | 
               | (applications should expose that they can support this -
               | like they expose that they support handling a 'close
               | window' event - so that compositing window managers can
               | do it themselves for applications that do not support it,
               | which is also why this needs to go through the window
               | manager)
               | 
               | Qt _can_ do this but AFAIK window managers do not do this
               | because there isn 't any standard events for that - i
               | remember an email about this exact topic when i took a
               | look at the Xorg mailing list for WMs some time ago, but
               | it didn't seem to be going anywhere (in that it barely
               | had any replies).
               | 
               | So it really is about standardizing how it is to be done.
               | I think the main reason it isn't done is that such setups
               | are comparably rare (i mean hidpi displays themselves are
               | very rare - if you check any desktop resolution stats
               | they often barely are a blip - and having both a hidpi
               | display and a regular dpi one is even less common than
               | that) so developers aren't that interested in
               | implementing such a thing.
               | 
               | One way it could be done however is also pushing the idea
               | that this isn't just for multimonitor setups: as i wrote
               | above, you can use that for generic scaling, which is
               | useful even for single monitor regular dpi setups (if
               | anything it can be very useful for low resolution setups
               | - like 1366x768 and similar which are _way_ more common
               | than hidpi - when faced with applications with a lot of
               | padding, etc).
        
               | catblast01 wrote:
               | > i mean hidpi displays themselves are very rare - if you
               | check any desktop resolution stats they often barely are
               | a blip
               | 
               | Do you have a link/cite for this? I couldn't find easily
               | somewhere summarizing pixel density stats.
               | 
               | "Desktop resolution stats" is not the same thing. All the
               | retina displays have at least a 2x pixel ratio so these
               | tables on a cursory Google search are clearly lumping 13
               | inch MacBook pros into the 1280x800 bucket for instance.
               | 
               | You got a reference to something that clearly is
               | accounting for pixel ratio?
        
               | vetinari wrote:
               | > Note that the problem isn't really with X11 (or at
               | least Xorg) since it does provide the necessary
               | information via RandR to perform per-monitor scaling.
               | 
               | It is issue with X11. If you have Wordperfect binary from
               | 1999, it still has to work; it does not matter that RandR
               | provides information, old clients will not ask for it and
               | without it, they will be broken.
               | 
               | That's why Xwayland does upscaling by itself.
               | 
               | > mean hidpi displays themselves are very rare - if you
               | check any desktop resolution stats they often barely are
               | a blip - and having both a hidpi display and a regular
               | dpi one is even less common than that
               | 
               | Cause and effect. They are rare, because using them
               | sucks, making them even rarer. On systems, where they do
               | not suck, they are not that rare. This attitude makes
               | entire platform worse off.
        
               | grishka wrote:
               | The issue with Linux is that nothing is part of the
               | system. There's no single standard GUI toolkit. There's
               | no single standard windowing system. There's way too many
               | variations of everything.
        
               | badsectoracula wrote:
               | This isn't really an issue, you just need people to agree
               | around doing some common stuff (even if they do their own
               | stuff elsewhere).
               | 
               | And this is really not that dissimilar under Windows:
               | nowadays you have a lot of different GUI toolkits and
               | applications still need to "opt-in" and explicitly
               | support stuff like scaling, so you have a lot of
               | applications that do not do that.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | They don't even agree with what they are supposed to
               | support from freedesktops.org.
               | 
               | On Windows, Win32 doesn't do that by default because it
               | would break backwards compatibility from those Windows 95
               | binaries being run on a Windows 10 2021 edition, so it
               | must be a conscious decision to enable it.
               | 
               | UWP and WinUI work just fine.
        
               | vetinari wrote:
               | For decades, the standard windowing system was X11; and
               | not just for Linux, for other systems as well.
               | 
               | The issue was elsewhere - it provided standardized wire
               | protocol and you could not break it. It could extend it,
               | but applications not aware of the extension would be not
               | able to benefit. Windows and Mac on the other hand kept
               | the protocol proprietary and you had to use supplied
               | libraries, you could not talk to the display server
               | directly. So Microsoft and Apple could update these
               | libraries; on Linux, there was no such option, all the
               | apps using wire protocol instead of client libraries
               | would be left out in the dark.
        
               | herbst wrote:
               | Some of us don't call that an issue ;) it just makes
               | discussions about what's possible more complicated
        
               | danieldk wrote:
               | _What exactly is wrong with "scaling" on Linux? I use Qt
               | apps on Plasma and everything just works. Nearly all my
               | displays are HiDPI now._
               | 
               | If you use 2x scaling (or other integer scaling),
               | everything is fine. If you need fractional scaling,
               | things break down pretty quickly, at least on GNOME.
               | 
               | Once you use fractional scaling (e.g. 1.5), GTK
               | applications will scale correctly, but are slightly
               | slower and consume more mattery. However, all XWayland
               | applications are unusably blurry.
               | 
               | Unfortunately, fractional scaling is really needed on 14"
               | 1080p laptops or 4k e.g. 27" screens. With 1x scaling
               | everything is tiny and with 2x scaling gigantic.
               | 
               | The only workaround that worked ok for me was using 1x
               | scaling and using font scaling in GNOME. Many controls
               | and icons are tiny that way, but at least text is
               | readable and not blurry. Of course, this only works up to
               | some extend and when both screens need the same amount of
               | scaling (since font scaling cannot be configured per
               | screen).
               | 
               | [1] https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issues/566
        
               | hollerith wrote:
               | On a _non-HiDPI_ display (I use one that is 1680 by 1050
               | and one that is 1280 by 1024) fractional scaling works
               | fine on my machine running Gnome 34 with apps that bypass
               | XWayland and talk directly with Wayland (which is true of
               | all the apps I use). (Google Chrome needs to be started
               | with a couple of command-line switches to bypass
               | XWayland.)
               | 
               | But your comment makes me hesitate to buy a HiDPI
               | monitor!
        
               | dTal wrote:
               | I guess this is the issue with saying "Linux" supports or
               | doesn't support things. My software stack of
               | Xorg/Qt/Plasma works fine. Your stack of
               | Wayland/GTK/GNOME doesn't. Should we hold it against
               | "Linux"? Is that a fair comparison to MacOS, where
               | everything uses Cocoa? For that matter, how do GTK apps
               | look on MacOS?
        
             | Kwpolska wrote:
             | The scaling was quite glitchy in 2009 [0], and in 2021, the
             | only allowed scale factors are 100% and 200% -- so you
             | don't need floating-point numbers for it.
             | 
             | [0]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009/08/mac-
             | os-x-10-6/21/#re...
        
               | zacwest wrote:
               | If you want to position an @2x view (1 pt = 2 px) you
               | need to use fractional points. A view at (0, 0.5) in
               | points is (0, 1) in pixels. Resolution Independence was a
               | separate concept.
        
             | JKCalhoun wrote:
             | When your graphics model is Display PostScript (and then
             | PDF)....
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | Chazprime wrote:
         | > The Big Sur interface changes, whilst I thought I'd never get
         | used to them, have actually grown on me.
         | 
         | That's the thing with some people and Apple; I generally moan
         | whenever Apple changes their UI substantially (the change to
         | the "flat" iOS comes to mind first), but soon I come to wonder
         | how I ever liked anything else. :)
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | They also (intentionally or not) make many of the changes
           | "reversible" with tweaks and other programs. This allows the
           | people who have a visceral reaction to revert and usually
           | over time it softens, and then you find yourself not
           | bothering with it.
           | 
           | The biggest change for me was the switch to zsh which ended
           | up in me changing my default shell everywhere else.
        
         | smoldesu wrote:
         | This is why Linux exists. I was pretty disappointed by the
         | compatibility/performance of the M1, so I switched back to my
         | desktop with Manjaro Linux installed on it. Suffice to say, I
         | doubt I'll be using my Macbook unless Apple revives 32-bit
         | libraries or switches back to x86 in some capacity.
        
         | minimaul wrote:
         | Rider and .NET Core aren't native yet on M1 - but .NET 6 fixes
         | this :)
        
         | seltzered_ wrote:
         | "switched from my 2015 MBP to a Surface Book 2 at the end of
         | 2019, and switched back to my same, six-year-old MBP just a few
         | months ago. To keep things short, whilst WSL puts Windows miles
         | ahead of where it once was, I find that the same old rough-
         | edges still remain."
         | 
         | I had a similar feeling when given a new windows laptop in 2020
         | to work with that was supposedly better spec'ed than my late
         | 2013 macbook 15". The problem has been windows and the lack of
         | finding flow in it's OS. I've been trying to document workflows
         | & apps here for the past year to see if alternatives are
         | emerging:
         | https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/148zTJUwfVv9xfDcpSoH3...
         | . For me it's not so much the development environment but
         | whether I can quickly deal with administrivia tasks (organizing
         | files, copying things from one form to another, etc.). I'm
         | surprised windows 11 still lacks miller columns:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_columns
         | 
         | My concern about the apple platform going forward isn't so much
         | about the technical, but the material - my 2013-era macbook
         | died recently and found the fact that I could remove the ssd
         | and plug it into a similarly old mac to still be a savior ,
         | despite having multiple backups. It's driven me to consider
         | installing linux on an intel windows tablet over buying an M1
         | macbook - I'm getting leary of both the lack of repairability
         | and really wanting a tablet on stand + detached
         | keyboard/trackpad for sake of ergonomics.
        
         | peterburkimsher wrote:
         | I'm glad that your MacBook Pro didn't get bricked by the Big
         | Sur update! I heard that there was some issue with the HDMI
         | port firmware, so haven't updated my 2014 MBP.
         | 
         | I have had major issues with trying to replace the battery.
         | Beware of third-party replacements, which idle at 12V. The
         | original battery idles at 2.2V and "wakes up". A voltage spike
         | when waking from battery killed my logic board, and 3
         | professionals have failed to repair it so far. I've spent over
         | NZ$1900 on 5 replacement batteries to try to get something that
         | works, since September 2020. I just want a laptop that I can
         | use on the bus, with a removable SSD so I won't lose my data
         | when it breaks, and iTunes so I can sync my iPod and iPhone.
        
           | kalleboo wrote:
           | The music app in Big Sur still supports syncing to old iPods,
           | I used it with an old 30-pin pre-video iPod nano that I found
           | in a thrift store. It could even properly reformat it from
           | windows FAT32 to Mac HFS format
        
           | Joeri wrote:
           | Instead of looking for a removable SSD consider setting up
           | some kind of syncing and backup solution. A removable ssd
           | doesn't protect you from theft or ransomware. I use a
           | combination of time machine, backblaze and syncthing to make
           | sure all my data is synced across my machines and backed up
           | locally and in the cloud.
        
             | smoldesu wrote:
             | A removable SSD _does_ ensure that my laptop doesn 't
             | become trash after I use it long enough. For many people
             | (myself included) no computer can truly feel "perfect"
             | unless it can be run in relative perpetuity.
        
             | peterburkimsher wrote:
             | I also use Time Machine to an external drive.
             | 
             | 4TB Sabrent Rocket M.2 SSDs with adaptors don't come cheap.
             | Getting that much storage soldered onto the logic board is
             | even more expensive.
        
         | shkkmo wrote:
         | Switching to windows and expecting an improvement from MacOS is
         | silly. I switched to Linux from MacOs in 2015 and never looked
         | back. I cam dual boot into Windows, but do so less than once a
         | year these days.
        
       | jimnotgym wrote:
       | Anecdata:
       | 
       | One of our developers had used mac since the pre-Intel days. He
       | used to develop mostly mac native apps. In recent years it has
       | been mostly web dev in linux.
       | 
       | He ran Linux through vagrant on mac. Now he does the same on pc.
       | He says that the hardest thing about moving is that he lost his
       | browser shortcuts.
       | 
       | Ps he has a company provided PC, Intel and M1 macs on his home
       | desk so really he can use whatever he wants.
        
         | 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
         | Firefox sync?
        
       | larusso wrote:
       | Yes I remember the shift around that time. I had my first contact
       | with a Mac at school in ca 2001. OSX was just released and the
       | school received a new order of iMac G3's as lab computers. What
       | can I say. I hated the machines. Everything was so weird and
       | ugly. It didn't help that the teachers had to run OS9 for
       | compatibility reasons with the school software. I had a brand new
       | WinXP desktop machine at home which was miles and leaps ahead of
       | the iMacs ;) well for me anyways. The only thing I really liked
       | was iTunes. That is a story on it own ;). It took a few more
       | years for me to come around. It was with the release of snow
       | leopard that I saw that macOS was way better than windows. I
       | switched in 2011 professionally to mac and use it still as my
       | daily driver. But my love for the system that sparked with snow
       | leopard dwindled. I didn't want to update to Catalina (was forced
       | in the end due to a new machine I got and well Xcode) and still
       | refuse the UI of BigSur. I switched to Arch Linux on my personal
       | machine but have to stay on macOS professionally as the only
       | other option my company IT can support is Windows. Well macOS is
       | no longer the highland for developers, WSL and Apple itself saw
       | to that. But Windows is still a no go area as a daily driver for
       | me.
        
         | thrower123 wrote:
         | Apple pumping iBooks into schools was a big coup for them in
         | the early 2000s. A lot of people my age got into Macs and never
         | got out of them, just because of that early exposure.
         | 
         | https://bangordailynews.com/2002/06/11/news/during-visit-to-...
        
           | larusso wrote:
           | I'm from germany. Here Apple was never a huge player. I
           | learned very late of its existence. My school was a so called
           | OSZ (Oberstufen Zentrum) which is something like school a
           | where you can gain work related diplomas. I'm really bad at
           | describing this. They had a design and print department and
           | they run all on apple.
        
             | the-dude wrote:
             | I think the English term is _vocational_.
        
           | trainsplanes wrote:
           | Yep. For me, I always "dealt" with Windows at school.
           | Computers were just a device you were meant to wrestle with
           | to get a job done and that was just an immutable truth.
           | 
           | Then I moved to a new middle school that would bring in carts
           | of iBooks for us to do work on. Some things were weird (lack
           | of a right click for one), but other things just felt
           | incredibly natural and the design didn't scream "soulless
           | device for office drones."
           | 
           | When my parents got me my first computer the next year, it
           | was a Mac, and I've stuck with Apple for 17 years since then.
        
       | vishnugupta wrote:
       | > So Dad, there's this company called Apple. They make a new kind
       | of computer that's as well designed as a Bang & Olufsen stereo
       | system, and underneath is the best Unix machine you can buy. Yes,
       | the price to earnings ratio is kind of high, but I think a lot of
       | people are going to want these.
       | 
       | This aged well :-)
        
         | zabzonk wrote:
         | Actually, I am writing this on an Asus laptop with so-called
         | "Bang & Olufsen Technology". The laptop is fine, though showing
         | its age, but the sound quality through the built-in speakers is
         | awful, and always has been - I now use a cheap Anker bluetooth
         | speaker which is far better.
         | 
         | And to be honest, I was never very impressed with the sound
         | quality of B&O way back in the 1970s, when they were seen to be
         | the height of sophistication.
        
           | ch_sm wrote:
           | You should definitely try the newer Bang and Olufsens, if
           | you're into high-end audio - like the Beolab 20 or Beolab 28.
           | They're incredible, and actually compare favorably to B&W or
           | KEF in the same price range. The laptop licensing shenanigans
           | are awful though.
        
           | leoc wrote:
           | I get the impression that Apple since Jobs' return has
           | actively gone out of its way to try not to have pundits and
           | the general public make the pretty obvious comparisons to B &
           | O or Bose, because they rightly see it as not a flattering
           | comparison for Apple.
        
             | skavi wrote:
             | Bose' QC series of headphones is great. Incredibly
             | comfortable and well tuned with noise canceling that's
             | still very competitive with more recent headphones.
             | 
             | The newer Bose 700 makes too many compromises to look nice
             | IMO.
        
       | analog31 wrote:
       | Oddly enough it was around 2005 that I was using one platform at
       | my workplace (Windows) and another at home (Linux). And I've used
       | Apple II, MS-DOS, 68k Mac, etc. I decided two things:
       | 
       | 1. Any time spent learning the "innards" of an OS, would be spent
       | on Linux. Most of that learning has resulted from tinkering with
       | the Raspberry Pi.
       | 
       | 2. All of the software that I use on a daily basis would be
       | platform independent, especially my programming tools.
       | 
       | As a result, right now I have the luxury of being ambivalent
       | about platforms. I actually spend remarkably little time
       | interacting with the platform, mainly setting up networking when
       | I get a new machine. I can choose a new computer based on
       | ergonomics and cost. Windows happens to have the best touch
       | screen support right now, and refurb'd computers are not
       | intolerably expensive.
        
       | zabzonk wrote:
       | Is it just me, or did all these "hackers" that apparently bought
       | Macs back then not really produce all that much hacker software
       | (or non-hacker software, come to that)? It seems to me that
       | Windows and Linux both had much greater funds of developer
       | software than did the Mac ecosystem.
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | There seems to be a lot more interesting software on the Mac
         | than Windows or Linux and I've never really understood that.
         | 
         | Think about how many Mac enthusiast podcasts, websites, and
         | blogs there are. Windows should have many more of these, but
         | they don't. And Linux enthusiast sites are very technical and
         | low level. There's no writing about being a Linux user that
         | isn't also about being a developer.
         | 
         | Where are there no companies like the Omni Goup, Cultured Code,
         | and Panic turning out great applications for Windows? In
         | theory, the market is an order of magnitude bigger yet the
         | reality seems to be that there are fewer Windows users willing
         | to pay for great software. Is it because Windows users are not
         | on that platform by choice?
         | 
         | Desktop Linux users are definitely there by choice, yet they
         | too seem to be unwilling to pay for software.
        
           | handrous wrote:
           | > Where are there no companies like the Omni Goup, Cultured
           | Code, and Panic turning out great applications for Windows?
           | In theory, the market is an order of magnitude bigger yet the
           | reality seems to be that there are fewer Windows users
           | willing to pay for great software. Is it because Windows
           | users are not on that platform by choice?
           | 
           | There are such companies! For video games. Video games and
           | B2B/business-productivity software is where the money is on
           | Windows. Your buyers are PC gamers or businesses.
           | 
           | There are also lots of unsophisticated low-needs users who
           | are on Windows at home because it's what was cheap at the big
           | box store, and/or they learned in the earlier PC days to shop
           | based on spec numbers back when those mattered much for basic
           | home users, and the Apple section of the store doesn't look
           | very interesting if you shop that way.
           | 
           | AFAI can tell (from watching relatives fitting this profile,
           | which is... all of my relatives, plus many relatives of
           | friends) the only way to make money off them, since the death
           | of actual boxed software in stores (which they did used to
           | sometimes buy!), is to be Microsoft and use Win10 to spam
           | them until they buy (maybe not even realizing what's
           | happening or, once they've paid, what they bought or what
           | it's for or how to ever use it--yes, really) or be a
           | straight-up malware scammer type. The problem with those
           | users, if you want to sell them software, is they basically
           | just want/need a browser, MS Office, and perhaps something to
           | play the unorganized folder of pirated MP3s of 50s-90s music
           | the unsophisticated-user side of the family has been passing
           | around for 20 years. They may want something to organize
           | photos and such, but they'll never figure out how to use it
           | right even if you show them how, unless it's high-lock-in,
           | very automatic ("AI" tagging and such), and probably cloud-
           | based (so, likely some Web crap, not desktop software, oh and
           | because advertising and hoovering up user data to train AI is
           | an endless money spigot _if and only if you already have
           | massive scale_ you 'll likely be competing on price with
           | "free", so, have fun with that).
           | 
           | > Desktop Linux users are definitely there by choice, yet
           | they too seem to be unwilling to pay for software.
           | 
           | Developing for Linux means receiving support load for all its
           | desktop brokenness (driver problems [mostly video drivers];
           | issues with any basic hardware+software systems your software
           | relies on to work well for all but the most basic operation,
           | like audio for example; xorg/wayland/DE instability) and
           | every crazy configuration out there.
           | 
           | Sure you can say "fuck off, we support exactly and only [a
           | couple major desktop distros] with the default config that
           | you get if you keep clicking OK on the OS installer and then
           | not changing anything, and only on [list of hardware], report
           | on any other set-up and you will be ignored" but you're
           | already on such a tiny platform that you can hardly afford to
           | annoy/turn-off/generate-vocal-anti-fans-among users. So
           | instead... you develop for literally anything else, or maybe
           | toss out some electron garbage to Linux as an afterthought.
           | 
           | Linux is expensive per-user and doesn't bring you that many
           | users to begin with. Plus, yeah, there may be less
           | willingness to pay for software.
        
             | criddell wrote:
             | I'm glad you pointed out video games because that's a great
             | counterpoint.
             | 
             | It just seems strange that with a billion desktops, there
             | aren't a few million who would buy software like OmniFocus
             | or Things if it existed on Windows.
             | 
             | And yeah, desktop Linux is messy.
        
         | makeitdouble wrote:
         | The mac's main advantage to devs/hackers is Darwin, and we
         | mostly use it for linux compatible software. Heck, I've
         | switched from FreeBSD to osx just to get better laptop hardware
         | and peripheral support.
         | 
         | Most stuff we produce are *nix compatible. I'm no great hacker
         | but everything I wrote to make my life easier is shell based.
         | 
         | I think Windows with ASL will have the same impact, with more
         | and more *nix compatible software being produced.
        
         | m12k wrote:
         | As someone that uses both Mac and Windows regularly, I find the
         | quality of the software I use on Mac to be generally higher.
         | Cyberduck (FTP), Transmission (bittorrent), Charles Proxy
         | (packet sniffing), Sourcetree (git gui), Pixelmator (image
         | editing), Sketch (vector graphics), Things (todo), 1Password
         | (password management) are all solid applications with polished
         | user interfaces, where I struggle to find anything quite as
         | nice on Windows (several of these have been or are being ported
         | to Windows, with varying levels of polish carrying over).
        
           | kitsunesoba wrote:
           | This is a problem on Linux too. The lack of a Sketch
           | equivalent for Linux bit me just the other day. Akira is the
           | closest thing, but it's so early in its dev cycle that it
           | won't be useable for several more years. A lot of people will
           | point to Inkscape, but it's much more of an _Illustrator_
           | alternative and as such feels more geared for print.
           | 
           | I might've been able to fudge Figma to do what I needed, but
           | even that wouldn't have been ideal, with how it's designed
           | for collaborative prototyping more than a generic digital
           | vector graphics editor. Aside from that, I don't like using
           | Figma simply because they don't publish specs for their file
           | format and try to lock you in (as opposed to Sketch, which
           | uses a publicly documented file format that has plenty of
           | converters).
        
           | GnarfGnarf wrote:
           | CyberDuck (macOS) is inferior to Ipswitch WS_FTP (Windows).
           | The CyberDuck interface is awkward, it's confusing to tell
           | where your uploads and downloads will wind up.
           | 
           | Cornerstone (macOS Subversion client) is atrocious, God help
           | you if you created a sandbox in the wrong place, deleting it
           | could wipe out your repository. Tortoise (Windows) is so much
           | better.
           | 
           | As a Windows developer recently porting my code to macOS, I
           | am underwhelmed. I expected to be blown away.
        
             | pilsetnieks wrote:
             | Cyberduck is an odd choice for a file transmission app
             | showcase, Panic's Transmit (https://panic.com/transmit/) is
             | much better.
        
           | vincentmarle wrote:
           | These are all apps that did not exist in 2005. In 2005, XP
           | was king.
        
             | m12k wrote:
             | Right, that was my point. The comment I was replying to
             | said that all those hackers that supposedly switched to Mac
             | in 2005 didn't seem to have produced any notable software,
             | so I listed a whole bunch of nice software that they had
             | produced.
        
               | aidos wrote:
               | Nitpick: I might be misremembering but I feel like I had
               | CyberDuck in 2004 (OSX Panther?)
        
           | mkl95 wrote:
           | What are your issues with Transmission on Windows? I have
           | been using it for years and it works like a charm.
        
           | zabzonk wrote:
           | As you say, several of these are also available on Windows -
           | I can't think why anyone developing such software would not
           | make them available on multiple platforms.
        
             | herbst wrote:
             | Sometimes because APIs? Back when I had a Mac forced on me
             | I was surprised how fast you can discover files and
             | software, something windows back then simply has not
             | managed to offer via their API. The 'finder' or whatever
             | that tool was called simply felt wrong on windows, nothing
             | like the original.
             | 
             | One different example may is the gnome shell desktop. Many
             | of us who use it have basically overcome the win95 approach
             | of desktop design. There is as far as I know no equivalent
             | on windows or Mac. And a port would not be possible as you
             | can't replace their window managers.
             | 
             | Then there is the whole Linux standard toolset, that yes
             | works on windows these days, but obviously feels very
             | foreign and doesn't integrate well to the system.
             | 
             | It's not only a matter of porting software when some things
             | are so fundamentally different
        
             | zepto wrote:
             | > I can't think why anyone developing such software would
             | not make them available on multiple platforms.
             | 
             | Because it's a lot more work, and because it's next to
             | impossible to create a great cross platform app with a
             | native feeling UI.
        
               | ficklepoet wrote:
               | > it's next to impossible to create a great cross
               | platform app with a native feeling UI
               | 
               | And who do we have to thank for that? Perhaps there's
               | some business out there that made a chocolate-themed UI
               | toolkit that was notoriously proprietary and unworkable,
               | so much so that it drove the industry into a software
               | drought that only let up when x86 was fully standardized?
               | 
               | Maybe I'm just spitballing here.
        
         | speedgoose wrote:
         | I believe that objective-c and the Apple documentation didn't
         | encourage people to create on Mac for a long time.
         | 
         | Now it's a bit better with Swift or web applications using
         | Electron.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | On the contrary, OS X had first support to Java via the Java
           | Bridge and Apple's own JVM implementation, because they
           | weren't sure if the developer community educated in Object
           | Pascal and C++ would be willing to touch Objective-C, so they
           | decided to play safe with having Java for the ride, doubling
           | down on Java uptake.
           | 
           | Objective-C was embraced by the developer community in such a
           | way that they quickly deprecated Java Bridge and eventually
           | got rid of Java development costs altogether.
        
             | speedgoose wrote:
             | I remember running Java applications on a powerpc g4. It
             | was incredibly slow and ugly, no wonder why developers
             | still preferred objective-c over Java on Mac.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | That was certainly not Apple's Java, as it had good JIT
               | compiler with code cache, and the same L&F than
               | Objective-C applications, that wasn't definitely it.
        
               | speedgoose wrote:
               | I remember the Java IDE like Eclipse or NetBeans being
               | incredibly slow, and ugly, compared to the same software
               | on similar priced computers running windows or GNU/Linux,
               | or compared to more native software like Xcode or
               | TextMate. But perhaps the powerpc g4 was simply a bad CPU
               | for a JVM and Java developers were not very good at
               | designing UIs for Mac.
               | 
               | I also remember having to wait a long time whenever the
               | JVM was starting. It was annoying when a website did
               | contain a Java applet because my web browser would be
               | stuck until the JVM was ready.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Yeah, because they did not made use of the APIs exposed
               | by Apple on their JVM implementation,
               | 
               | XCode also did Java back then.
               | 
               | https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation
               | /Co...
               | 
               | https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation
               | /Co...
               | 
               | https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation
               | /Ja...
        
           | WanderPanda wrote:
           | What the M1 giveth, Electron taketh away
        
             | tomxor wrote:
             | vi inspired the concept of the GUI.
             | 
             | Then Electron sent many of us back to vi in search of lost
             | CPU cycles.
             | 
             | -- A JavaScript Dev
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Just the plain idea that vi had anything to do with GUI
               | is hilarious.
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | It is. It's modality was an anti-inspiration, as in...
               | how the hell can we not have modes (a GUI)... sort of...
               | then everyone started burring crap under menus though
               | feature accretion... hence we go full circle, because
               | people get fed up of bloat, leading to both UX fatigue
               | and performance fatigue, which eventually gives you a
               | kind of appreciation for simple modal interfaces.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | These are GUIs,
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Vision
               | 
               | https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800225.806843
               | 
               | vi might have visual on the name, but only for those in
               | the Bell Labs silo
        
         | dijit wrote:
         | A lot of what works on Mac bleeds into Linux.
         | 
         | Linux userland tools in the last 10 years are incredible; it's
         | not easy to draw a direct line between that and the Mac, but
         | I'm relatively certain there is correlation.
         | 
         | I'm talking about castnow, youtube-dl and a whole slew of other
         | software which integrates proprietary things. In the 00s things
         | like those were almost all running exclusive to windows.
        
           | csomar wrote:
           | > Linux userland tools in the last 10 years are incredible
           | 
           | Yet, still waiting for a Git GUI for Linux.
        
             | ficklepoet wrote:
             | Pretty much everyone I know has used GitG since... 2006?
        
             | ptomato wrote:
             | Sublime Merge?
        
           | zabzonk wrote:
           | > A lot of what works on Mac bleeds into Linux
           | 
           | I'd say it was the other way around, and it also bleeds into
           | Windows. For example (of course): git.
        
             | herbst wrote:
             | Or literally the whole Linux ecosystem with WSL
        
         | deregulateMed wrote:
         | People really don't want to believe that we are chemical
         | reactions and that Apple used psychology tricks on us through
         | marketing campaigns.
         | 
         | It's a lot easier to justify buying an Apple product with an
         | excuse than to realize that relentless advertising is what
         | caused people to give Apple money.
        
           | onethought wrote:
           | I don't buy this. There was something special in that time of
           | having a Unix system with a well considered cohesive UI.
           | Windows was not an option, and 1 click install set-and-forget
           | linux distros weren't (aren't? :P ) really common.
           | 
           | There was a clear gap in the market for a unix system that
           | was up and running with minimal fuss, apple capitalised
           | (accidentally happened upon) this.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | shkkmo wrote:
             | Dell makes hardware that easily rivals Apple and sells it
             | with Linux pre-installed and officially covered by their
             | support services.
        
               | mthoms wrote:
               | The parent was referring to 2005 (when PG posted this).
               | Did Dell have that option way back then? Colour me
               | impressed if so.
        
               | slacktide wrote:
               | Pretty close. They started offering Ubuntu preinstalls on
               | 24 May 2007.
               | 
               | https://www.delltechnologies.com/en-us/blog/15994-2/
        
             | fundad wrote:
             | Exactly! Psychology tricks would include supporting Linux
             | commercially which is a wildly successful business (even
             | before counting the likes of AWS which supports an OS as
             | part of hosting).
             | 
             | They by definition market their product and win sales.
             | Sales funded Linux and a lot of OSS beyond what hobbyists
             | could possibly have done, an inconvenient truth.
             | 
             | People who want to support their own installation of Linux
             | or FreeBSD do so without considering a commercial OS and a
             | few of them constantly shitpost about how anyone could
             | possibly not make the same choice as they do.
        
               | ficklepoet wrote:
               | > do so without considering a commercial OS
               | 
               | You forget that most people are using Linux to _replace_
               | a commercial OS.
        
             | deregulateMed wrote:
             | The same people that want a Unix based operating system
             | can't manage to install Linux?
             | 
             | I was 14 years old in 2005 and knew nothing about
             | programming, but was able to get Linux installed in a few
             | minutes.
             | 
             | There is a real reason, but the part of the brain that
             | makes the decision is different than the speech part of the
             | brain.
        
               | spiderice wrote:
               | I have also installed and managed many Linux systems.
               | Doesn't mean I want to on my main driver. I also don't
               | want a cheap plastic computer with a terrible trackpad
               | (regardless of how great the intervals are) and until
               | recently, that was pretty much all you could find in the
               | non-Mac laptop world.
        
               | deregulateMed wrote:
               | "cheap plastic"
               | 
               | The marketing company won.
               | 
               | This is a Major red flag.
               | 
               | Speaking of cheap plastic. "Cheap keyboard" ring a bell?
        
               | pram wrote:
               | Nah dude, I installed Slackware 7 in 1999 when I was 13,
               | and used Linux up until 2003. Then I bought a G4
               | PowerBook and never looked back. People who chose OSX for
               | its UNIX foundation weren't too dumb and stupid to use
               | Linux, contrary to what you believe.
        
               | linguae wrote:
               | Sometimes users have problems installing Linux, not
               | because of lack of ability, but because of lack of driver
               | support. This is especially true for laptops. I remember
               | installing Linux on my desktop in 2004 as an 11th grader,
               | and I remember having to purchase a $50 serial port modem
               | at Fry's (yes, my parents were still on dial-up at the
               | time) because the modem that shipped with my PC was a
               | "Winmodem," one that had many of its core functionality
               | implemented in software that was only available for
               | Windows.
               | 
               | After my freshman year of college ended, in the summer of
               | 2006 I replaced my desktop (which was dual-booting
               | Windows XP and FreeBSD) with a Core Duo MacBook, which
               | was just released two months before. It felt great using
               | a Unix machine where I didn't have to worry about driver
               | support, and where I can run Unix applications and
               | various proprietary software packages such as Microsoft
               | Office without dual-booting, emulation, or
               | virtualization.
               | 
               | I've stayed a Mac user since, though lately I'm in the
               | slow transition of switching away; I just replaced my
               | 2013 MacBook Air with a Microsoft Surface Pro 7 running
               | Windows 10 (I love WSL!), and I plan to replace my 2013
               | Mac Pro with a Ryzen 7 or 9 build sometime in 2022 or
               | 2023, which will most likely run FreeBSD. In the interim
               | I've installed many Linux and FreeBSD systems for work
               | and for play.
        
         | aenis wrote:
         | From my purely anecdotal experiences of attending/organizing a
         | few 500-person-plus hackstons and dozens of smaller ones, at
         | least half of the people I meet there use macs. Its definitely
         | in fashion still.
         | 
         | I switched to a m1 mac last year after nearly 4 decades of low
         | level x86 work, incl. drivers, rootkits, and the like. These
         | days I code in higher level languages such as rust or, ehm,
         | python, and the mac offers a fine experience. Ironically, what
         | pushed me over the fence was the pandemics; most of the video
         | conferencing stuff causes windows laptops to sound like vacuum
         | cleaners.
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | It did the same to the Macs (even recent models) to be
           | honest. The M1 is the only laptop that seems to not die under
           | zoom strain.
        
         | zepto wrote:
         | The hackers that bought the Macs built startups.
        
       | kensai wrote:
       | "Though unprecedented, I predict this situation is also
       | temporary."
       | 
       | Funny enough, the situation was not temporary, the change in
       | trend was real and sustained.
        
         | tootie wrote:
         | The tipping point wasn't anything to do with OSX IMO. It was
         | iOS. Still my absolutely biggest grudge against Apple is how
         | shitty and locked in the iOS ecosystem is. I haven't wanted a
         | Mac as a developer machine for the last 5 years but since I
         | have to support iOS, I don't have a choice. I had a year
         | "break" where I actually needed at Windows machine and it was a
         | dream. Touchscreen was so incredibly useful.
        
       | peterburkimsher wrote:
       | "In 1994 my friend Koling wanted to talk to his girlfriend in
       | Taiwan, and to save long-distance bills he wrote some software
       | that would convert sound to data packets that could be sent over
       | the Internet. We weren't sure at the time whether this was a
       | proper use of the Internet"
       | 
       | I also have a girlfriend in Taiwan, and met her while working
       | there for 4 years, at a job partly made possible by PTT BBS (a
       | very old Telnet web forum). I'm so grateful for VoIP, fast
       | Internet connections, and being able to chat to her every night
       | (at 5:20 of course, which sounds like Wo Ai Ni  in Mandarin).
       | 
       | "If you want to attract hackers to write software that will sell
       | your hardware, you have to make it something that they themselves
       | use. It's not enough to make it 'open.' It has to be open and
       | good."
       | 
       | Are there any such platforms nowadays, that aren't restricted by
       | a walled garden? (says he, typing this on a 2014 MacBook Pro
       | running 10.13, while charging his iPhone 4S running jailbroken
       | iOS 6.1.3).
        
         | thaumasiotes wrote:
         | > (at 5:20 of course, which sounds like Wo Ai Ni  in Mandarin)
         | 
         | Huh? The Ling -Ni  pun relies on not making a sound distinction
         | which does exist in Mandarin. They sound similar in other
         | Chinese languages, not Mandarin.
        
       | robomartin wrote:
       | While I have no issues with Apple/MacOS (we own several) or
       | Windows (I think the nit-picking is silly) I still remember what
       | Apple did in the PowerPC transition. That left a level of
       | distrust for the company and how it makes decisions.
       | 
       | Context is important here. I wasn't running my own business at
       | the time. I was working for a company that had somewhere around
       | 250 Macs and maybe 10 or 20 PC's.
       | 
       | What happened?
       | 
       | Apple made the transition and, as a result, all software and
       | hardware this company had invested in became obsolete, virtually
       | overnight. We are talking about a non-trivial amount of money and
       | resources.
       | 
       | I saw and experienced the pain that caused first hand. From that
       | point forward I always had this in the back of my mind. As I
       | moved to run my own business with limited funds, the last thing I
       | wanted to face was making any investment that could be subject to
       | that kind of a pole-shift effect. Macs, for the most part, were
       | out.
       | 
       | It's interesting to see the level of nit-picking people on HN
       | tend to apply to a PC running Windows. I think things change when
       | you are responsible for your own bottom line and have to get
       | practical. There's nothing wrong with the hardware or software.
       | At least nothing wrong enough to be a deal-breaker. The proof?
       | Probably tens to hundreds of millions of companies running all
       | kids of businesses just fine using PC's. Compatibility, long term
       | viability, cost and cost of ownership (repairs!) are far more
       | important than being able to right-click an icon to get a
       | convenient function to work.
       | 
       | Microsoft/Windows has always been about long term compatibility.
       | That means things evolve slowly. That's OK.
       | 
       | Aside from that, at least in our case, the engineering software
       | we run won't work on anything else. In some industries you have
       | no other options.
       | 
       | The Linux question and WSL. I don't understand the complaints. I
       | run multiple Linux virtual machines on any of our powerful
       | Windows desktop or laptops. No issues whatsoever. Some of us
       | dual-boot. Other than Linux hardware and other issues, no
       | problems at all. In fact, we carefully select our hardware during
       | builds (or when buying laptops) in order to ensure the greatest
       | level of compatibility with both Windows and Linux software we
       | use.
       | 
       | If there is a solid justification for using an Apple machine, I
       | am all for it. That's why we have several of them. No issues at
       | all. I just don't think the nit-picking is valid or useful any
       | more. If you are in business you just want to get shit done.
       | There's nothing seriously wrong with quality PC hardware and the
       | software ecosystem that runs on it, Linux or Windows.
        
         | LeoPanthera wrote:
         | > Apple made the transition and, as a result, all software and
         | hardware this company had invested in became obsolete,
         | virtually overnight. We are talking about a non-trivial amount
         | of money and resources.
         | 
         | Are you talking about the 68k to PPC transition? Because Apple
         | made an enormous amount of effort to ensure both forward and
         | back compatibility so I don't think your statement is true at
         | all. "Fat binaries" allowed new software to run on 68k systems
         | for years after the transition - you could even run 68k Mac
         | apps on OS X for a few years!
         | 
         | And future versions of MacOS remained compatible with 68k Macs
         | up until (if my memory serves) Mac OS 8.1. Even if you didn't
         | upgrade to OS 9, most software ran on 8 anyway just fine.
         | 
         | They had to draw the line somewhere, but you had a _long_ time
         | to deal with the transition thanks to Apples efforts.
        
           | robomartin wrote:
           | PowerPC to Intel.
           | 
           | The company had very expensive media software suites that
           | became incompatible. This isn't about word processors and
           | browsers but rather the case of essential and sometimes
           | expensive businesses tools.
        
       | quijoteuniv wrote:
       | For me is more: Exodus from the Mac Or even better: Return of the
       | Linux converted Mac. Great machines that can be use many years if
       | transformed. The software filoshopy does not relate to the (end
       | of)world we are living. People that can afford them is an elite
       | and this is not the way to go. Is Tim Cook planning to go to
       | space just for fun too? We have a responsibility to the planet!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-04 23:01 UTC)