3 ms·

It’s not about tinkering. It’s more about control and having options for working the way you like instead of Apple’s way. I can’t imagine accepting such a limit

It’s not about tinkering. It’s more about control and having options for working the way you like instead of Apple’s way. I can’t imagine accepting such a limited environment. Unfortunately, thanks to iOS, I still have to build and test things in the Apple prison complex regularly - so I know exactly how limited things are by comparison (I prefer a Linux desktop.) Programming is about controlling things and Apple hates giving users and developers control. It’s about getting your job done by being able to install and configure things the way you need them without a lot of hassle. If you’re willing to put up with that hassle and live within the confines that Apple has laid out for you than that’s good for you. But there’s a reason that the vast, vast majority of programmers are not using a Mac outside the SV bubble. Even Windows gives you more control! (and hardware freedom of choice.) I’ve been programming since the early 90s and Apple has always been anti-developer and anti-power user.

bzbarsky 6y ago
I think the "hassle" point is key. The things I have wanted to install have generally not involved hassle on a Mac, and never more hassle than they would have on Linux. Configuring things has varied; some are less hassle than Linux, some are more, some are impossible, but unlike Linux once I do a configuration there is generally no hassle _keeping_ the configuration over several OS updates. And there is a lot less hassle in some ways, at least compared to the last time I was trying to use desktop Linux, around things like WiFi, drivers, finding a laptop that will actually work, etc. Yes, the latter is somewhat cheating because I am forced into Apple's hardware, but the hassle-savings from not having to dig through everything on the market to find the laptops that are well-supported by Linux is something I absolutely do not miss. So I think what it comes down to is that different people find different things hassle-full.
- wayneftw 6y ago
  The Mac OS is very clearly and objectively limited compared to Linux or Windows regarding the amount of control they give you over things. I could list many of them in detail, for they are numerous but they range from the small, like the fact that you can't even change the color of your mouse cursor to something other than black, to the large, like ability to run on any hardware. You're right that it comes down to what people find hassle-ful. That's why I say that if you fit into whatever Apple limits you to, then good for you. But those limitations are why most programmers actually don't use a Mac. > ...unlike Linux once I do a configuration there is generally no hassle _keeping_ the configuration over several OS updates. That's not my experience at all. Using a rolling release (Manjaro) for years I've rarely, if ever, had to re-configure anything major. I have kept three of these machines running without any hassle. They all just work (1 laptop and 2 desktops). Meanwhile on my Macbook Pro, just upgrading through El Cap, Sierra, High Sierra, Mojave and finally to Catalina - each and every time there's a major upgrade they've broken software that I use to the point where I just stopped using all the third party tools that I had to use to make my Mac work the way I want - tools like Karabiner, Better Touch Tool and so on... because I got sick of having to re-install or re-configure them after one of these updates. Also, Apple updates take forever and the update procedure is so clunky that even if you think you've updated something like XCode - the next time you open it you have to do more updates within the actual app. Package managers are soooo much nicer. Haven't you read any of the threads here on HN around the time Apple releases a major new Mac OS update? There are always tons of people complaining about what they broke. I think last time we lost the ability to even run 32-bit apps... > And there is a lot less hassle in some ways, at least compared to the last time I was trying to use desktop Linux, around things like WiFi, drivers, finding a laptop that will actually work, etc. If you had said picking a distro [0], I'd agree with you. But finding a Linux laptop couldn't be easier. Google for: Linux laptop. Also, if you've been scanning headlines here on HN for any amount of time I'm absolutely positive that you could name one right off the top of your head if you thought about it for thirty seconds. Here's a hint: The model name/number starts with XPS. Regarding drivers - every Linux desktop distro I've used has a GUI for picking drivers. You check off a couple boxes, hit apply and restart. Meanwhile on my Mac, I can't even get full functionality out of common hardware like a MS Natural Keyboard or a standard wireless USB mouse - so I gave up trying to do that too. [0] I'll save you some time if you ever want to escape Apple: Pick an Arch-based distro.
  - bzbarsky 6y ago
    > I've rarely, if ever, had to re-configure anything major. I suspect we differ significantly in the sorts of configuration we do. Also, please note that I mostly gave up on desktop Linux around 2006, after using it for 9 years straight as my only desktop OS. I kept using it for some things until earlier this year for work, and the update woes were still present, albeit smaller than in the past (maybe that's a Fedora-specific thing?). It's quite possible that even for a primary desktop the situation is better than it was in 2006, but at least for my use cases I'm at this point in "it ain't broken, don't spend time to fix it" territory wrt my OS. If that changes and there are things I want to do that macOS doesn't let me do, I will of course start looking at other options. > I think last time we lost the ability to even run 32-bit apps... Indeed, and for some people that's a deal-breaker. For me specifically it was a non-issue; everything I use had long ago upgraded to 64-bit. I had to install a newer version of DOSBox than I had before; that's it. Again, this is not going to be everyone's experience! Upshot: I'm glad we have the various options we have right now, since it's pretty clear that different people experience them very differently and value different tradeoffs. I would be very sad if any of them disappeared.

bzbarsky 6y ago

I think the "hassle" point is key. The things I have wanted to install have generally not involved hassle on a Mac, and never more hassle than they would have on Linux. Configuring things has varied; some are less hassle than Linux, some are more, some are impossible, but unlike Linux once I do a configuration there is generally no hassle _keeping_ the configuration over several OS updates. And there is a lot less hassle in some ways, at least compared to the last time I was trying to use desktop Linux, around things like WiFi, drivers, finding a laptop that will actually work, etc. Yes, the latter is somewhat cheating because I am forced into Apple's hardware, but the hassle-savings from not having to dig through everything on the market to find the laptops that are well-supported by Linux is something I absolutely do not miss. So I think what it comes down to is that different people find different things hassle-full.

wayneftw 6y ago
The Mac OS is very clearly and objectively limited compared to Linux or Windows regarding the amount of control they give you over things. I could list many of them in detail, for they are numerous but they range from the small, like the fact that you can't even change the color of your mouse cursor to something other than black, to the large, like ability to run on any hardware. You're right that it comes down to what people find hassle-ful. That's why I say that if you fit into whatever Apple limits you to, then good for you. But those limitations are why most programmers actually don't use a Mac. > ...unlike Linux once I do a configuration there is generally no hassle _keeping_ the configuration over several OS updates. That's not my experience at all. Using a rolling release (Manjaro) for years I've rarely, if ever, had to re-configure anything major. I have kept three of these machines running without any hassle. They all just work (1 laptop and 2 desktops). Meanwhile on my Macbook Pro, just upgrading through El Cap, Sierra, High Sierra, Mojave and finally to Catalina - each and every time there's a major upgrade they've broken software that I use to the point where I just stopped using all the third party tools that I had to use to make my Mac work the way I want - tools like Karabiner, Better Touch Tool and so on... because I got sick of having to re-install or re-configure them after one of these updates. Also, Apple updates take forever and the update procedure is so clunky that even if you think you've updated something like XCode - the next time you open it you have to do more updates within the actual app. Package managers are soooo much nicer. Haven't you read any of the threads here on HN around the time Apple releases a major new Mac OS update? There are always tons of people complaining about what they broke. I think last time we lost the ability to even run 32-bit apps... > And there is a lot less hassle in some ways, at least compared to the last time I was trying to use desktop Linux, around things like WiFi, drivers, finding a laptop that will actually work, etc. If you had said picking a distro [0], I'd agree with you. But finding a Linux laptop couldn't be easier. Google for: Linux laptop. Also, if you've been scanning headlines here on HN for any amount of time I'm absolutely positive that you could name one right off the top of your head if you thought about it for thirty seconds. Here's a hint: The model name/number starts with XPS. Regarding drivers - every Linux desktop distro I've used has a GUI for picking drivers. You check off a couple boxes, hit apply and restart. Meanwhile on my Mac, I can't even get full functionality out of common hardware like a MS Natural Keyboard or a standard wireless USB mouse - so I gave up trying to do that too. [0] I'll save you some time if you ever want to escape Apple: Pick an Arch-based distro.
- bzbarsky 6y ago
  > I've rarely, if ever, had to re-configure anything major. I suspect we differ significantly in the sorts of configuration we do. Also, please note that I mostly gave up on desktop Linux around 2006, after using it for 9 years straight as my only desktop OS. I kept using it for some things until earlier this year for work, and the update woes were still present, albeit smaller than in the past (maybe that's a Fedora-specific thing?). It's quite possible that even for a primary desktop the situation is better than it was in 2006, but at least for my use cases I'm at this point in "it ain't broken, don't spend time to fix it" territory wrt my OS. If that changes and there are things I want to do that macOS doesn't let me do, I will of course start looking at other options. > I think last time we lost the ability to even run 32-bit apps... Indeed, and for some people that's a deal-breaker. For me specifically it was a non-issue; everything I use had long ago upgraded to 64-bit. I had to install a newer version of DOSBox than I had before; that's it. Again, this is not going to be everyone's experience! Upshot: I'm glad we have the various options we have right now, since it's pretty clear that different people experience them very differently and value different tradeoffs. I would be very sad if any of them disappeared.