4 ms·

I guess we could fairly call it a undocumented or obscure garden? But there's no real designed wall there. Apple aren't preventing anything, they're just not h

I guess we could fairly call it a undocumented or obscure garden? But there's no real designed wall there. Apple aren't preventing anything, they're just not helping us out either. Agree it would be nice for them to help out a little, but it's really not the same thing.

p_l 6y ago
IIRC, it turned out that ability to run non Apple OSes depends on one person who implemented it and is responsible for it. It wasn't part of any road map for M1
- saagarjha 6y ago
  There's certainly more than one person involved.
webmobdev 6y ago
> Apple aren't preventing anything, they're just not helping us out either. It's the same thing. (And the only reason they aren't yet outright preventing it is because it would be bad PR - nobody wants their desktop computer to be like the iPhone or iPad. But it will happen.)
- coldtea 6y ago
  >nobody wants their desktop computer to be like the iPhone or iPad You'd be surprised. (Also, this exactly has been the proposition and allure of the Chromebooks - a computer that you can just wipe and restart again and it's like a phone or tablet device, and your data are synced in the cloud).
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Apple has a computer with a locked down OS, it's the iPad. Apple sells the iPad as a locked down system because some users prefer a less flexible, more predictable, and secure system. Apple has a computer which isn't locked down, it's the Mac. Apple maintains MacOS as a flexible/ pro platform because if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to sell $2000-8000 Macs to pro users who need that power and flexibility to do their jobs. For Apple there is zero profit in neutering the Mac. Whatever profits you think Apple could make by forcing people to use the Mac App Store, would be dwarfed by the sales lost due to pro & power users leaving the system en-masse.

4 ms·

I guess we could fairly call it a undocumented or obscure garden? But there's no real designed wall there. Apple aren't preventing anything, they're just not h

by BillinghamJ 6y ago

p_l 6y ago
IIRC, it turned out that ability to run non Apple OSes depends on one person who implemented it and is responsible for it. It wasn't part of any road map for M1
- saagarjha 6y ago
  There's certainly more than one person involved.
webmobdev 6y ago
> Apple aren't preventing anything, they're just not helping us out either. It's the same thing. (And the only reason they aren't yet outright preventing it is because it would be bad PR - nobody wants their desktop computer to be like the iPhone or iPad. But it will happen.)
- coldtea 6y ago
  >nobody wants their desktop computer to be like the iPhone or iPad You'd be surprised. (Also, this exactly has been the proposition and allure of the Chromebooks - a computer that you can just wipe and restart again and it's like a phone or tablet device, and your data are synced in the cloud).
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Apple has a computer with a locked down OS, it's the iPad. Apple sells the iPad as a locked down system because some users prefer a less flexible, more predictable, and secure system. Apple has a computer which isn't locked down, it's the Mac. Apple maintains MacOS as a flexible/ pro platform because if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to sell $2000-8000 Macs to pro users who need that power and flexibility to do their jobs. For Apple there is zero profit in neutering the Mac. Whatever profits you think Apple could make by forcing people to use the Mac App Store, would be dwarfed by the sales lost due to pro & power users leaving the system en-masse.