3 ms·

So we are now speculating about future hardware? Apple macs were never locked down. Why would they now suddenly start being locked down? If Apple wanted to loc

So we are now speculating about future hardware? Apple macs were never locked down. Why would they now suddenly start being locked down? If Apple wanted to lock them down there would not have been a better moment then with the M1. They already have all the tech ready to go. But they obviously decided not do to that. Assuming a product line that has been not locked down for decades to suddenly start being locked down AFTER the best moment to do it is the wrong assumption.

amelius 5y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23640746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23640746 I will believe Apple if they say they officially support booting of other OSes, and will keep doing so in the future.
- rowanG077 5y ago
  You mean like they supported bootcamp "officially" and then just took it away suddenly with M1? I don't see how that is different then having unofficial support and apple then locking down a new Mac. In either case you lost support with a new hardware platform.
  - mlyle 5y ago
    > In either case you lost support with a new hardware platform. If we're talking about "new hardware platforms" --- yes, any vendor or vendor ecosystem may drop support for anything at any time in future products. If ARM Ltd's next core is a mechanical abacus, it will not run Linux.
    - rowanG077 5y ago
      Right! So whether there's unofficial or official support. It doesn't buy you anything.
      - mlyle 5y ago
        Unofficial support: you may get locked out at any time, even within that product's lifecycle. Official support: if you get locked out within this product's lifecycle, they will have to compensate you.
        rowanG077 5y ago
        Can you give a single example of a product being locked out without user intervention?
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    Boot Camp was always Intel-specific. There was no Boot Camp on Power Macs, and they couldn't run Windows either. MS has not made available a version of Windows on ARM for the M1 platform, either.
    - rowanG077 5y ago
      There is no "Windows for mac" for Intel either. Apple just added some drivers. That could be done for the M1 as well.
      - wpm 5y ago
        No it couldn’t. Microsoft doesn’t sell Windows for ARM.
        rowanG077 5y ago
        How is that a problem. Microsoft would jump at the chance to run windows on M1. Make no mistake here. It's only Apple not wanting to invest in features that have existed for years.
        rdsnsca 5y ago
        If they would jump at it ... why is the ARM version of Windows OEM only?
        rowanG077 5y ago
        Because there is no reason for it to be. Apple has made a clear statement that it won't actively support other operating systems.
      - marcan_42 5y ago
        No it couldn't. The ARM ecosystem is a lot more fragmented than x86, and M1 does not follow the SystemReady specification (which mandates certain hardware beyond the CPUs), which means OSes need core kernel patches to support it (which is what we're doing with Linux). To run Windows on the M1 requires Microsoft's cooperation. You can't do it just by writing drivers. This isn't new; Microsoft did it with the Raspberry Pi 3, which is also a nonstandard SoC. But it can't be done by Apple alone.
webmobdev 5y ago
> If Apple wanted to lock them down there would not have been a better moment then with the M1. ... But they obviously decided not do to that. That's a laugh - what other OS can you run on the M1 today apart from macOS? It is as good as locked down already! Apple understands very well that this is a very lacking feature of the M1, and that is why Apple is very cleverly using those reverse engineering effort as part of its online marketing to mislead some into beliveing that Linux or xBSD OSes will be available on the M1 in the very near future. The sad reality is that even if the reverse engineering is successful all you are going to get are buggy versions of other OSes, with features missing, which will make you regret purchasing the M1 if you hoped to run other OSes on it.
- rowanG077 5y ago
  You can run linux TODAY, you can run netBSD TODAY. it's not fully featured yet but you can run it. Locked down has a clear meaning and macs aren't locked down. Ipads are locked down, Iphones are locked down. It's impossible to boot a different OS on those. Linux has ran for years fine on macs. I don't see any reason why it won't run fine on the M1 macs.
  - webmobdev 5y ago
    > You can run linux TODAY, you can run netBSD TODAY. it's not fully featured yet but you can run it. Apple understands very well that this is a very lacking feature of the M1, and that is why Apple is very cleverly using those reverse engineering effort as part of its online marketing to mislead some into beliveing that Linux or xBSD OSes will be available on the M1 in the very near future. I can run a fully featured gui based Linux / xBSD / Windows XP on my 15+ year old single core Pentium machine even today ... that highlights how useless and crippled the M1 is in supporting alternative OSes. And that is simply because the M1 is as good as a locked down machine.
    - rowanG077 5y ago
      Can you point me towards marketing from Apple that highlights the ability to run linux or BSD? The reverse engineering effort has only been in full swing for 6-7 months, that's nothing. And yet it's already quite usable with the main thing not working being hardware acceleration.

amelius 5y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23640746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23640746 I will believe Apple if they say they officially support booting of other OSes, and will keep doing so in the future.

rowanG077 5y ago
You mean like they supported bootcamp "officially" and then just took it away suddenly with M1? I don't see how that is different then having unofficial support and apple then locking down a new Mac. In either case you lost support with a new hardware platform.
- mlyle 5y ago
  > In either case you lost support with a new hardware platform. If we're talking about "new hardware platforms" --- yes, any vendor or vendor ecosystem may drop support for anything at any time in future products. If ARM Ltd's next core is a mechanical abacus, it will not run Linux.
  - rowanG077 5y ago
    Right! So whether there's unofficial or official support. It doesn't buy you anything.
    - mlyle 5y ago
      Unofficial support: you may get locked out at any time, even within that product's lifecycle. Official support: if you get locked out within this product's lifecycle, they will have to compensate you.
      - rowanG077 5y ago
        Can you give a single example of a product being locked out without user intervention?
- zozbot234 5y ago
  Boot Camp was always Intel-specific. There was no Boot Camp on Power Macs, and they couldn't run Windows either. MS has not made available a version of Windows on ARM for the M1 platform, either.
  - rowanG077 5y ago
    There is no "Windows for mac" for Intel either. Apple just added some drivers. That could be done for the M1 as well.
    - wpm 5y ago
      No it couldn’t. Microsoft doesn’t sell Windows for ARM.
      - rowanG077 5y ago
        How is that a problem. Microsoft would jump at the chance to run windows on M1. Make no mistake here. It's only Apple not wanting to invest in features that have existed for years.
        rdsnsca 5y ago
        If they would jump at it ... why is the ARM version of Windows OEM only?
        rowanG077 5y ago
        Because there is no reason for it to be. Apple has made a clear statement that it won't actively support other operating systems.
    - marcan_42 5y ago
      No it couldn't. The ARM ecosystem is a lot more fragmented than x86, and M1 does not follow the SystemReady specification (which mandates certain hardware beyond the CPUs), which means OSes need core kernel patches to support it (which is what we're doing with Linux). To run Windows on the M1 requires Microsoft's cooperation. You can't do it just by writing drivers. This isn't new; Microsoft did it with the Raspberry Pi 3, which is also a nonstandard SoC. But it can't be done by Apple alone.

webmobdev 5y ago

> If Apple wanted to lock them down there would not have been a better moment then with the M1. ... But they obviously decided not do to that. That's a laugh - what other OS can you run on the M1 today apart from macOS? It is as good as locked down already! Apple understands very well that this is a very lacking feature of the M1, and that is why Apple is very cleverly using those reverse engineering effort as part of its online marketing to mislead some into beliveing that Linux or xBSD OSes will be available on the M1 in the very near future. The sad reality is that even if the reverse engineering is successful all you are going to get are buggy versions of other OSes, with features missing, which will make you regret purchasing the M1 if you hoped to run other OSes on it.

rowanG077 5y ago
You can run linux TODAY, you can run netBSD TODAY. it's not fully featured yet but you can run it. Locked down has a clear meaning and macs aren't locked down. Ipads are locked down, Iphones are locked down. It's impossible to boot a different OS on those. Linux has ran for years fine on macs. I don't see any reason why it won't run fine on the M1 macs.
- webmobdev 5y ago
  > You can run linux TODAY, you can run netBSD TODAY. it's not fully featured yet but you can run it. Apple understands very well that this is a very lacking feature of the M1, and that is why Apple is very cleverly using those reverse engineering effort as part of its online marketing to mislead some into beliveing that Linux or xBSD OSes will be available on the M1 in the very near future. I can run a fully featured gui based Linux / xBSD / Windows XP on my 15+ year old single core Pentium machine even today ... that highlights how useless and crippled the M1 is in supporting alternative OSes. And that is simply because the M1 is as good as a locked down machine.
  - rowanG077 5y ago
    Can you point me towards marketing from Apple that highlights the ability to run linux or BSD? The reverse engineering effort has only been in full swing for 6-7 months, that's nothing. And yet it's already quite usable with the main thing not working being hardware acceleration.