3 ms·

I disagree. Intel and AMD both contribute heavily to the Linux Kernel. This means that on the vast majority of Intel or AMD based systems, you can boot from US

by _xy8h 5y ago

I disagree. Intel and AMD both contribute heavily to the Linux Kernel. This means that on the vast majority of Intel or AMD based systems, you can boot from USB and have a working system. Apple doesn't even release documentation on their SOCs. Apple doesn't use standard, open boot methods to allow other OSes to simply boot from USB. No BIOS/Standard UEFI. There is a huge chasm between what you can do on the vast majority of PCs out there... and what you have to do to get anything else running on Apple hardware. IF you can get anything running. (Eg, locked bootloaders on iDevices)

CarelessExpert 5y ago
As a bit of meta-commentary, the fact that anyone is even arguing with the points you're making is deeply disappointing to me. It seems like there's an entire generation of folks out there who can no longer tell the difference between an open technology ecosystem and a closed one...
- stormbrew 5y ago
  Hi I grew up with a TRS-80 and a Tandy 1000. I'm not sure what generation you think I'm from but I suspect you're wrong. What disappoints me is a "generation of folks" who can't tell that openness is a spectrum and that every bit of openness they enjoy was hard-fought for by pushing the boundaries of the platforms that existed beyond their original intentions, and now treat an effort to do the same on new platforms as some kind of windmill tilting.
  - CarelessExpert 5y ago
    > What disappoints me is a "generation of folks" who can't tell that openness is a spectrum And Apple is very far on the closed end of that spectrum relative to their competitors, and always has been. There is simply no arguing this point. > every bit of openness they enjoy was hard-fought for by pushing the boundaries of the platforms that existed beyond their original intentions, and now treat an effort to do the same on new platforms as some kind of windmill tilting. Let's be real: Asahi isn't gonna change Apple's corporate culture. It's a super cool technical project and I absolutely applaud these sorts of efforts simply because they're cool. But you're not the Jedi fighting the empire here. You're not gonna blow open the M1 and suddenly change Apple hearts and minds. The PC industry became more open for one reason and one reason only: Money. The IBM monopoly was destroyed because clones were cheap, not because of ragtag freedom fighters. Linux won over in the embedded space because it doesn't cost anything, not because folks suddenly got stars in their eyes over the GPL. Apple will only change their practices when economics force them to. But it's very clear that they view a walled garden of hardware and software as key to their financial success, and everything they're doing is intended to build those walls just a little bit higher. So until you can change that financial equation, nothing in the Apple ecosystem will change. But, honestly, keep plugging away! Have fun! I personally love repurposing hardware to make it do cool things for which it was never intended. When I see projects like this, I think of Everest: We do it because it's there. But let's not pretend that you're somehow going to change Apple just because you get the Linux kernel booting on the M1.
    - stormbrew 5y ago
      Fundamentally, if people with your and the spawner of this thread's attitudes had won the day we wouldn't have any of the things this thread is allegedly about loving so much. That's my main point here. Also I am not involved in or affiliated with or even a likely user of the Asahi project, to be clear. I just find this attitude incredibly frustrating, and I'm definitely bristling at accused of being a young'un or some shit for believing people can actually do surprising things. I am not the dewy-eyed idealist you seem to think I am, I believe what I'm saying here because I've seen it happen over and over and over again.
      - CarelessExpert 5y ago
        > I just find this attitude incredibly frustrating What attitude? The attitude that Apple's hardware is closed and Apple should be criticized for building a walled garden? That we should, where possible, invest in open hardware and technology and put our money where our mouths are, so as to create the kinds of economic incentives that ensure that technology remains open in the future? Do you really disagree with that? > I am not the dewy-eyed idealist you seem to think I am, I believe what I'm saying here because I've seen it happen over and over and over again. What "it" are we talking about here? What do you think the end game is going to be? I genuinely have no idea what your argument is, other than to tell me how I'm wrong without providing any specifics regarding how I'm wrong. Please, enlighten me, I'm happy to listen!
        stormbrew 5y ago
        The attitude that pushing on technology that seems hard isn't worth it. We can do both. We should do both. At any rate, I'd suggest you go read marcan_'s replies and the OP submitted to HN because the picture you paint and the picture they paint of this platform are not quite the same to begin with. I think the people doing the work deserve a little more credit to describe the platform they're working on.
        CarelessExpert 5y ago
stormbrew 5y ago
Intel and AMD don't make the computer (most of the time). They make the CPU. ARM is as open a CPU platform as x86 is at any rate, so if you're gonna pick your line only based on the CPU there's literally no difference there. But you obviously know that's not all there is. Most computers anyone can buy are full of components that only have drivers or support in the linux kernel because people reverse engineered them. Most are also full of components that linux only works with because of extracted firmware blobs from other systems. EFI is more or less an open boot system (which.. you know intel macs used that right?), though with plenty of proprietary extensions and alterations in most booting computers, but the BIOS boot that predated it? Yeah you know that was a proprietary system right? Linux booted off it because people reverse engineered and cloned it until it was forced to be an 'open' thing. It didn't just magically happen one day and IBM even sued about it back in the day.
randomguy1234 5y ago
For Linux and BSD, everything has been reverse engineered and hacked from the beginning. Linux has been ported to hundreds of unsupported computing devices. If everyone had your mindset, Linux and BSD would not even exist, only proprietary operating systems would exist. You just don't get it. Linux on M1 is a worthy challenge for the most talented and creative software engineers. If we all just waited passively for manufacturers to provide official support then literally none of the free / open source operating systems would have ever existed.

by _xy8h 5y ago

CarelessExpert 5y ago

As a bit of meta-commentary, the fact that anyone is even arguing with the points you're making is deeply disappointing to me. It seems like there's an entire generation of folks out there who can no longer tell the difference between an open technology ecosystem and a closed one...

stormbrew 5y ago
Hi I grew up with a TRS-80 and a Tandy 1000. I'm not sure what generation you think I'm from but I suspect you're wrong. What disappoints me is a "generation of folks" who can't tell that openness is a spectrum and that every bit of openness they enjoy was hard-fought for by pushing the boundaries of the platforms that existed beyond their original intentions, and now treat an effort to do the same on new platforms as some kind of windmill tilting.
- CarelessExpert 5y ago
  > What disappoints me is a "generation of folks" who can't tell that openness is a spectrum And Apple is very far on the closed end of that spectrum relative to their competitors, and always has been. There is simply no arguing this point. > every bit of openness they enjoy was hard-fought for by pushing the boundaries of the platforms that existed beyond their original intentions, and now treat an effort to do the same on new platforms as some kind of windmill tilting. Let's be real: Asahi isn't gonna change Apple's corporate culture. It's a super cool technical project and I absolutely applaud these sorts of efforts simply because they're cool. But you're not the Jedi fighting the empire here. You're not gonna blow open the M1 and suddenly change Apple hearts and minds. The PC industry became more open for one reason and one reason only: Money. The IBM monopoly was destroyed because clones were cheap, not because of ragtag freedom fighters. Linux won over in the embedded space because it doesn't cost anything, not because folks suddenly got stars in their eyes over the GPL. Apple will only change their practices when economics force them to. But it's very clear that they view a walled garden of hardware and software as key to their financial success, and everything they're doing is intended to build those walls just a little bit higher. So until you can change that financial equation, nothing in the Apple ecosystem will change. But, honestly, keep plugging away! Have fun! I personally love repurposing hardware to make it do cool things for which it was never intended. When I see projects like this, I think of Everest: We do it because it's there. But let's not pretend that you're somehow going to change Apple just because you get the Linux kernel booting on the M1.
  - stormbrew 5y ago
    Fundamentally, if people with your and the spawner of this thread's attitudes had won the day we wouldn't have any of the things this thread is allegedly about loving so much. That's my main point here. Also I am not involved in or affiliated with or even a likely user of the Asahi project, to be clear. I just find this attitude incredibly frustrating, and I'm definitely bristling at accused of being a young'un or some shit for believing people can actually do surprising things. I am not the dewy-eyed idealist you seem to think I am, I believe what I'm saying here because I've seen it happen over and over and over again.
    - CarelessExpert 5y ago
      > I just find this attitude incredibly frustrating What attitude? The attitude that Apple's hardware is closed and Apple should be criticized for building a walled garden? That we should, where possible, invest in open hardware and technology and put our money where our mouths are, so as to create the kinds of economic incentives that ensure that technology remains open in the future? Do you really disagree with that? > I am not the dewy-eyed idealist you seem to think I am, I believe what I'm saying here because I've seen it happen over and over and over again. What "it" are we talking about here? What do you think the end game is going to be? I genuinely have no idea what your argument is, other than to tell me how I'm wrong without providing any specifics regarding how I'm wrong. Please, enlighten me, I'm happy to listen!
      - stormbrew 5y ago
        The attitude that pushing on technology that seems hard isn't worth it. We can do both. We should do both. At any rate, I'd suggest you go read marcan_'s replies and the OP submitted to HN because the picture you paint and the picture they paint of this platform are not quite the same to begin with. I think the people doing the work deserve a little more credit to describe the platform they're working on.
        CarelessExpert 5y ago

stormbrew 5y ago

Intel and AMD don't make the computer (most of the time). They make the CPU. ARM is as open a CPU platform as x86 is at any rate, so if you're gonna pick your line only based on the CPU there's literally no difference there. But you obviously know that's not all there is. Most computers anyone can buy are full of components that only have drivers or support in the linux kernel because people reverse engineered them. Most are also full of components that linux only works with because of extracted firmware blobs from other systems. EFI is more or less an open boot system (which.. you know intel macs used that right?), though with plenty of proprietary extensions and alterations in most booting computers, but the BIOS boot that predated it? Yeah you know that was a proprietary system right? Linux booted off it because people reverse engineered and cloned it until it was forced to be an 'open' thing. It didn't just magically happen one day and IBM even sued about it back in the day.

randomguy1234 5y ago

For Linux and BSD, everything has been reverse engineered and hacked from the beginning. Linux has been ported to hundreds of unsupported computing devices. If everyone had your mindset, Linux and BSD would not even exist, only proprietary operating systems would exist. You just don't get it. Linux on M1 is a worthy challenge for the most talented and creative software engineers. If we all just waited passively for manufacturers to provide official support then literally none of the free / open source operating systems would have ever existed.