3 ms·

You might be right. I've never used a Purism or System76 laptop. If I can use it without ever having to know which boot loader I'm using (or what a boot loader

You might be right. I've never used a Purism or System76 laptop. If I can use it without ever having to know which boot loader I'm using (or what a boot loader is), what version of a given driver I have installed, which partition I'm writing to (or what a partition is), whether I'm currently logged in as root or as admin... ... that'd be comparable to MacOS, and it definitely opens the door to me switching to Linux if/when Apple takes a dark-enough turn. Now one might argue that every professional user, especially a programmer, should know what a boot loader is or what partition they should be writing to, since that's as basic a requirement to use a professional tool as touch-typing is. But I wouldn't agree with that; macOS abstracts away a lot of basic things, and that's why I like it.

rhn_mk1 5y ago
You're not going to be disappointed when you give them a try then. They match your requirements so far. Sure, they have problems specific to them (e.g. losing encryption keys, some WiFi sticks unsupported by policy), but every ecosystem has rough edges you won't find elsewhere. BTW, there are more Linux-focused companies. Those two are just the ones I remember from the top of my head.
AnthonyMouse 5y ago
> But I wouldn't agree with that; macOS abstracts away a lot of basic things, and that's why I like it. Everything does that now. People only care about boot loaders if they want to dual boot Windows, and in general the extent of caring about it is to confirm when the installer asks if that's what you want to do. Linux attracts the kinds of people who want to know what a boot loader is, because it makes that easier than alternatives do. But it's not actually required to use it.