> And modern macOS has no Nvidia drivers at all. Why would it, there is no modern Mac (excluding Mac Pro) with nvidia GPU and soon, not even an AMD GPU once th

> And modern macOS has no Nvidia drivers at all. Why would it, there is no modern Mac (excluding Mac Pro) with nvidia GPU and soon, not even an AMD GPU once they stop selling all Intel based Macs. macOS is not an OS you can install on any other hardware. So, how does that apply to the reason why companies and developers are continuing to use macOS in the first place? If the companies and developers need nVidia support, they wouldn't buy the Macs in the first place, they would've bought the devices and use the OS that supports it. We're not talking about which OS is better or whatever, we're talking about why there is momentum and why many developers/users are still using macOS despite the obvious better solutions out there like Linux + System76/ThinkPad/XPS/etc. > Would Linux be a better OS if they simply removed the choice for the user to use Nvidia if they want like Apple does? They mostly already do (or did). Many distros refuse to let users install the closed-source nvidia's drivers from the installers or included in the image because it's not open source. I'm not disagreeing with them but the fact is that I am only able to use Linux due to Pop_OS that had nvidia drivers built into their image. I even got a few other people to Pop simply because of their hardware using Nvidia GPU. I couldn't use Debian/Fedora 2-3 years ago because of this. Many distros seem to be opening up to allowing non-free drivers into their image and installers; Fedora is getting better at this. Debian 12 sounds like it is going to open up to this as well. Users would have an easier time working with Linux if many distros include support for installing nVidia drivers out of the box. If I bought a ThinkPad with nVidia GPU and Linux didn't even boot on it because the nVidia GPU is too new or there's no open source drivers, I'm still going to say it is Linux and I'm not bothering with it anymore, I'll just install Windows and move on because it just works and does what I want it to do. > It has loads of weirdly missing basic features like the ability to adjust the sound of a monitor's speakers when connected by HDMI or DP. Updates are the absolute slowest of any OS regardless of whether it's a whole new version or a security update. And if your SSD kicks the bucket the whole machine is a brick. 1. I don't use monitor's speakers, they're horrible but I can understand why that'd piss people off. Definitely agree that macOS should support adjusting the monitor's settings and audio out of the box instead of forcing people to use a third party tool. 2. Meh, all updates are slow. Fedora updates are just as slow if you install updates via their software app instead of dnf, which requires a reboot for any updates. Debian upgrade took just as long on my older laptop, so I'm going to say this is not a con on macOS because it applies to various OSes. 3. SSD has nothing to do with macOS tho, this is a hardware lockdown by Apple, yes it is horrible but it does nothing to slow down or pause companies and developers from continuing to use Macs. This is fairly easy to work around by using Time Machine to back up your data and swap out the logic board at Apple or get a new Mac. Also, Macs don't really break this easily, by the time it may break, companies and developers are already buying the next models.