4 ms·

s/Linux/Unix MacOS is better though.

by sedatk 3y ago

tomrod 3y ago
This is a joke, right? MacOS is all over the place?
- rufugee 3y ago
  Agreed...I fail to see how macOS is an improvement. I mean, you have /Applications, but you also have /Library, ~/Library, and so on.
  - pavel_lishin 3y ago
    And /Applications, and /System/Applications, even though if you open them in Finder, you'll see the two combined.
    - reactordev 3y ago
      And ~/Applications, and /usr/bin, and /usr/local/bin, and homebrew, and Mac ports, tell me again how Mac is better?
      - sedatk 3y ago
        I just wasn’t aware of these issues. Let me rephrase it then: MacOS’ intentions were better. :)
        tomrod 3y ago
        Eh............................. maybe? :)
- wraptile 3y ago
  I'd say that MacOS is even worse which is impressive given that Apple has the absolute control of the platform and seemingly infinite resources and could have refactored the mess at any point.
  - tharne 3y ago
    > I'd say that MacOS is even worse which is impressive given that Apple has the absolute control of the platform and seemingly infinite resources and could have refactored the mess at any point. That's true, but also irrelevant. The file system can be a mess on MacOS because most MacOS users will never actually interact with the file system in any meaningful way. Apple obscures the file system away from its users by design. If you ask the average Mac user where on the computer their files are stored, they'll likely tell you something like, "They're all in the Photos app". On the other hand, even a fairly novice linux/unix user will almost certainly end up interacting with filesystem directly at some point, probably a lot.
  - graemep 3y ago
    I would guess the RoI of refactoring (especially on a consumer OS) is pretty low though. The average person never sees this stuff. Linux is widely used as a server OS and it still has taken a long time for new appraoches to get traction.
- jxdxbx 3y ago
  I think the basic file system exposed to users in the Finder is pretty simple. /Applications, app bundles, etc. The Unix under the hood is just standard stuff and Apples hides away detritus like .plist files. And sandboxed apps have their own little stub filesystems too. Anyway I like the idea of GoboLinux a lot but kind of think GUIX, just abstracting it away might be the right approach.
29athrowaway 3y ago
macOS has pros and cons. The external monitor fiasco is a dealbreaker for me.
- nusl 3y ago
  External monitor fiasco? Limitations on monitor count by CPU?
  - gigatexal 3y ago
    non pro versions of the M chip only support one external monitor... which is just silly
    - nusl 3y ago
      Yeah it's pretty silly. I guess Apple looked at their market and figured something out that met the majority of use cases, but not having that freedom is very frustrating.
      - lproven 3y ago
        I think it's instructive to consider the history of the M1 Macs here. In many ways they are essentially a sort of iPad with a keyboard and a USB port or 2 instead of an iPad or Apple Lightning connector. The GPU is very closely coupled to the CPU inside the SoC, as is the RAM and the soldered-in flash nonvolatile storage. You can't just boot them off USB. You can't just plug in extra drives. You can't add more memory or bigger SSDs without extremely elaborate desoldering of BGA parts. These are not "PCs with an Arm ISA chip". They're a whole computer, disks and all, in a single closed package, without all the buses and connectors of COTS x86 kit -- which is _why_ they are so much faster.
    - fragmede 3y ago
      You can choose to complain that it so doesn't support it natively, or you can just buy the aftermarket hardware that does support it and get on with your dual-head, non-pro life. Or upgrade your monitor to a single curved 5k ultra wide monitor, which is better than dual-head, imo.
Gud 3y ago
FreeBSD doesn’t have as big mess of a file system as many Linux distributions do, in my opinion.
- tharne 3y ago
  All the major BSDs have relatively clean file systems, at least compared to practically everything else out there.
- lproven 3y ago
  It is 100% as complicated and guided by historical principles that are, 50 years later, almost totally arbitrary. I use both. I see no improvement whatsoever in the BSD approach.
  - vogon_laureate 3y ago
    I like that userland is kept separate from base as much as possible, but agree it could be even better. I do think the BSDs have more coherency than Linux on the whole. Would be nice if we could simplify things down even further, but I suspect it just becomes one giant bikeshedding exercise, which is probably why it's easier to just cling on to hier https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier
  - Gud 3y ago
    It’s a mess, but at least they have the decency to install 3rd party software under /usr/local

s/Linux/Unix MacOS is better though.

by sedatk 3y ago

s/Linux/Unix MacOS is better though.

tomrod 3y ago

This is a joke, right? MacOS is all over the place?

rufugee 3y ago
Agreed...I fail to see how macOS is an improvement. I mean, you have /Applications, but you also have /Library, ~/Library, and so on.
- pavel_lishin 3y ago
  And /Applications, and /System/Applications, even though if you open them in Finder, you'll see the two combined.
  - reactordev 3y ago
    And ~/Applications, and /usr/bin, and /usr/local/bin, and homebrew, and Mac ports, tell me again how Mac is better?
    - sedatk 3y ago
      I just wasn’t aware of these issues. Let me rephrase it then: MacOS’ intentions were better. :)
      - tomrod 3y ago
        Eh............................. maybe? :)
wraptile 3y ago
I'd say that MacOS is even worse which is impressive given that Apple has the absolute control of the platform and seemingly infinite resources and could have refactored the mess at any point.
- tharne 3y ago
  > I'd say that MacOS is even worse which is impressive given that Apple has the absolute control of the platform and seemingly infinite resources and could have refactored the mess at any point. That's true, but also irrelevant. The file system can be a mess on MacOS because most MacOS users will never actually interact with the file system in any meaningful way. Apple obscures the file system away from its users by design. If you ask the average Mac user where on the computer their files are stored, they'll likely tell you something like, "They're all in the Photos app". On the other hand, even a fairly novice linux/unix user will almost certainly end up interacting with filesystem directly at some point, probably a lot.
- graemep 3y ago
  I would guess the RoI of refactoring (especially on a consumer OS) is pretty low though. The average person never sees this stuff. Linux is widely used as a server OS and it still has taken a long time for new appraoches to get traction.
jxdxbx 3y ago
I think the basic file system exposed to users in the Finder is pretty simple. /Applications, app bundles, etc. The Unix under the hood is just standard stuff and Apples hides away detritus like .plist files. And sandboxed apps have their own little stub filesystems too. Anyway I like the idea of GoboLinux a lot but kind of think GUIX, just abstracting it away might be the right approach.

29athrowaway 3y ago

macOS has pros and cons. The external monitor fiasco is a dealbreaker for me.

nusl 3y ago
External monitor fiasco? Limitations on monitor count by CPU?
- gigatexal 3y ago
  non pro versions of the M chip only support one external monitor... which is just silly
  - nusl 3y ago
    Yeah it's pretty silly. I guess Apple looked at their market and figured something out that met the majority of use cases, but not having that freedom is very frustrating.
    - lproven 3y ago
      I think it's instructive to consider the history of the M1 Macs here. In many ways they are essentially a sort of iPad with a keyboard and a USB port or 2 instead of an iPad or Apple Lightning connector. The GPU is very closely coupled to the CPU inside the SoC, as is the RAM and the soldered-in flash nonvolatile storage. You can't just boot them off USB. You can't just plug in extra drives. You can't add more memory or bigger SSDs without extremely elaborate desoldering of BGA parts. These are not "PCs with an Arm ISA chip". They're a whole computer, disks and all, in a single closed package, without all the buses and connectors of COTS x86 kit -- which is _why_ they are so much faster.
  - fragmede 3y ago
    You can choose to complain that it so doesn't support it natively, or you can just buy the aftermarket hardware that does support it and get on with your dual-head, non-pro life. Or upgrade your monitor to a single curved 5k ultra wide monitor, which is better than dual-head, imo.

Gud 3y ago

FreeBSD doesn’t have as big mess of a file system as many Linux distributions do, in my opinion.

tharne 3y ago
All the major BSDs have relatively clean file systems, at least compared to practically everything else out there.
lproven 3y ago
It is 100% as complicated and guided by historical principles that are, 50 years later, almost totally arbitrary. I use both. I see no improvement whatsoever in the BSD approach.
- vogon_laureate 3y ago
  I like that userland is kept separate from base as much as possible, but agree it could be even better. I do think the BSDs have more coherency than Linux on the whole. Would be nice if we could simplify things down even further, but I suspect it just becomes one giant bikeshedding exercise, which is probably why it's easier to just cling on to hier https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier
- Gud 3y ago
  It’s a mess, but at least they have the decency to install 3rd party software under /usr/local