3 ms·

Every time I see Apple flaunting Linux containers I can hardly consider it as anything but admitting defeat. It could easily be Darwin, if they still had the ca

by m132 4mo ago

Every time I see Apple flaunting Linux containers I can hardly consider it as anything but admitting defeat. It could easily be Darwin, if they still had the capacity.

groundzeros2015 4mo ago
Just change 30 years of internet history
- al_borland 4mo ago
  For what it's worth, the first web server was a NeXTcube, and NeXTSTEP was the foundation of macOS.
ahknight 4mo ago
[dead]
tw04 4mo ago
What is the alternative? They gave up the server market a decade ago and before that they barely actually supported it. If they were to support darwin containers, what would be the point? Literally nobody would build to it, Linux won.
- riffic 4mo ago
  > Literally nobody would build to it because nobody does ci/cd against macOS or iOS apps right?
  - tw04 4mo ago
    And what is the revenue stream tied to that ci/cd pipeline they aren’t capturing today? Apple would sell less hardware in order to…? There aren’t any app developers avoiding the Apple ecosystem because there aren’t Darwin containers. They don’t sell server hardware and by all accounts have no intention of ever reentering that space. So they’d spend a bunch of developer cycles to reduce their own revenue stream with no apparent upside beyond “goodwill” which they’ve never been overly concerned about.
    - m132 4mo ago
      Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the same logic, you could also say this whole containerization framework is of no use either. If they're investing resources into it regardless, they might at least try making something that Docker for macOS and co. haven't solved the same exact way already. Something that, due to their almost unhealthy obsession with "system integrity", only they can realistically make. Like native containers.
      - tw04 4mo ago
        Supporting the containerization framework lets them sell more laptops to Linux devs that may have otherwise bought a Dell or hp or insert brand to run Linux natively on or windows with WSL.
      - MBCook 4mo ago
        Containers are REALLY REALLY popular. This is a a great value add for developers on Mac who need to deal with Linux containers. Which is a ton of ‘em.
  - pjmlp 4mo ago
    They already support this scenario with XCode Cloud, it is only a market for those that don't want to pay Apple for it.
TheDong 4mo ago
Apple set itself up for defeat in the server and developer marketplace as soon as they decided macOS was proprietary code. Why would any serious developer use closed-source code they can't debug and modify? Especially for a production server? It's the same reason no serious developers or hackers use macOS, like part of the point of being a developer is being able to dig into the code at any layer and debug and fix things.
- vehemenz 4mo ago
  No offense, but serious developers don’t think this way at all.
  - bel8 4mo ago
    For server side, which I believe is the context here, Linux and open source are king. Even Microsoft gave up on Windows and just runs Linux most things except niche cases. Heck, even SQL Server which is expensive piece of machinery got ported to Linux and that's the default target now in their docs. With that said, one can't deny Apple's success on the b2c side of things so it feels wrong to call their strategy a failure.
    - pjmlp 4mo ago
      Except the cloud isn't open source, the ones that matter to developers that is. Which is why so many projects get burned with their license choices.
      - gf000 4mo ago
        I don't see how this comment is relevant to parent's point. Sure, cloud is proprietary. But it is Linux for the vast majority.
        pjmlp 4mo ago
        Which is an Pyrrhic victory, when Linus and other founders are long gone, most of this generation actually, what will subsist are proprietary forks, just like what happened with UNIX System V.
Danox 4mo ago
Darwin is open source still available (anyone who has the guts and talent) can pick up the gauntlet it’s been about 26 years. For example, those three engineers who left Apple to form Nuvia (to bad they didn’t want to do a OS to go along with hardware). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://github.com/PureDarwin/PureDarwin https://github.com/PureDarwin/PureDarwin https://www.reddit.com/r/MacOS/comments/1b75xlv/why_is_darwinxnu_open_source/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MacOS/comments/1b75xlv/why_is_darwi... https://x.com/LeakerApple/status/2018467873308786771 https://x.com/LeakerApple/status/2018467873308786771 Nuvia

by m132 4mo ago

Every time I see Apple flaunting Linux containers I can hardly consider it as anything but admitting defeat. It could easily be Darwin, if they still had the capacity.

groundzeros2015 4mo ago

Just change 30 years of internet history

al_borland 4mo ago
For what it's worth, the first web server was a NeXTcube, and NeXTSTEP was the foundation of macOS.

ahknight 4mo ago

[dead]

tw04 4mo ago

What is the alternative? They gave up the server market a decade ago and before that they barely actually supported it. If they were to support darwin containers, what would be the point? Literally nobody would build to it, Linux won.

riffic 4mo ago
> Literally nobody would build to it because nobody does ci/cd against macOS or iOS apps right?
- tw04 4mo ago
  And what is the revenue stream tied to that ci/cd pipeline they aren’t capturing today? Apple would sell less hardware in order to…? There aren’t any app developers avoiding the Apple ecosystem because there aren’t Darwin containers. They don’t sell server hardware and by all accounts have no intention of ever reentering that space. So they’d spend a bunch of developer cycles to reduce their own revenue stream with no apparent upside beyond “goodwill” which they’ve never been overly concerned about.
  - m132 4mo ago
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the same logic, you could also say this whole containerization framework is of no use either. If they're investing resources into it regardless, they might at least try making something that Docker for macOS and co. haven't solved the same exact way already. Something that, due to their almost unhealthy obsession with "system integrity", only they can realistically make. Like native containers.
    - tw04 4mo ago
      Supporting the containerization framework lets them sell more laptops to Linux devs that may have otherwise bought a Dell or hp or insert brand to run Linux natively on or windows with WSL.
    - MBCook 4mo ago
      Containers are REALLY REALLY popular. This is a a great value add for developers on Mac who need to deal with Linux containers. Which is a ton of ‘em.
- pjmlp 4mo ago
  They already support this scenario with XCode Cloud, it is only a market for those that don't want to pay Apple for it.

TheDong 4mo ago

Apple set itself up for defeat in the server and developer marketplace as soon as they decided macOS was proprietary code. Why would any serious developer use closed-source code they can't debug and modify? Especially for a production server? It's the same reason no serious developers or hackers use macOS, like part of the point of being a developer is being able to dig into the code at any layer and debug and fix things.

vehemenz 4mo ago
No offense, but serious developers don’t think this way at all.
- bel8 4mo ago
  For server side, which I believe is the context here, Linux and open source are king. Even Microsoft gave up on Windows and just runs Linux most things except niche cases. Heck, even SQL Server which is expensive piece of machinery got ported to Linux and that's the default target now in their docs. With that said, one can't deny Apple's success on the b2c side of things so it feels wrong to call their strategy a failure.
  - pjmlp 4mo ago
    Except the cloud isn't open source, the ones that matter to developers that is. Which is why so many projects get burned with their license choices.
    - gf000 4mo ago
      I don't see how this comment is relevant to parent's point. Sure, cloud is proprietary. But it is Linux for the vast majority.
      - pjmlp 4mo ago
        Which is an Pyrrhic victory, when Linus and other founders are long gone, most of this generation actually, what will subsist are proprietary forks, just like what happened with UNIX System V.

Danox 4mo ago

Darwin is open source still available (anyone who has the guts and talent) can pick up the gauntlet it’s been about 26 years. For example, those three engineers who left Apple to form Nuvia (to bad they didn’t want to do a OS to go along with hardware). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://github.com/PureDarwin/PureDarwin https://github.com/PureDarwin/PureDarwin https://www.reddit.com/r/MacOS/comments/1b75xlv/why_is_darwinxnu_open_source/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MacOS/comments/1b75xlv/why_is_darwi... https://x.com/LeakerApple/status/2018467873308786771 https://x.com/LeakerApple/status/2018467873308786771 Nuvia