4 ms·
Sure but that's not really their point. They're not saying that Linux is a joke nor that it's useless; they're saying that the amount of people installing Linux
by smith7018 26d ago
Sure but that's not really their point. They're not saying that Linux is a joke nor that it's useless; they're saying that the amount of people installing Linux on their Macs is so small that it wouldn't make financial sense for Apple to support them. Knowing how much an engineer gets paid, even staffing a small team to supporting Linux would cost Apple a couple million each year. That's not even taking support into account.
- oblio 26d agoThat's not why they're avoiding it, though. They're avoiding it because installing Linux (or Windows, even), would actually decrease their income. I doubt people running Windows on Intel Macs were avid Apple Music subscribers.
- gjvc 26d agowould actually decrease their income per device, but they would still make money on the device. or are you saying apple devices are loss-leader prior the app store revenue ? that's the model taken to the extreme
- oblio 26d agoNo, they're not loss leaders, but in 2015 services were about 9% of Apple revenue. Now they're about 28%. It's fairly clear which direction the wind is blowing. Also, hardware - software integration pushes more hardware sales. People with iPhones are a lot more likely to buy Macs than people with Android phones. Same story for Airpods & co. I've also basically never seen an Apple keyboard used with non-Apple computers.
- dwaite 26d agoAlso Apple stops supporting the hardware and the software at the same time. The case that Linux support lets hardware be used longer is a harder sell when the company stops manufacturing/stocking parts for servicing at the point where someone would consider Linux.
- conradfr 26d agoThey had a revenue of $416 billion in 2025. That would be like you buying something at the dollar store.
- dwaite 26d agoIf Apple doubled their Mac revenue, the financial benefit of Linux would remain the same. That means it would then be effectively half as important for their business, but the operational challenges and risks remain the same. At some point the ongoing maintenance and support as well as coordination and organizational distraction mean it wouldn't get approved if internal engineers offered to start it off for free.