Unlike him, I maxed both out at the time so they’d last me 7 years. Also, unlike him, I’ve been in the Apple ecosystem for 41 years, been in the Linux ecosystem for 29 years, been in the BSD ecosystem for 32 years, and been in the Windows ecosystem for 27 years.
So far, so good… they still do everything I want them to.
For anything else, I have my Linux server I can remote into. Both devices are still beefy enough to run VMs as needed for most tasks that won’t run on bare metal.
My takeaways? Apple still has the most reliable out of the box experience for hardware. I’ve run macOS, Windows, Linux and BSD as my base OS, and get along fine with all of them these days. But I always have containers and VMs running other OSes so I can use the best tool for the job (or at least the best tool for me).
I generally want a computer I can pick up and use to get a task done these days, without having to spend a few hours on the update and configure cycle first. My hardware on hand can’t handle it? That’s what networked compute is for — I can even set up a container locally and deploy it to beefier inline infrastructure if I need to.
Maybe if I were a PC gamer who always wanted to play the latest games, this setup wouldn’t work — but for my actual needs, it works.
My friend recently sold his Mac as he’s very accustomed to tinkering and MacOS either didn’t listen or broke. The ouf of the box experience is real but once you are ouf of this box (aka you need more customisation and configuration) it’s not enough. But of course very Linux approach to MacOS.
Apple still has the most reliable out of the box experience for hardware.
Out of curiosity, did you try an equivalent, e.g. Framework or Tuxedo or a SteamDeck, or only generic hardware, like a PC, then slapped on it a random distribution?
I don’t want to presume of your experiences and only to highlight that Apple out of the box experience better be flawless precisely because they have very limited hardware to support. In fact I would argue any distribution, even an obscure one, could fare very very well if it only had well known hardware (even if hundreds of them) supported, as opposed to an open and thus endless ecosystem.
Heh… like him, I have an M1 Pro and an iPhone 13.
Unlike him, I maxed both out at the time so they’d last me 7 years. Also, unlike him, I’ve been in the Apple ecosystem for 41 years, been in the Linux ecosystem for 29 years, been in the BSD ecosystem for 32 years, and been in the Windows ecosystem for 27 years.
So far, so good… they still do everything I want them to.
For anything else, I have my Linux server I can remote into. Both devices are still beefy enough to run VMs as needed for most tasks that won’t run on bare metal.
My takeaways? Apple still has the most reliable out of the box experience for hardware. I’ve run macOS, Windows, Linux and BSD as my base OS, and get along fine with all of them these days. But I always have containers and VMs running other OSes so I can use the best tool for the job (or at least the best tool for me).
I generally want a computer I can pick up and use to get a task done these days, without having to spend a few hours on the update and configure cycle first. My hardware on hand can’t handle it? That’s what networked compute is for — I can even set up a container locally and deploy it to beefier inline infrastructure if I need to.
Maybe if I were a PC gamer who always wanted to play the latest games, this setup wouldn’t work — but for my actual needs, it works.
My friend recently sold his Mac as he’s very accustomed to tinkering and MacOS either didn’t listen or broke. The ouf of the box experience is real but once you are ouf of this box (aka you need more customisation and configuration) it’s not enough. But of course very Linux approach to MacOS.
Out of curiosity, did you try an equivalent, e.g. Framework or Tuxedo or a SteamDeck, or only generic hardware, like a PC, then slapped on it a random distribution?
I don’t want to presume of your experiences and only to highlight that Apple out of the box experience better be flawless precisely because they have very limited hardware to support. In fact I would argue any distribution, even an obscure one, could fare very very well if it only had well known hardware (even if hundreds of them) supported, as opposed to an open and thus endless ecosystem.