Comment by dmayle | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dmayle | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I understand the move from a business perspective. This will probably drastically lower their support costs (no more unknown hardware), increase their licensing revenue (no more compatible peripherals without Apple taking a cut) and drastically increase lock-in.

However, I am now watching from the sidelines, as Apple computers are no longer an option for me. I cut my teeth on DOS (3.1 maybe?), then Windows, and started using Linux occasionally in 1996. As I was weaning myself off of Microsoft platforms towards Linux full-time, Apple introduced the x86 Mac (2006).

At that time, it felt like Apple cared about the "engineers" again. (Whether that be software development, scientific computing, etc.). Previously, all of the designers I knew swore by Apple, but serious computing happened on Windows or Linux.

But finally, this was Unix, with a beautiful GUI, on the open platform I cared about. (I've written in assembly, written an assembler, my own boot sector, gui toolkit in the VGA/MCGA days, so I care about x86). From 2006-2019 my primary computer has always been a Mac of some kind (always Linux on the server, Mac on the desktop). The last couple of years, I've felt pushed away from the Mac (hardware limitations, keyboard issues, locking down of hardware/software) and started experimenting off-platform again.

Apple seems to have forgotten lessons from it's own history (whether that be the initial problems with the Lisa, or the great success of the first open/unix version of its OS, or how iPhone usage exploded with the comparative opening up of the platform for development).

Don't get me wrong, this isn't anti-ARM sentiment, I now run an ARM linux server alongside my x86 server cluster. If Apple releases an open ARM Macbook, I'll be truly surprised, because I think Apple has been saying for awhile now that it no longer cares about an open computing platform.

So, goodbye Apple, thank you for the good years. I hope that this is just another wave, and you'll come back to open computing in my lifetime.

But finally, this was Unix, with a beautiful GUI, on the open platform I cared about. (I've written in assembly, written an assembler, my own boot sector, gui toolkit in the VGA/MCGA days, so I care about x86).

Why do you think x86 is a more open platform than ARM?

All this whinging about Apple on HN is getting a bit tiring, there is rarely any substance to it.

> Why do you think x86 is a more open platform than ARM?

It's measurable. Whether in total number of computers sold with an unlocked bootloader on that platform, or percentage of computers with unlocked bootloaders on that platform.

Or, if not in terms of devices, measure in terms of drivers. The number of board types with working open source drivers (or, lacking that, at least open specifications on the hardware) is much higher on x86.

And the, finally, look at Apple hardware specifically. They started x86 with a completely open platform (w/ Windows drivers shipped), and have slowly been addiing proprietary hardware (and software) to the platform to lock it down. Since the x86 launch, Apple has shipped many ARM platforms, not one of which was open.

How is there no substance to it?

I heard people say the same stuff about Apple slowing down performance on iOS. People complained about it for months and years, and Apple fans and “Geniuses” gaslighted everybody by saying they were just imagining it, until we found out that Apple was actually doing it. The reason they did it was not bad, but the lack of transparency was.

We also saw the same thing with the keyboards. People complained about the terrible reliability and how it was overall just worse for years, and not until later, esp when Casey Johnston I believe documented her keyboard experience, people kept telling others it was a matter of preference and anecdote != data, to the point that Apple, after 3 revisions, basically went back to the earlier design.

The anti-Apple sentiment can be tiring, but a lot of it is driven by the rabid pro Apple sentiment that assumes nothing Apple does can be wrong.

Specifically, even if x86 is not more open than ARM, if you believe that Apples implementation of ARM would be more open than what they have right now, then you are clearly relying on faith that is not backed up by any evidence at all. Apple for the past decade or so has been on a steady and consistent path of locking things down on both iOS and MacOS and they will proudly tell you about it as well.

Again, I don’t even entirely disagree with their locking things down (I’ve seen how much more comfortable novices can be with iOS than MacOS, although, at the same time, I’ve seen the same novices grow with MacOS in terms of stuff they can do in ways I haven’t with iOS), but that doesn’t change the fact that it is entirely reasonable to assume that if Apple changes from 3rd party processors to in house ones they will likely lock things down further.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com