Personally, I see it as a user hostile change.
I honestly don't even know why you'd do that. I certainly have never heard of anyone doing that until now.
Never bothered with GPU passthrough however.
I run Catalina in a VM because it's the oldest macOS version that supports the APIs I'm developing against. I used to use KVM for virtualizing macOS, but VirtualBox[3] is more portable despite being much slower, so I use that now.
If you can use KVM with Virtio and VFIO passthrough, it's really fast. Linux just got Virtio-fs[4], too. I've had to pass boot options to the kernel to get the IOMMU to play nicely on the Mac, though, and I just don't have patience for that these days.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23607374
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25172499
I'm not personally affected, and my Apple outrage cup is already filled up with their sustained anti-repair pro-landfill stance.
If you actually do care about the environmental impact of your electronics, Greenpeace are the real deal. They look into the details from renewable energy use, eliminating toxic materials, average device lifetimes to reduce device churn and recyclability, there's one clear option out of the big device manufacturers and it's not even close.
https://www.fastcompany.com/40561811/greenpeace-to-apple-for...
My one criticism of the a Greenpeace report I think is that they don’t really put enough weight on average device working lifetime. It’s a direct multiplier on every other factor.
Not exactly, because other phones can be repaired which extends their life.
Apple's doesn't do board repair themselves, and blocks others from doing it as well. This means more components end up in land fills. Apple's own extended warranty program makes billions of dollars. And the repair industry itself is quite large - millions maybe hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Apple products clearly fail and need repair at some point or another.
I hope you'll join everyone else in demanding Apple stop opposing right to repair legislation.
“..researchers found that brand, an intangible property, is more important than repairability or memory size in extending the life of a product.”[0]
The article found that Apple phones last on average a year longer than Samsung’s.
[0]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181016142434.h...
Another estimate puts Apple device lifespans at 4 years 3 months.[1]
[1]https://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-ipad-mac-heres-how-long...
The average for all smartphones is estimated as from 2 to 3 years, but bear in mind that includes many Apple devices, so non Apple devices must average the low end of that.[2]
[2]https://www.coolblue.nl/en/advice/lifespan-smartphone.html
The fact is repairability simply isn’t a significant factor in environmental impact overall. I do completely accept that wanting it as an individual right is entirely reasonable. There are plenty of solid arguments in favour of repairability, but environmentalism isn’t one of them. If you care about the environment more than right to repair, Apple devices win by a very large margin.
>The fact is repairability simply isn’t a significant factor in environmental impact overall.
This is not a fact. Every single environmental group on this planet agrees that repair is significant component in reducing environmental impact. By definition it means fewer devices need to be re-purchased, fewer devices end up in landfills, more local repair jobs, more support-economy jobs, etc. I don't think I will be able to convince you otherwise. I will let you have the last word. Have a nice day :)
Not swayed by studies. Sheesh. If the best you can do is “Laaa, Laaa, I’m not listening”, I’m done.
My priors tell me that to a close approximation, this will prevent 0 people from installing MacOS. It's just "outrage porn".