November 2022 Progress Report
asahilinux.org
asahilinux.org
Well, I've been perfectly happy with the "ancient" power management of my computers. It took a decade or two until suspend/resume actually _worked_ most of the time, and now all of that has been swapped out wholesale by a set of states that are at least an order of magnitude more complicated.
Apparently on newer chipsets, there is no such thing as "suspend to RAM" anymore. Instead, they rely on the OS to micro-manage the sleep states of all the various component that make up the system. I can see this being effective in smartphones where one vendor (Apple, Google) owns the whole stack of hardware, firmware, and software plus a large chunk of every third-party application by tightly controlling what code can run. They can actually run functional tests on the whole stack under varying conditions and have access to every part to debug issues.
Heck, it probably works great on Apple computers for the same reasons. But on general-purpose computers made up of components from dozens of manufacturers running dog-knows-what software and drivers, I don't think it can ever work well. There is already lots of evidence that these "modern" intermediate sleep states are causing real problems not only for Linux users (poor battery life while running, high battery drain while suspended) but also Windows users whose laptops bake themselves to death inside a backpack because a toolbar widget or something woke the system up at 3 a.m. and it then decided to run Windows Update.
When I suspend my laptop, I want to know, with _certainty_, that it will stay suspended until I physically open it. From everything I've been reading, newer laptops offer no such guarantee. The only way to know that your computer won't wake up on its own is by powering it completely down, like we did in the 1990s. Not looking forward to that.
I am all for more power-efficient computers but introducing these new sleep states while throwing out the old ones completely really feels like some backwards pageantry.
This. I want suspend/deep sleep. I don't mind slow wake; and I definitely don't want bluetooth, wifi, etc running while it's supposed to be idle. 90% of the issues with Windows on Laptops waking and causing them to overheat in backpacks is because of this bullshit half-sleep/smart-sleep they've started adding and forcing users to live with.
At least let me, as an informed person, choose to allow my laptop to suspend still.
It doesn’t significantly affect battery life; any time in your own life you’ve spent thinking about this would be better spent playing with your dog, or getting a dog so you can play with it.
That’s more well known for performance (where faster Ethernet interfaces do increasingly more offloading) but it works for power savings too.
That’s a reasonable thing to think about if you’re a wifi driver engineer. It’s not reasonable if you’re a hobbyist responsible for a single install in one laptop. It’s not really advancing the state of the art here.
That is the state I want, not their glorified hybrid S1. If you want it, go for it; no one is saying remove it, just re-enable S3/S4.
Also, you don't need to keep the machine actually awake to wake up fast; I have laptops that are... more than a decade old now, that wake so fast from S3 that they're active by the time you get the lid open.
It's funny, the answer is both yes and no. I have a funky Skylake CPU in my current travel laptop, and one of it's cool party tricks is that Linux can drop the CPU into suspend state just by limiting the CPU to it's lowest frequency. I've seen it drop all the way down to 400mhz when leaving it alone, which gives me a chuckle.
Totally useless for the "power nap" functionality you're thinking of, but ironically useful for certain other use-cases.
That being said, it's still not a huge power gain. I mostly do it to keep the system cool and the fan off.
The Linux kernel does all the PM stuff nowadays automatically afik. At least I didn't touch any of this settings for a long time and it just works. When not compiling anything or something that like, but surfing, editing text (in something besides IDEA), watching videos, or such "light tasks" the computer has only a few percent CPU load at max, the fan is off, it has room temperature, and runs for hours on battery.
I would also support what one of the siblings said: Explicitly pining the CPU to lower frequencies doesn't help much. For example web pages load much longer. I think a few hundred milliseconds at higher speed and then falling back into the idle mode doesn't cost much extra battery compared to up a few seconds of full CPU load at lower frequencies for a page load.
Yes, it safes battery to make the CPU slow. But than doing anything with the computer is also much slower and everything takes "forever" therefore. I'm not sure this is a net win when the battery lasts longer but you waste much more time waiting. A super slow computer feels worse in the end, imho.
Nope, the very first (and last) time that I suspended my Macbook and stuffed it in a backpack, it was hot to the touch when I went to go take it out. I looked online and everyone was just advising each other to power down every time they wanted to take their laptop anywhere. So no, Apple can't get it right either. FFS, will OS vendors please just let me hibernate to disk like the old days?
It is useful in laptops as a last ditch effort to avoid losing data when the battery dies, but that’s one reason phones don’t implement it even though their batteries die much more often.
on the other hand i got macos black screens of death for a year as the last stage of every reboot... apple is by far not flawless. but i cant imagine using windows as a daily driver. the shit to put up with is just endless. and it makes my eyes bleed
...If you don't really use the terminal at all, and don't mind a really slow "resume".
That’s valid. I don’t notice it, since I’m always ssh’d into a server.
> and don't mind a really slow "resume".
I remember wake from hibernate being pretty slow too. I can’t quantify it, but macOS boot feels like a similar delay to me.
Modern laptops don’t seem to have this capability unfortunately. Both my Mac and Linux machine (even with windows) doesn’t seem to last as long these days.
I’m a Windows user, and I can confirm. My HP ProBook 445 G8 laptop doesn’t support any of the proper S1-S3 sleep states.
Luckily, I discovered that before any hardware has failed due to overheating, by reading the output of `powercfg /availablesleepstates` console command. To workaround, I have set up the OS to hibernate when the lid is closed, instead of going to sleep.
Newer chipsets? Or AMD chipsets particularly?
I can't stand other platforms comparatively. On Linux, I can start my laptop and be productive in the time other platforms take _to wake up from suspend_. No thanks
> However, it does come with some caveats: the driver [...] may also reduce performance on some setups, since it is really meant to be used together with GPU acceleration (the simpledrm framebuffer driver has some software rendering optimizations that DCP lacks) and clients using the modern atomic-modeset and swap APIs, like Wayland compositors. It also has some limitations when used with legacy clients such as Xorg - in particular, there is no support for true VBlank interrupts, and it is unclear whether the hardware/firmware supports this at all. This breaks XFCE4’s window manager with compositing enabled. For these reasons, we are not enabling DCP by default for all users
Is there a reason they can't use the DCP driver to change display brightness without switching over to it entirely? It sounds like DCP and GPU acceleration probably ought to ship together—but IMO, changing display brightness is a must-have, in order to use a laptop comfortably in different ambient environments.
I assumed that Macs were mostly preferred because of their UX and relatively high-quality drivers/OS working well with sleep/wake. But if you put linux on there, you're giving all that up
Are there not any linux laptops out there with decent build quality and comparable perf/battery life?
Aside from the processor, there really isn't anything particularly compelling to me about the hardware. Apple's forte is how they integrate the whole hardware package with good software. The build quality is better than most but not especially great. That's not really saying much when you consider the low quality of so many others out there. The keyboards are terrible and I had serious reliability issues with the last couple Macs I used. The battery life probably comes as much from the OS as it does from the hardware. Support is generally acceptable if you pay for AppleCare, although you can sometimes end up waiting a couple weeks for certain repairs.
The Asahi team is doing great work, but I can't help but feel like Linux will always be a second class citizen on Apple hardware. I understand it still appeals to some people. It's not for me, though.
I'm using a ThinkPad now. It's ok. It's well supported in Linux and Lenovo still provides good support. I think the plan I paid for includes next day repairs. I like that it actually has a variety of ports unlike some of the others that cheap out. It's more repairable than most laptops out there. I will probably get a Framework next time or maybe System76. If I was into MacOS, I'd get a MacBook without a doubt, but I just don't like the OS very much anymore.
Yeah, but I find the processor pretty damn compelling.
And then the rest of the hardware is—if not remarkable—very solid, so the computer is an enticing package.
A bit offtopic, but I've been a bit annoyed lately that we have to treat the computer as a package. Why should my choice of keyboard (Brazilian ABNT2) and trackpad (I want three physical buttons) restrict my choices of CPU or screen?
The trackpad. I've tried a dozen laptops. Thinkpads work great for linux support, as do Dell XPS 13's and the X1 Carbons. But the trackpads on all those pale in comparison to the accuracy of an Apple Trackpad. It's accurate, precise, I can select text anywhere easily, double click works reliably and consistently, and the mouse feels like it is directed exactly where I want.
Here's a recent example of a linux distro using libinput: https://old.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/sp3yfe/libinput_...
There are some good suggestions for improvement in the comments, but the fact remains it is always more frustrating to use a trackpad on a non-apple device.
Have the state of trackpads changed in the last 6 months for other laptop vendors? If so I'll seriously consider switching but in my experience, even on Windows, those other laptops don't even come close to what Apple offers.
Other sources about the linux trackpad problems, I've not tried these changes but allegedly they're supposed to come close to what Apple offers:
https://www.gitclear.com/blog/linux_touchpad_update_december...
Now with the release of the AS machines, I hear the exact opposite sentiment very frequently, especially on techie sites. It’s certainly been an interesting reversal. I for one like both macOS and the AS hardware, and (minus the somewhat higher bugginess with recent releases) couldn’t be happier about the state of Macs.
None that I've ever seen, especially now compared to M1 Macs.
The hardware integration UX is the good part of Macs. The UI UX is inferior to Linux IMO. I'm not referring to any one DE in particular, just the fact that they are so customizable. I wish I could have Windowmaker again on hardware as rock solid as my MBP (and all the integration bits solved, i.e. audio, wi-fi, plug-n-play, multiple monitors, etc.).
It is certainly not a macbook but I do get 7-10 hours of battery life doing Rust development.
"Isn't it absurd that no vendors who support Linux are making Apple laptops?"
Again, the problem is that the hardware and the software are not optimized to work well with each other as much as Mac hardware and MacOS. Dell's fingerprint sensors do not work on Linux due to undocumented specs, and sleep/suspend doesn't work (the laptop will overheat in your backpack)
To exceed the Apple M1 / M2 specs with anyone else’s hardware, you need to give up on other specs that matter greatly to those of us who care about things like that.
The point is that not everyone cares as much about perf/watt and there are plenty of comparable computers which surpass Apple laptops in different areas.
For a laptop these specs hold considerable weight.
1. Does not indicate the amount of power used during the compilation (again, no one has equivalent performance / watt as the Apple Silicon chips).
2. Does not report the speed of the disks involved.
3. Does not report the amount, type, and speed of the RAM involved.
4. Does not report anything about the compilation environment (cross-compiling, running in an x86 VM, running in any VM, etc.)
Are there faster computers than Apple Silicon computers? Yup. Are there faster computers that have the same power and thermal specs? It’s possible, but I have yet to see a single benchmark that reports anything close which is available to most people.
It’s not just laptops, BTW. Amazon Graviton 2 machines run in server farms that consume less power and are cooler than their x86 equivalents.
Please stop being blinkered by your prejudices.
Absolutely no PC manufacturer matches the build quality, battery life, weight, thermal management, power consumption, and performance capability that the current round of Apple laptops provide. From my perspective, that means that there’s nothing acceptable or comparable.
In the year or so that I’ve had this Mac, I’ve heard the fan spin up a total of three times, and while I’m not doing heavy compiles often, there’s no other computer that I’ve owned with active cooling that is as quiet as this has been (using its passive cooling for all but those three times, all caused by runaway processes triggered by the problem in the chair).
> Modern micro-speakers require sophisticated software EQ to sound good, but they also require sophisticated safety models! The most critical safety parameter for micro-speakers is the temperature of the voice coil: you don’t want to melt the thing
They destroyed their own tweeter while testing!
> Assuming a constant resistance (which isn't true but it'll do for now), with the amp at 15.5 dBV, and input at -2dBFS, that's 13.5 dBV = 4.73 Vrms, current at 3.72Ω is 1.27 A. Almost exactly 6 W I was pumping into each tweeter.
> We have τ_Tvc = 3.9 and τ_Tmg = 70, and I think T_sett_vc=104.9 and T_sett_mg=129.5 are the thermal resistances in °C/W. That means that, if I'm mental mathing right, the tweeter voice coil would've reached >600°C after a few seconds, give or take (and longer as the magnet heats up).
> Yeah, no wonder I cooked it.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZFSE
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haruhiko_Okumura
[2] https://github.com/opensource-apple/kext_tools/blob/bc71a85/...
Yes, iPhones and iPad's don't allow it and Microsoft doesn't allow it on it's ARM based OS. (enforced secureboot; detailed slightly here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/SurfaceRT#Secure_Boot )
There was no expectation on my side that they would support it.
So, again, it was not looking positive.
Even with the T2 chip, it was possible to turn off Secure Boot 100% so you could boot whatever operating system you wanted.
Just as a disclaimer, I'm no Apple fanboy, I stopped using their software/OS even before I got rid of my last MacBook, and since 2018 or something haven't been using the hardware neither and only use a Mac for testing various software I develop. So I don't normally defend anything they are doing.
But right should be right; they have never previously tried to stop people from running whatever OS they want on their computer hardware so guessing they suddenly would start, feels like a pretty far-out guess.
It's a falsehood to say it was allowed.
It was possible but very much not how you seem to imply.
The reason I said it was a "worrisome trend" is because with the switch to M1: Apple would need to intentionally leave in a back-door if people had a chance of booting alternative operating systems.
Since they had not shown any interest in supporting alternative operating systems (outside of Bootcamp, which we knew was going away too) then it could be reasonably assumed that they would do no extra work to allow alternative operating systems at all.
Since it was extra work, and since they had not shown any care before.
I’m not sure if you’re deliberately missing the point either.
The point was that the trend seemed to be locked down devices more and more, not that it was impossible before; just that it was getting more and more difficult- and that it was already difficult on arm platforms.
This is exactly what is happening with Asahi linux. The ARM bootloader to install Linux, but they aren't helping the Asahi linux developers write a GPU driver. They are not locking the platform down, they are simply saying you can do what you want, but don't expect any help from us.
"What's a computer?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S5BLs51yDQ
I really don't know what to call iOS devices other than computers. Unless one of your requirements for "computer" is "ability to boot third party OSs"; I don't entirely disagree with that but it's a bit circulatory in this context.
So I was a bit surprised the following week when one of them showed up with an iPad! But, it had that attachable keyboard and trackpad Apple sells, and it really did work fine in the web-based environments we use.
Broadly speaking, I agree that most people think of Macs as computers and iPads as iPads, but I don't think that distinction is meaningful. Macs and iPads are marketed for most of the same things, and Apple has even begun touting how they have the same chips inside!
Any questions?
Apple spent significant engineering effort modifying their iOS bootloader to support third-party OSs—then neglected to tell anyone how to actually make a third-party OS. Whoops! Have fun!
And to be clear, this is absolutely preferable to Apple selling fully locked-down Macs. And, I realize that macOS will always be Apple's first priority, and that writing documentation takes effort.
But would it really kill Apple to connect Marcan to an engineer, who could allocate 30 minutes a week to answering questions? Is there some sort of legal liability involved? Security concerns? Brand safety?
The Asahi team is comprised of people who clearly enjoy reverse-engineering, and if everyone is having fun (and creating an awesome Linux port in the process), perhaps that's all that matters. But I still find Apple's choices confusing.
This tend to be the usual practice for much of what Apple does, release things with minimal documentation and let others figure out how it works.
Maybe it's just a sadist corporation who wants to see how far people are willing to go in order to get stuff working with their own hardware/software? Sometimes it certainly seems that way.
This is an ongoing problem that has prevented me from daily-driving MacOS since Catalina. Really a stance I wish Apple would revert, even Microsoft does a better job here than Apple.
How so?
Meanwhile from Microsoft:
that is the only true modern interop fs and they keep it hostage.
But why should it change? They've become the most profitable for sure, but they became that while ignoring docs etc. Why should they now change, considering it's been unquestionable proven that it doesn't matter for their financial success?
PS: i still don't understand how people some people call it largest, doesn't that adjective describe size...? It doesn't have the most employees, it doesn't have the most locations etc. It definitely has the largest pile of money, but that's still a very unfitting description for that, at least in my opinion, as that's usually called richest.
Because I'm not buying Macbooks anymore. In fact, over the past 5 years I've increasingly seen people develop on a dedicated Linux box or Linux VM. Apple's appeal is shrinking to developers, and it has been on a steady decline for the past 10 years. For all of MacOS' POSIX certification, it hasn't stopped people from trying to implement Linux just so they can run privacy-respecting software and benign GPU libraries that Apple refuses to officially support.
Their plan here isn't working. It might placate the 80% of users who don't care about this stuff, but the technical sentiment towards Apple's technologies is waning. I'm frustrated with WebKit, I'm frustrated with Swift, and everyone is frustrated with their 30% tax. Something has to give, and it's probably going to be Apple's facade of benevolence.
> It definitely has the largest pile of money, but that's still a very unfitting description for that, at least in my opinion.
All businesses are constrained by a set of limiting factors. The most important factor will always be capital, since you can trade it for any one of the lesser factors. Apple uses their 200 billion USD cash reserve to buy goodwill in the form of advertising, first-in-line tickets to TSMC and the finest lobbyists in the nation. They have every protection that lesser companies do not, which is why their valuation supersedes any other publicly or privately traded organization.
I'll stop calling them the biggest company when business stops revolving around money.
You're not but many people still are [0]. Many people started to see Apple's developer experience wane in previous years, true, but their Apple Silicon changed that. Their price/performance/battery life ratio is simply unbeatable for devs and anecdotally many people I know bought AS Macs where before they would've bought or used a Windows or Linux computer, including me.
There are some things I will agree with you on though, such as their 30% tax, as a mobile developer myself.
[0] 2021 Mac shipments grew twice as fast as overall PC shipments - https://9to5mac.com/2022/01/12/2021-mac-shipments-growth/
Apple Silicon only reverses their hardware quality (which was truly awful 2015-2018). Their software quality has still been in rapid decline since Mojave, and it's developer experience out-of-the-box is still marred with coreutils older than dinosaurs and increased restrictions around running software. I know a lot of developers that are happy with Apple Silicon, but I know exactly 0 developers that don't complain MacOS.
I used to use tools like Codemagic which ran macOS in the cloud for deploying mobile apps, so buying a MacBook wasn't necessarily a blocker for me.
Codemagic, from my understanding just does code-signing and deployment. I don't know how you did it, but a Mac would still be necessary for access to Xcode libraries, Objective-C, and iOS simulators.
Honestly speaking, Apples main success vector has always been it's marketing. It's never been benevolent, and if you ever thought it was... I'm afraid you've only witnessed first hand how effective they are at their job.
> I'll stop calling them the biggest company when business stops revolving around money.
I admit that I'm not a native speaker, but that's exactly the reason why that adjective confuses me so much.
Bigger/largest directly translates over but nobody would consider bigger to be better in a financial context. Profitability is the thing that's interesting, and to a lesser extend how rich is is.
Calling it biggest/largest doesn't (to me) say anything particularly interesting about it
So you have engineering teams with hacker ethos building "open" hardware, but Apple the company doesn't really give a shit and is not going to spend money on documentation for a feature the company doesn't care about.
Allowing an engineer to answer questions for half an hour a week would be practically a rounding error in terms of resources, and certainly less of a commitment than rewriting iBoot policy, which they already did.
They've just decided they don't want to be in the business of supporting Linux on Apple hardware.
Short of fully supporting Linux, the "Whoops! Have fun!" part would happen somewhere, no matter where the line was drawn.
Of course they could do more. But you and I shouldn't really expect to be able to tell Apple how to spend their money.
I don't, I just think Apple chose to draw the line in a perplexing location. I'd love to know what they were thinking.
Perhaps it was "targeted" for some internal skunkworks project to get Windows running on ARM Macs? Linux/BSD obviously got there first (at least in the open) and Microsoft is under a Qualcomm only contract for now
Microsoft can't directly request that Apple allow booting their OS, or work with them directly. But "leaving a spare key under the doormat" is a bit more innocent looking
That being said, ARM hardware is nowhere close to being cross-vendor interoperable[0] and going from Qualcomm to Apple Silicon would require a significant reverse-engineering effort on Microsoft's part. The "spare key under the doormat" is running Windows on ARM in a VM under macOS.
[0] Hell, most vendors don't even bother with generational interoperability. Each chip is it's own island. Apple Silicon is a very unique exception.
For Apple's hardware, the documentation exists. It's comprehensive. It's just not being released. (This is not the case for software.)
Source: Apple employee.
But this attitude is common in the hardware industry. This particular situation is a bit unusual because most of the time, Linux drivers either are developed with no support from the hardware vendor (something which wouldn't have been possible here due to secure boot) or are developed by the hardware vendor itself. But in the second case, it's common for no documentation to be released along with the driver, leaving independent parties to glean what they can from register names and other definitions in the source code. Or if documentation is released, it only covers the parts that drivers are supposed to access, excluding what would be needed to, say, write a custom firmware to replace the included blob.
That, and they don't give a crap about the open source community, unless it directly benefits them. They have zero incentive to help a group of hackers run Linux on their hardware that will only benefit a niche of a niche of users. Allocating any of their engineers' time to this project would ultimately result in a negative ROI.
TBH I'm surprised Asahi Linux hasn't received a C&D notice yet. Apple hasn't been this tolerant of hackintosh projects before, so at least they're turning a blind eye to this.
Why anyone would want to spend their free time working in such a hostile environment is beyond me, but hats off to the Asahi team for the dedication. The patience and talent required must be extraordinary.
These are people who have bought genuine Apple hardware - putting money in Apple's pocket. Then they want to write some custom software for their computer.
I don't see how this threatens Apple in any way. The intersection between general Apple users and those who want to run "a remix of Arch Linux ARM" on their $1000 hardware has to be pretty small anyway.
Actually it could open up a new market for Apple. I for one am quite impressed by Apple hardware, but have minimal interest in running their software. If Asahi becomes stable enough, I would seriously consider buying Apple.
Your second point is a good one, however.
Though Apple hasn't historically prosecuted individuals for such things, so this likely won't happen.
But it's even less likely they'll officially support, advertise, or even recognize this project in any way.
The difference is that jailbreaking compromises the security of iOS. Whereas some clever apple engineer has setup the M1 MacBooks such that each OS is completely isolated from each other (enforced by dis encryption and the Secure Enclave). The only thing a rogue linux install could do is delete macOS entirely. But there would be little incentive to do so. Installing malware or stealing data is completely blocked.
I would say, definitely. Apple does use third-party components as well, with presumably closed firmware/drivers.
I am missing why we think they are not doing so continuously, perhaps behind the scenes
Spiritually it's your device but their ego
Before, Firefox would bring the laptop to a crawl with ~200 tabs (Yeah, I know). Having PHPStorm open at the same time was a sure machine killer.
Just today I found myself casually with close to 350 tabs, while at the same time working in PHPStorm with no issues.
In my experience (My previous box was a Thinkpad T430 with 16 GB of RAM running Debian) linux is far from this good handling memory.
Also, the state management in MacOS is equal to no one. I have a Lenovo Thinkbook 15 (I7), and having to wait for it to restart when I open the lid is excruciating. I should put a "This is my pos laptop" on it.
Memory is still much faster than SSD but it is not as insanely faster as it was compared to spinning rust. And compression is a huge thing now, too.
But just to say it: I also freak out when I see someone with so many tabs open that it's like a little Joy Division cover on the top of their browser.
I understand the existential dread of closing a useful-or-interesting-but-unread tab. But isn't this what bookmarks were created to solve?
The other use case for bookmarks is creating a new tab and navigating to some website like a blank google doc, twitter, hacker news, etc. This is better handled by history. The most frequently used sites can show up on the new tab screen and show up in the results when you start typing in the URL bar.
I don't see any advantage to regular bookmarks for 99% of use cases. They seem to be a feature that exists due to limitations of hardware and browsers from the early days of the web. It's similar to YouTube. In the old days you had to subscribe to channels. Now YouTube is advanced enough to not require you to subscribe to anyone for it to give you content that you want.
It seems like for people with 50+ tabs, rate_of_addition > rate_of_closure.
Saving state is a fair a point, but I can't think of many read pages where that's important to me + I'd trust it to a browser.
As someone who has a lot of browser tabs, unfortunately no. It's often near impossible to remember the magic query that yielded a particular site as a result and the problem with bookmarks is the overhead that comes with organizing them — most tabs sit in an uncanny valley between long-term usefulness and disposability which would require frequent clean up passes through bookmarks to keep one's bookmarks in a reasonable state.
And as noted by others, these tabs are typically organized by both windows (e.g. one window for apple platform dev stuff, one for android dev, one for shopping, etc) as well as tab groups within those windows.
some of them I want to keep for "reasons" so every once in a while I do some cleaning.
Firefox has now that beautiful feature that originated in Chrome where each window has a drop down (To right, a rotated "greater than" - or "smaller than" - symbol pointing down) that lists all the tabs ina window, and I can close them from there.
So, cleaning time just got slimmed down greatly :)
But: I have currently on this Debian Testing box under KDE Unity, Rider, Sublime Merge (with a few hundred changed files), half a dozen Yakuake tabs, Kate as note pad, and around 30 Firefox windows (with maybe 5 to 6 thousand tabs)¹ open.
According to htop it uses only around 15 GB RAM.
(Hmm, actually something seems not OK when I look at it as there is still unused RAM, but htop says almost 9 days of uptime? And it still didn't fill all unused RAM with FS cache? Strange. Did something change in Linux 6.0? Maybe something really broke in Linux memory management? But I actually didn't notice anything unusual after the latest Kernel update.)
---
¹ Before someone asks: Yes, thousands of tabs. But don't ask further…
Firefox handles this just fine with the help of tree tabs and tab auto discard. Only "booting" Firefox in such a state takes some time (I guess over 1 min.); but when it runs it runs just fine. No issues.
As a side note, what I truly like about random comments like this is the app naming. Never ever had heard of Yakuake, but that looks seriously interesting (Tough luck I'm on MacOS now).
Fetching Kate as we speak.
I have an issue sorting tabs. I don't want to throw away research, and than never find some interesting things again. Actually having so much windows is already a good sign as it means I've sorted parts of the mess. But would still need to bookmark (and tag) stuff and this could take some time.
So I just "never" close tabs… (I close them after reading, and bookmarking and tagging the more interesting things; but I open new tabs faster than I could sort old ones… That's the problem.)
I think I had once even over 10k tabs open. But back than FF was much more unstable and it crashed in the end.
> Never ever had heard of Yakuake […]
It's one of the oldest KDE apps. I thing I was already there in version KDE 1. It's an drop-down console wrapper around `konsole-part`, the std. console "widget" in KDE. So it can do everything that Konsole (the default terminal in KDE) can do. But the window management is simpler with the drop-down approach.
Kate is the "dumb" desktop editor in KDE (besides KWrite, which I think nobody uses). But for a "dumb" editor it's quite powerful by now. And it's fast!
I don't do anything funky with it though. You can build half an IDE with it I think. But I never tried to get some LSP servers working with it. It's just my default "dumb" text editor.
I didn't know that there's a version for other OSes! Does it really work under macOS (or Windows)? I'm baffled to be honest. Also the webpage looks like Kate has much more features than I've seen. Even I use it for years. Interesting.
And I do think that's what you'd have to do, because unlike on Intel, macOS on Apple Silicon does not support software rendering.
macOS 12 VMs will run on Mac hardware that doesn't even exist yet, with GPU acceleration.