The Impossible Port: MacOS | Hacker News Reader

The Impossible Port: MacOS

blog.ryujinx.org

276 pointswow00114 comments

For emulating vintage gaming hardware that's no longer available, one argument would be preservation of the media.

But what's the rationale (not rationalization) on running an emulation of the Nintendo Switch, when it's still commercially available?

In practice, is it usually because people want to play the games without paying for the hardware and software?

Preservation starts in the present, does it not?

I think one thing that's easy to forget, some of the old school emulation, like early SNES emulators, came about when the hardware was still kinda current or recent.

Yes, the timelines match up pretty well:

The SNES was released in Japan in 1990. The first SNES emulator in 1994 could run a few homebrews; I'd say SNES emulation proper started in perhaps 1996 with Snes96, but that's a judgement call.

The Switch was released in 2017. We are in 2022 now.

Nice observation. I hadn't realized how parallel that timeline is.

I just remember playing games on a pentium 2 in '98 that were published in '94.

And Nintendo 64 was released 1996-7, UltraHLE was 1999. And apparently early GBA emulation predated the GBA?

https://emulation.fandom.com/wiki/History_of_emulation#Game_...

iirc GBA emulation got an early head start due to leaked documentation (citation needed).

For the developer community, I think it's mostly in the challenge and the joy of solving it.

For the player community... I have a Switch, and I have zero desire to play my Switch games on anything but the Switch. After all, I already totally accept its reduced performance for its amazing convenience and controller situation. But I do appreciate the preservation aspect.

(Seriously, it's not just about handheld vs. docked. Just propping up my Switch, screen only, on a table or the edge of my couch, and playing with relaxed arms and a joy con in each hand, is already worth a ton to me.)

Yes, and the OLED version of the Switch finally also comes with a proper latch to prop it up.

Yes! I just replaced my old Switch with the OLED one.

At first I was wondering whether it would be a worthwhile upgrade, but I can now say, for me specifically at least, would do it again in a heartbeat. That screen is amazing, and the kickstand replacement is so much better…

I own a Nintendo Switch, and several games for it. I also own a Steam Deck, and I'd like to be able to play my Switch games on it so I don't have to carry two devices around. Emulation lets me do so.

Yes. Piracy is a thing people do sometimes. We can beat around the bush and grandstand or be honest about it.

If the emulator has good compatibility for the game you want to play, it's just a much better experience overall. Why play games at low resolutions and unstable framerates when an emulator can run them better at whatever resolution you want, on the same device you already use for most other things?

And yes, many people just don't want to pay for the game or console, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's not like Nintendo cares about the customer either anyway.

I don't think feeling snubbed by a business entitles you to their wares without paying, and the law would tend to agree with that.

Playing an emulator requires you to grab the keys from your purchased switch, and dump your games. I’m not going to pretend that a lot of people don’t do this, but this is how it’s recommended to use the emulator.

Even of those who don't, some of them may still have paid for the game they are downloading. Dumping the keys/games from your Switch requires hacking it, and some people are hesitant about doing that (you might brick your Switch, or Nintendo might ban it from their online services.) Or, you might only own a recent revision–which are far more difficult to hack than the first revisions were.

I never claimed I was legally entitled to it. They're free to stop me, if they can.

I disagree with the “better experience” overall. The massive advantage of the Switch is its convenience and form factor. I have a bunch of games that I could play with much better graphics on the versions bought from Steam that I also own, and I still vastly prefer to do so on the Switch.

Remember that convenience is subjective here. I don't travel regularly and have no interest in playing games in public, for me it's much more convenient to sit at my desk, wait 5 minutes for my game to download on a gigabit connection, grab my controller, open the emulator and launch the game, than it is to turn on my switch that needs its own dedicated dock plugged into my monitor, slowly navigate the eshop to find a game I want, wait 2 hours for it to download through the switch's exceptionally bad wifi connection, wait for it to load from the slow SD card, and finally play an ugly 720p 30fps game which is painful when I'm used to 1440p 144hz gaming.

I rarely play outside the house, and still I prefer my Switch, docked and undocked. Whether I just want to lie on the couch instead of sit on it, or at the table.

One button press and the Switch is off no matter what it was doing, one other button press and it seamlessly picks up again.

The (Ethernet-connected) dock is attached to my TV. All I need to do to play there is either plop the running Switch in, or press a button on the controller to turn it on. It downloads fast over my Gigabit Fiber Connection, and even if it wouldn’t I don’t buy a new game every day.

1440p 144Hz gaming is not worth the massive loss in convenience for me. Graphics get better all the time, it’s not what keeps me attached to a game. As said, the games that I own on Steam as well I rarely if ever play there.

That's more of a matter of personal opinion than convenience. I've noticed that people who prefer the Switch tend to see video games as quick time wasters that they play for 10 minutes at a time when their hands are free and don't give much thought to where or why they play them. Personally whenever I play games I prefer to sit down in a quiet room for hours at a time and dedicate all of my attention to them, while playing at a level of visual quality that's actually pleasing to the eyes.

    1440p 144Hz gaming is not worth the massive 
    loss in convenience for me. Graphics get better 
    all the time, it’s not what keeps me attached 
    to a game

So, game design and gameplay mechanics are the things for you?

Me too. Honestly, I prefer stylized/retro looks to Call of Duty style attempts at "realism" -- I think Wind Waker on Gamecube is a lot better looking quite honestly!

However... while I'm not overly concerned with graphic detail, I think that frame rates and refresh rates do rather directly affect gameplay.

(Of course, that's just my subjective opinion and it's not any more "correct" than yours!)

Yup. Sleep is killer. The Steam Deck got me playing and buying PC games again because it's sleep mode works unlike a normal PC. I COULD hop over to the PC 10 feet away but then I'd have to boot the whole game up, get the controller connected, etc. then if I want to do something else I have to wait for a save point or check point.

> the switch's exceptionally bad wifi connection

The switch can use usb Ethernet adapters; you might need to look up which chipsets are supported, but it supports an 10/100 adapter I already had, seems like it supports some 1G adapters, but I have < 100M to the internet, so 10/100 is plenty.

I'm aware but honestly I already have way too many cables running under my desk and I don't download games on my switch often enough to justify adding one more.

There are also reports of the network adapters keeping the Switch from going into the lowes power state, thus keeping it somewhat warm. I had the same reasons as above though to not buy an adapter: I buy new games only very infrequently, so wireless is good enough for me.

At one point I didn’t have a TV, so it was easier to play switch games on my desktop as it didn’t require plugging in all the cables for the switch. Was a just works experience.

My only issue is Bluetooth controllers seem to have lag but wired is fine.

I have absolutely no interest in the size or portability of the switch and bought mine solely to play exclusives (Mario/Zelda/etc). If those were available on PC outright i'd have never purchased the device

> And yes, many people just don't want to pay for the game or console, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I suppose that will work out for people until they too become successful, and people start to steal from them.

Piracy is not theft.

I default to the Switch in many cases due to emulation not being compatible in ways that could be significant depending on the game. But if a game plays well on yuzu or ryujinx? Even setting aside better graphical fidelity, the massive increase in sound quality playing on a Steam Deck compared to the Switch makes it absolutely worth it. If I can get away with playing my games on better hardware, I will.

Gaming PCs can be much more powerful than dedicated consoles these days. For example, Zelda BOTW on Switch is limited to at most 1600x900, but folks running it on their own machines with Cemu can run it at 4k. Some folks also like to try out custom shaders, mods, texture packs, etc. Example: Mario Kart 8 in 4k / raytraced - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIGpt26ocWU

What’s the point of Breath of the Wild at 4k?!

You can run it at higher than 30fps as well, although with some issues. It does make a difference in smoothness.

Everyone’s different, but to me it does not seem worth giving up the convenience of the Switch.

How about the steam deck then?

Tempting, but part of the draw of the Switch for me is its controller situation. I often play it propped up with the Joycons detached, one in each hand. Steam deck I would always have to hold in my hands, and can it be docked then?

I’ve thought about getting one, but I have a feeling the games that I want to play on a computer instead of my Switch won’t benefit.

You could achieve a similar setup with the Steam Deck by using a Bluetooth controller, either propped up as you do the Switch or plugged into a screen via its HDMI port.

JoyCons are 100% valid bluetooth controllers as well.

Convenience doesn’t matter much to some people. When I get a Switch, I doubt I’ll ever play it undocked. I preferentially play Nintendo DS games on the Wii U Virtual Console rather than on my 3DS as I find it much more comfortable.

Exactly. I wish they’d make a non-portable switch too, since they already made a non-sociable one. That I’d buy. I have no interest in playing games away from my sofa.

Remember the Super Game Boy?

I agree, but lots of people don’t

Convenience is relative to how the rest of your life is arranged. Some people have easy enough access to their computer that switching to a Switch would be less convenient.

> Everyone’s different, but to me it does not seem worth giving up the convenience of the Switch.

To me, the Switch's portability is irrelevant. I'm not really a "game on the go" guy, it's just the console I had to buy to play modern Mario and Metroid. It lives in its dock 99% of the time, only coming out when I go on vacation, and these days since I have a Steam Deck that will probably become 100% of the time.

When Nintendo announced the Switch Lite my immediate thought was how I'd love for them to do the exact opposite, give me a "Switch Heavy" that trades the screen and battery out for a faster SoC that can do 1080p instead of 720p and builds in all the features from the fancy dock that comes with the OLED model

I can honestly say that Ryujinx sold me on the Switch as well, back in the summer of 2020 I saw some news posts about the development of the emulator, grabbed it and a copy of Mario Maker 2, and proceeded to play through the entire single player campaign in one sitting, which made me decide to get a real one so I could get online and get the user created content. I set up a few auto-refreshers on various store web sites and in a week or so ended up getting an order confirmed on one.

It looks and runs better.

Pokemon Scarlet and Violet struggle on the Switch. I'd seriously consider switching to emulation on PC if it improved performance and reliability

What kind of question is this? What's the point of any game looking and running better?

I’m years behind on games, but if I have the choice to play an older (say, SNES) game on a PC emulator or on the Wii U (my newest console) Virtual Console, the PC emulator quality of life is miles better, even though I don’t particularly care about graphics.

I don’t have the time to spend hours grinding at games any more, but on an emulator, I can play every game with my preferred xbox elite controller, and map save state/load state/fast forward to paddles on the controller. It basically eliminates replaying of areas in games due to difficulty, since save/load-state makes death near-impossible, and any parts of the game that are progressing too slowly I can run at 10x speed.

I don't want to buy a new Switch, but I'm happy to buy games. I have one of the first Switches which have a bootloader exploit and a screen that got scratched up by the dock and both joycons with a nasty analog stick drift.

With Ryujinx and yuzu, I buy switch-exclusive games from eShop or the local games shop, dump them to my NAS, and stick them on my steamdeck and the machine whose display the nintendo switch dock used to be attached to. I've bought a lot more games from Nintendo once I was able to use my decent xbox controller, PC, etc, since I started doing this.

The nintendo switch is quite a fragile machine. Mine was already repaired twice.

So having a second option if it ends up unrepairable is a good thing imho. Nintendo won't refund my games if my switch die.

I think this may be an overly cynical take - there are already exploits / tools that would allow direct piracy on the Switch itself which would no doubt perform much better than any emulation.

It seems far more likely that this is done just for the curiosity of doing it.

There’s one fascinating outcome to me as a result of Nintendo essentially repeating two hardware generations (GameCube -> Wii, then Wii U -> Switch), which is that on the highest end gaming PCs, games for the Switch can and do run at much higher resolutions and framerates than the Switch itself is capable of. On the YouTube videos I’ve seen the games don’t appear as stable as native hardware, but they really do look tremendous. Especially Breath of the Wild.

People regularly pirate and violate licensing agreements without even the mildest cognitive dissonance despite knowing it is breaking the law or unethical.

Unethical? Because someone could have profited more?

Sure, whatever. That isn't the point.

I have dumped a few of my Switch games to play on the Steam Deck. It's a better experience overall, for the games that run well, and it means I can take only one console when I'm out.

I haven't downloaded a single pirate ROM since I own both the hardware and the software.

On a powerful PC, you can run some games at much better frame rates than on the Switch hardware as well.

Very nice!

I wonder how hard it'd be to get the Asahi Linux supported too :-)

EDIT: I see other ARM platforms are being discussed, too, like Nvidia Jetson here: https://github.com/Ryujinx/Ryujinx/issues/1884

Where do people go to get roms of games they own these days?

You aren't going to get any links to copyrighted content, but a Switch running CFW can dump game backups easily.

Unfortunately the window of Switch consoles sold that are softmoddable (afaik) was very narrow and early on, about the first ~18 months of the console's life (and mind, it is 5 years old now). Most units of the standard console are not softmoddable, nor are any of the Lite or OLED units. Hardware mods exist for all of them.

So I should keep/sell for alot my purchased-in-the-first-three-months switch?

Don't know the exact prices they're going for nowadays but if it's in good condition and you're willing to prove to the buyer that it's hackable, you can probably sell it for at least a bit more than what you originally paid for it.

I've been considering getting a second one for myself just in case my own first year console decides to kick the bucket (I already had to open it up to replace the joycon rails once)

Did you ever update it?

That shouldn’t matter… homebrew supports the latest firmware as long as you’re on the original hardware.

The ability to softmod those early Switches can't be patched out in software AFAIK, so it shouldn't matter what software version it's running

Oh cool. Thanks for that…off to go check mine..

There's no officially supported way of obtaining them. The closest thing is owning a console manufactured before mid-2018 and hacking it. But nobody really cares how you get the games anyway especially if you already own them, so just download them from somewhere.

I've done it, and won't pass negative judgment on anyone doing so, but being able to dump your own games actually feels like a bit of an accomplishment, it's just nice to not have to pirate your own games to use them in emulation, and it can open up preservation wider: It's possible that you own a revision of a game that was previously unknown, or maybe you just have a really obscure game card.

> It's possible that you own a revision of a game that was previously unknown, or maybe you just have a really obscure game card.

This isn't as common as it was in older consoles, thankfully. And we have groups of cool people working in the background to preserve perfect dumps of basically any game they can get their hands on.

For me, it's still fun regardless, and removes a lot of friction for knowing where to get games: from my own legit copies of said games! (for as frequently as sites/archives go down that host pirated copies... it's honestly worthwhile doing it myself)

I've dumped all my NES cartridges and even though they match with existing No-Intro entries, it's still fun and gives peace of mind enough that I'm not unknowingly holding onto a rare revision.

Yeah, I'm not arguing against that. I don't dump my games often but it's still good to have that freedom, makes me feel like I actually own the product I bought for once.

I'm happy to see that most games just work fine and do not rely on any weird proprietary Nvidia stuff to run.

You can just right click to open anyway without going through the settings.

Are people who own M1 Macs actually interested in playing games though? You'd think they would buy something more suitable for the job if they were.

Quite a sizeable crowd, actually. The M1 series is quite fine for gaming, it just requires vendors/authors producing for it.

A platform that nobody develops for isn't really a good platform for gaming. And I don't see why developers would bother when Apple is just going to break compatibility for their games in a few years unless they keep updating it.

The last compatibility break (i386) had 15 years of warning, although I still saw game developers complaining about being surprised afterward.

Apple doesn't just remove architecture support, they remove APIs too.

My last, and brief, foray into games development on MacOS was quickly soured by things breaking between point version updates. Even things as crucial and simple as pushing pixels onto the screen broke as Quartz APIs changed

That's generally true of any change that Apple makes. They telegraph the change directly, yet it's largely ignored, usually wilfully, and the caterwauling starts as soon as they take the action that they say they are going to take. Take the M-series transition. When M1 was announced (mid 2020), Cook said that they expected to complete the transition in 2 years. If you have a pre-2020 mac, expect the next macOS to be the last.

All of my favorite games are on macOS.

M1 Macs are cool and videogames are cool. I have bought exactly one game specifically because of Mac compatibility, so I doubt I'm the target demographic.

I am. I have no interest in getting a Windows PC just for gaming, so I make do with what's available (for the games that are not better played on my Switch anyway, it really is the ideal gaming device for me).

Sometimes it's a struggle to get it working, but the payoff of being able to play my strategy game or whatever on my same old laptop on the couch is well worth it to me.

Plus, sometime I'm amazed how well the games then run on battery and with only little fan noise at worst, despite Rosetta. Just yesterday I played XCOM2 at maxed out graphics settings for hours. (Partly because the DLC I played isn't on the Switch, and partly because I wanted to see what the game was like at full graphics.)

Nobody is buying them for the explicit purpose of playing games, but that doesn’t mean people who own them aren’t interested in games.

I’m sure there’s a lot of Mac owners who play games on PCs or consoles.

Yes - it's not a bad machine for people who want to play a few casual games. For example, on a whim I downloaded Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, a pretty beefy game from about 5 years ago, and it runs on my MacBook Pro on maximum settings with no trouble. Similarly things like Cities Skylines, KSP, Minecraft and so on work really well. It's not a gamer machine, but can clearly handle mid-tier games.

The only gaming I do on my M1 Mac is via Steam streaming from my PC.

I don’t really expect to change this, the setup works well for me - my gaming PC is connected to a TV and has a much higher TDP and more fans than my Mac (which has none, and will never have any.) The only games I stream/play on my Mac are those that aren’t convenient on a TV. (e.g. Civilization.)

It costs somewhat more to have two devices, but not as much more as one might expect, since RAM/SSD space/(maybe GPU?) are all much cheaper in a DIY desktop than in a Mac, so my Mac doesn’t need to be specced for games.

What would be great is for a MacBook to be able to run the game well (for playing remotely or airplanes), but when available have a local Mac Studio to improve the performance through streaming over wifi or something like it.

“Improving the performance” in an additive way rather than just entirely offloading the performance would probably be murderously difficult. It would be like SLI/Crossfire, but over wifi rather than a PCI Express bus.

Edge compute is ridiculously difficult, especially given how variable networking can be. Many game routines aren’t able to be efficiently asynchronous either.

There are lots of games available for the M1. The Mac Gaming Wiki has a pretty big (but not exhaustive) list of M1 compatible games: https://www.applegamingwiki.com/wiki/M1_compatible_games_mas...

It’s clearly not every game, but it’s a lot of games (many gaming hours, if you look at it that way), especially when you consider there are many many games available that aren’t on that list and that some percentage of those other games are also supported.

Or are you conflating the concept of “interested in playing games” with the concept of “must play every brand new game”? I’m pretty sure there are plenty of people like me who are interested in gaming but feel no compulsion to play the newest hottest games that you need a top of the line graphics card just to be able to run. There are plenty of good and great games out there that don’t have such strict high requirements. Even when I had a “more suitable” computer, I didn’t feel the need to buy a super powerful graphics card just so I could play some games since there were so many good games that didn’t need that.

I play a ton of stuff on my M1 iPad. My desktop is still an Intel Mac Pro, but I’ve played tons of games on it over the years. I occasionally play a AAA game on it when there’s a port, but those don’t interest me too much. I have Steam on the Mac and Apple Arcade on my Mac, iPhone, iPad, and AppleTV. I tend to avoid Steam when possible because it’s a terrible application, but some games are only available there. Otherwise, I lean towards Apple Arcade because it avoids all the loot boxes, in-app purchases and other crap that makes games so toxic. I’d love for even more games to be available on Apple’s devices, as would others I know.

The consistent support from a handful of major studios for the Mac platform suggests enough Mac users do play games to make those efforts profitable. I'm pretty sure the user base plays different games, on average, though. Going all the way back to the 80s, every version of Civilization and Simcity were ported, while FPSes have been more hit-and-miss.

Why not? I got an M1 Max for the RAM, but the relatively powerful GPU is a nice bonus. It's also kinda natural to want to use a general-purpose device you already own for more purposes than you intended when you were buying it.

The baseline M1 Mac Mini replaced my gaming desktop for a few months when it first came out. I've also used my M1 MacBook to play games like Factorio, Civilization, and Stellaris.

It certainly isn't going to be playing games at max settings, but it does a good enough job.

This title indicates that it's a port of Mac OS. Please put a properly descriptive title on your post.

Same title as the article.

So what? This is not a domain-specific Web site, so there's no context. The problem is compounded because the title presents "Mac OS" as the sole item, with no other mentioned.

If you're reading a publication about dentistry and there's an article called "What's next in our field?" it would not be appropriate to barf that same title out on a more general-interest Web site.

For example, you'd post "What's next in dentistry?" on this site. Clear?

The article says:

> Implementing ARM compatibility is a big-deal for normal software, and emulators are far from normal.

This is bullshit. ARM compatibility is trivial for normal software, and unless an emulator wants to leverage some sort of virtualization technology, emulators are perfectly normal software.

Stop pretending there’s some mystique to them. Everyone who’s gone through a reasonable undergraduate CS curriculum should have implemented an emulator as part of their computer architecture courses, just like everyone should have implemented an OS as part of their operating systems coursework.

As someone who is about to graduate from an undergrad CS program in the fall, apparently my curriculum isn’t reasonable? None of the classes I’ve taken, required or otherwise, have had us implement an emulator or an entire operating system. We’ve mostly focused on integrating with existing things e.g. writing Linux kernel modules, writing MIPS assembly, rather than creating new things. Probably the only notable exception I can think of was writing a tokenizer/parser/compiler over the course of CSE340, but none of the classes my college offers involve writing an OS from scratch (at least at the undergraduate level).

Emulators are not remotely normal software. If there's any static or dynamic binary translation at all, there's a lot of architecture-specific stuff you gotta know.

That's going into the realm of virtualisation, which the parent comment does note is different from "plain old emulation".

> Everyone who’s gone through a reasonable undergraduate CS curriculum should have

Tell me the equivalent of "I went to Harvard you peasant" without telling it.

He is right on that regard. In Spain, CS curricula have that on any university.

In Spain CS undergrads are writing their own OS? Do you have any examples (preferably in English)? I find this hard to believe.

Thumb mode.

Doesn't reflect my experience at all

People who have some reasonable understanding of emulators/interpreters/compilers/OSes/etc are small % of graduates.

Over 5 years of studying I'm not aware of single person that had decent idea of how to build such a thing (with an exception for one that was really interested in one of those topics)

Maybe at top3 schools it's better, but that's very small amount of people per year.

> Everyone who’s gone through a reasonable undergraduate CS curriculum should have implemented an emulator as part of their computer architecture courses, just like everyone should have implemented an OS as part of their operating systems coursework.

You have a very ambitious understanding of the rigor of the average CS program.

Just a suggestion to the authors - if you want to get people on the platform excited about your work, maybe don’t shit all over the platform. You did something great. Emphasize that. Leave the editorializing out. Yes, Apple does things differently than other manufacturers and sometimes that makes things more difficult for what your trying to do. Every platform has these issues, just in different places. Other than that, it looks like a really neat project. Best of luck!

yeah, no. sometimes apple just decides to reinvent the wheel instead of using the cross-platform universal standard that everyone else is using. being frustrated by this is both understandable and obvious. apple's obstinance and complete refusal to implement vulkan is a large reason why game developers don't release games for the mac. thank god some third party decided to make a vulkan translation layer because that is one of the primary reasons macos has any games at all.

Metal predates Vulkan by 2 years.

That doesn't make sense, most game are made with Unity and Unreal, which can quite easily package a Mac version, but those aren't coming to Mac either. Which AAA studio uses Vulkan anyway?

id, and that’s about it as far as I’m aware?

> instead of using the cross-platform universal standard that everyone else is using.

1. Metal predates Vulkan

2. The vast majority of gaming platforms either don't support Vulkan, or have it as a distant third-party option https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33742823

I felt this was a very knowledgeable, yet accessible, insight into the burdens they had to overcome to make it work.

Certainly it didn't feel like "shitting all over platform" to me. That conclusion sounds like something mostly fanboys / "ego connected to brand choice"-loyalists would make.

If I had solved those seemingly impossible problems, then I would like to show everyone, not downplay my work to please frail egos.

> Yes, Apple does things differently than other manufacturers and sometimes that makes things more difficult for what your trying to do. Every platform has these issues, just in different places.

Out of genuine curiosity what would compel you to write this?

They wrote an article about the issues they faced and you felt a need to "defend" Apple?

I'd love to hear why people feel some sort of "personal connection" to a brand.

I wrote it because I was interested in the project. I like hearing about technical challenges in graphics and overcoming them. But as I got into it, it wasn’t just a list of “we faced x, y, and z challenges, and here’s how we overcame them.” It was “because Apple are jerks, they didn’t do everything exactly like everyone else.” For example, they say:

“Even with all the hurdles, roadblocks and brick walls put in our way, we're finally back on Mac!”

Hurdles - sure, things are different and it’s a challenge. “Roadblocks” and “brick walls” say that the author believes Apple made things that way with an intention to keep them from writing their software. This isn’t like some copy protection that is literally trying to fool would-be hackers. It’s just a slightly different way of doing the same thing. (I’ve done ports from OpenGL to Metal, so I’m aware of many of the differences.)

It wasn’t even specifically about Apple. It was just the fact that I didn’t want to hear a list of personal grievances with a company they don’t like. I just wanted to understand the technical challenges and solutions without all the moaning and bitching. As I said, it’s pretty impressive on its own. No need to add a bunch of fluff that detracts from it. It just reads like somebody typing “Micro$oft” on Slashdot 20 years ago. Grow up already.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com