Hacker News Reader

Comment by ExoticPearTree | Hacker News Reader

Call me a hater, but the problem is Windows, not necessarily the hardware. I get it they want to stop the MacBook Pro, but: Windows is slow for no reason; it collects everything it can about the user; takes screenshots of whatever the user is doing; has ads - even though you pay for the OS; drivers are still a mess; hardware is made by different companies and no actual proper integration like Apple does. I could go on, but like someone here said: you have to pay me a hefty sum to use a Windows portable device ever again.

View on HN

Similarly on the higher end, I want to run linux on Apple Macbook laptops.

Isn't there Asahi Linux that boots on Apple Silicon? Never tried it, but people here on HN mention it from time to time.

There is but it lags behind the latest apple hardware.

Asahi only supports M1, M2, and alpha support for M3.

Not that I blame them for the lag, there's a lot of reversing work because apple doesn't document this stuff.

Leave the drivers/power management to the optimized OS and do your work in VM ?

This will not save you from things like this:

macOS unable to open any non-Apple application (twitter.com/lapcatsoftware)

2603 points by mattsolle on Nov 12, 2020 | 1292 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25074959

I do this nonstop using the UTM app in Apple Silicon virtualization, not QEMU, mode. I've done this from M2, M2 Max, and M5 machines, it basically wraps the hypervisor.framework (or the current name) and i had used Asahi on an M1 before that.

With UTM wrapping hypervisor.framework, i have a complete fullscreen desktop running Linux (i use fedora earlier but Arch the last several months) with full graphics as if it were on a dedicated host.

Because it's running in an Apple Silicon hypervisor, i have macos tahoe running concurrently on separate desktops: no dual booting unlike when i was using Asahi.

I haven't looked to see if i can access graphics hardware directly or if it's hidden behind a virtio layer in UTM's wrapping of the hypervisor.framewirk.

Are you able to play Steam games?

posted as a sibling to your comment, but you'd likely be interested in

https://scottjg.com/posts/2026-05-05-egpu-mac-gaming/

never tried so I don't know. it's easy for you to fire it up and try though

You can play 64-bit macOS Steam games using ... Steam for macOS. This works fine (at least until they kill Rosetta2), though you are still translating x86.

And most Windows Steam games (32- or 64-bit) via Crossover. (Expect about half the frame rate of a native ARM/Metal port at the same settings.)

But you may be asking whether you can run Proton well in a Linux VM. I think it would depend on having a good Vulkan implementation that works well with a hardware GPU, so I expect the answer is yes with an eGPU, no with the internal GPU.

> You can play 64-bit macOS Steam games using ... Steam for macOS

Assuming they are kept updated. Unfortunately, the way macOS works is that Apple expects developers to constantly update their apps to keep them working on newer macOS versions, and for games especially this is often not the case a few years after the release.

Worse yet, many titles are marked as working, but if you actually try to use them, various things break, e.g. hi-DPI.

Yes, Apple's notorious contempt for backward compatibility raises its ugly head again.

people have gotten this to work (for a sufficiently sketchy definition of work) for linux run in QEMU at least.

https://scottjg.com/posts/2026-05-05-egpu-mac-gaming/

in particular, the conclusion of that article is "You can run cyberpunk 2077 on a M4 macbook air w/ a 5090 eGPU".

That looks completely esoteric, incredible stuff.

It’s surprisingly good to do with full screen and the Apple hvm is very nice. Don’t let the experimental tag scare you.

> Call me a hater, but the problem is Windows, not necessarily the hardware.

Thing is, MacOS was heading the same way until the new chips saved it. The last few versions that were still running on Intel shouldn't have been as slow as they were.

Software is going to shit everywhere, it's just there's now M* equivalent for Windows and Intel.

All that to say: yes, I think you're spot on, the problem is sowftware, not hardware.

More specifically, the problem is software that the user has less and less control of every year. We have no control over the bloat Apple and Microsoft perpetually add to their operating systems. We just have to take it, or hardware and ecosystem leave us behind.

I wouldn't mind Windows if it were easy to rein it in, if I had granular control over what updates get applied and what gets trashed, and the ability to opt-out of updates. I wouldn't mind macOS if I could more easily control the UI bloat, preinstalled apps, and hundreds of background daemons/processes that are running that I never asked for.

I want to take my Operating Systems back to 2009 and have a version of Windows 7 and OSX Snow Leopard that runs on my modern computers and have all 3rd party apps work on those operating systems.

Or, just install Linux.

s/it's just there's now M* equivalent for Windows and Intel/it's just there's no M* equivalent for Windows and Intel

(no instead of now)

Apple is lucky so many talented devs have built alternatives and fixes for the sorry state of factory MacOS. The settings app, the finder app, spotlight, the general lack of innovation are just a few things that really should've been fixed about a trillion dollars ago.

It's gotten to the point that I've switched to omarchy and somehow this tiling-only, arch based distro, with big changes every ~2 months is still more sensible and just gets out my way better than MacOS in early 2026.

Don't think Windows is unique in having their long-time users being unhappy with them. MacOS really isn't any different.

I switched to Mac in 2013, with the launch of the 13" MBP Retina and haven't looked back. With the exception of some minor annoyances here and there, I did not feel the need to install an app to customize the MacOS experience. Using migration assistant from Mac to Mac over many laptops, most of the settings have been kept and did not really got on the bandwagon for all the new enhancements introduced in MacOS over the years. Like the desktop thingie where you can have your windows tiled on the side, or Stage Manager or whatever is called and so on.

Search in Finder sucks, but luckily I know how to use find in the terminal so it's a non-issue for me. And so on. As I said, minor annoyances.

There is no perfect OS to make everyone happy.

For me MacOS brings the best of two worlds: Windows (GUI, friendly apps, etc.) and Linux (terminal, access to *NIX tools, etc.). And with the stability of a UNIX based system. And now with the size of its market share, there are so many apps for Mac that were Windows only.

And before anyone starts, I used Linux as the main desktop from ~ 1999 to 2006 or so. And went through all the pain of configuring X, make the sound card work, compile my own kernel because reasons and so on. I have touched it sporadically since then but it still feels unpolished compared to MacOS.

I've stopped using Windows as a Microsoft fanboy (I use C# to put bread on my table). I loved Windows, I think it peaked at 8 (yeah I know, unpopular take!) because 10 started out niceish, but went downhill and has been going downhill since, and Windows 11 is similar, just downhill to the max.

I wish Microsoft would separate their marketing shenanigans from Windows more drastically and stop requiring online accounts. My OS should be able to fully install and function without any internet, and continue to do so.

I'll default to buying Macs and Linux first systems instead.

I do hope these new Nvidia laptops see Linux flavors, I'd love to buy one. Maybe System 76 might build one? Not sure.

You're the first person I've seen call out 10 as going downhill. What were your complaints about 10?

I migrated to macOS for development years ago and going back to Windows for development always felt gross, but I never had any issues with windows for entertainment/general productivity workflows. It's only once I tried 11 that I noped out for everything other than use as a Steam launcher.

10 was universally understood to be terrible, we're revising it to be good because we're comparing it with 11.

That was the start of telemetry, it was forced on people with an upgrade pop-over that if uncancelled would just upgrade your PC...

Windows 8 may have got rid of the start menu, and Windows 10 did bring it back, but in a weird hybrid form with "live tiles".

Home users lost the ability to defer or decline Windows Updates.

Windows 10 also shipped with pre-installed apps like Candy Crush, and later versions introduced adverts in the Start Menu...

> Windows 8 may have got rid of the start menu, and Windows 10 did bring it back, but in a weird hybrid form with "live tiles".

Windows 8 eventually caved and added it back in. I'll sound crazy, but I didn't mind it taking up the whole screen. Windows 8 gave me this interesting feeling that my OS was wrapping around an older version of Windows with Metro, and for whatever reason I loved it. I also did have a touch-screen laptop that I loved, hell I still have it... I bought it the week Windows 8 came out... and it runs Linux now.

> I noped out for everything other than use as a Steam launcher.

I definitely recommend you spend a weekend checking out either Ubuntu or EndeavourOS (Arch based) and install Steam, enable Proton for all games, and add the "bypass" for native games to play natively (I forget where this setting was) and you will be shocked how many games play on Linux just as well as they do on Windows, in some cases better.

> I think it peaked at 8

Practically every benchmark agrees with you, aside from the Metro start menu, it was solid.

I am old enough to declare it peaked with Windows 2000, which was mercifully a version of NT that crashed less and had a UI that was intended for serious use, rather than consumer market thrills.

Which is why it was on the market so briefly. Every commit since has been for the bottom line, not the user.

NT 4.0 did not crash that often if you rebooted it weekly (not uncommon at the time). And it had a simpler menu.

But I agree about W2000 being peak Windows.

Same with iOS 18, "Windows 2000" was great, then Apple went downhill with iOS 26 "Windows ME"

7 was amazing. I was checked out from 8 on. I hope MacOS isn't repeating the 8 mistake with their recent MacOS updates. They seem to want to converge on one OS for every platform, watering down the experience across the board

> hardware is made by different companies and no actual proper integration like Apple does

This is literally a Microsoft made hardware product which is extra integrated with Windows.

To be picky, it is Nvidia made hardware with Windows bolted on top. And who knows how many other hardware components whose drivers are shipped by their respective manufacturers. I wouldn't hold my breath on the quality of the final software product and user experience.

Microsoft knows this. Just now at the BUILD keynote they showed off some kind of dev edition of Windows that didn't have the widgets and crap, they're shipping coreutils (uutils) in windows, improving the terminal, etc.

It's too late, I think they should have done all of this a really long time ago, but at least they see that they are bleeding mind and marketshare and recognize why.

I ordered a ThinkPad about a year ago, and removing Windows 11 Pro from the configurator saved me a cool £110 ($150). Despite this ridiculous overpricing, the surprising thing is, Windows isn't even in the top 5 businesses at Microsoft any more, even Xbox makes more money.

> Call me a hater, but the problem is Windows...

You're not a hater, windows is hot garbage.

Windows is so damaged a this point, both in terms of rep and functionality, that microsoft might as well start form scratch with linux as the kernel. I am not even joking. And fire every mba that ever influenced the product.

I'm pretty sure if they threw the Windows 7 source in a room with a mighty (sufficiently advanced) LLM, the only instruction being "make this better, make no mistakes" (as in the meme), it'd still be better than the current Win11 situation. This thing is horribly broken. At least with LLMs, I get a "you're absolutely right" when I complain.

It's a bit of column A and a bit of column B. Of laptops I'd like to run Windows on, I'd definitely choose the latest MacBook. Of reasons I don't run Windows on all of my desktop hardware, it's mostly because it's loaded with bullshit.

> the latest MacBook

Which one?

Outside the macbook pro 16, almost every other macbook has pretty reasonable competition now. At least hardware wise, and excluding the raw single-thread performance of the SoC.

On the windows laptop side, the zephyrus g14 and g16 (among others) are honestly just as nice as what Apple sells on the high-end. And better in certain ways, like the keyboards.

> Outside the macbook pro 16, almost every other macbook has pretty reasonable competition now.

It depends on how you look at it. I've been a happy Air user since the launch of the M2 air. I did not find any Windows laptop comparable in build quality to match it. Not to mention performance. It is not a bash on Windows per se, but on the hardware manufacturers that make crappy plasticky laptops that bend wildly. And don't get me started on display quality.

The display quality of a 14 inch 1800p oled at 120Hz (asus, lenovo, dell all offer this) is honestly a league above the 60Hz IPS panel the air has had for way too long now.

In response time, vibrance, smoothness, contrast ratio, and even display size at the same overall weight.

This year, you're starting to see tandem oleds too, which are even better than those. Do some more research, and don't just blindly regurgitate statements. Display quality?? That's the one thing macbook airs have lost out on for many generations at this point.

My M2 has a Retina Display and I had zero issues with it. I am lost to what statements I regurgitated.

This: "don't get me started on display quality"

Suggesting that the windows alternatives are somehow behind in display quality. The macbook air's display is fine (but definitely not class leading) for the price, but even comparing the newest M5 airs to the M1 macbook pro 14, it's not nearly as premium.

It's a baseless comment that just derails actual technical comparison and discussion about how good laptop screens in general have gotten. Especially with OLEDs/miniLEDs/touchscreens/high-refresh screens all becoming increasingly widespread.

OK, let me rephrase my issues with Windows laptops:

- most displays that I've seen on Thinkpads (the ones used at work) are not that great

- For the ones with higher resolutions, Windows scaling makes the windows look weird. What I mean by this is that either the fonts are too small or too big. What I like about the retina displays is that the fonts look just right.

I hope this clears up what I meant by the previous comment.

Yes, I have the MacBook Pro 16. I'd probably get an Air over a Zephyrus unless I was into gaming (where x86 and the standard GPU APIs help a lot) though.

I do also have one of those AMD 395 laptops, and I like it for what it is, but I still wouldn't call it as comparable even though it takes a similar architecture to the Apple Silicon devices. Much better than a "normal" laptop for trying to reach that claim though.

windows 10 LTSC has none of these problems and every software i use on it runs faster than on my 2023 mac. but decruddibg up your install , which is a 5 minute and massgravel away, is only valid from one direction for apple fanboys

Reply on news.ycombinator.com