You’ve only further convinced me further that apple cultists are beyond saving.
Android can be forked and modified, and at least a decent portion of the devices it runs on can have their bootloaders unlocked. Apple has never offered that functionality to iOS to users without the users taking it themselves.
As for the M6, you must be smoking the strongest shit in the world if you think that a specialized application benchmark is an indicator that the mac hardware is universally superior in all computing roles (try gaming on it if you would like to see what I mean).
Apple’s privacy standards are not a monolith by any means (Remember the deleted photos being restored incidents), and if you don’t think they will sell you out then I have a memecoin for you to invest in.
Also, the entire Asahi Linux project is largely made without endorsement or official documentation. It’s similar in circumstance to the people getting android to run on iPhones - possible but not supported or condoned.
Android can’t be forked properly anymore. It is barely opensource at that point.
AOSP? Google publishes it once a quarter, can’t contribute to it.
And not to mention that you have to use proprietary blobs, otherwise your phone just won’t run properly.
I’m not trying to put Google on a pedestal here (they are just as if not more unscrupulous as Apple in terms of business practices), but the ability for Android to be forked at all is what sets it apart from iOS. GrapheneOS is probably the best example of a forking project done right, and something Apple will never allow as an option for the user to install (or at the very least, will never provide the core resources needed to make a project like GrapheneOS work on iPhones).
As for the proprietary blobs, that’s incumbent upon all hardware manufacturers. We have to be a bit pragmatic to say that a completely libre phone is still largely a pipedream for the majority of the userbase (similar to how linux is often installed on proprietary hardware without libreboot), but there is a difference between providing proprietary blobs to be used for development, and holding them under lock and key forever.
Gaming on macOS is most certainly not held back by the hardware. I’m not here to refute most of your opinions, other than to say dismissing Apple Silicon is a profoundly naive take on things.
I don’t believe Apple Silicon as a whole should be dismissed, but I do think because it is a standard that is not in line with the rest of the industry, it’s hard for the hardware to have widespread adoption for practical computing in a lot of areas.
ARM as a whole seems to be plagued with the issue of trying to standardize an incredibly fragmented ecosystem, and Apple does not help things by trying to maintain their software moat throughout their development.
As an electrical engineering student, I can recognize the achievements made through the universally good aspects of the hardware (battery life, for instance). The parts I have issue with are mostly related to how Apple does business (lack of repairability and trying to keep most development features behind a fee or internal use only).
I see no reason that those issues will change without Apple being forced to, and as such I do not have faith in the platform for wider usecases.
There’s plenty of their business practices that it’s fair to critique. I share many of those critiques.
But saying ARM is out of line with the industry is such a gamer-centric take– and 10+ year old one at that.
I will concede there are some decisions of Apples that are indeed anti consumer, but I believe most others (especially hardware related) have some nuance. Take for example soldered RAM. Anti Apple zealots will claim it’s simply an anti-repairablity tactic to increase sales; Apple fanboys will claim some technical improvement that has some basis in fact. I’m of the opinion that the truth lies somewhere in between; there’s some truth to both.
The problem with supporting apple’s RAM soldering is they also solder storage and parts pair it, which has no basis in performance or longetivity. (Leading myself and others to believe that it is just planned obsolescence)
You misinterpreted my statement about ARM - ARM is widespread but has issues with being a unified platform (ARM devices are often specialized rather than general purpose), so it’s less of the architecture being the problem and more a double whammy of Apple-isms and ARM devices tending to be relegated to certain applications compared to x86.
You’ve only further convinced me further that apple cultists are beyond saving.
Android can be forked and modified, and at least a decent portion of the devices it runs on can have their bootloaders unlocked. Apple has never offered that functionality to iOS to users without the users taking it themselves.
As for the M6, you must be smoking the strongest shit in the world if you think that a specialized application benchmark is an indicator that the mac hardware is universally superior in all computing roles (try gaming on it if you would like to see what I mean).
Apple’s privacy standards are not a monolith by any means (Remember the deleted photos being restored incidents), and if you don’t think they will sell you out then I have a memecoin for you to invest in.
Also, the entire Asahi Linux project is largely made without endorsement or official documentation. It’s similar in circumstance to the people getting android to run on iPhones - possible but not supported or condoned.
Android can’t be forked properly anymore. It is barely opensource at that point.
AOSP? Google publishes it once a quarter, can’t contribute to it. And not to mention that you have to use proprietary blobs, otherwise your phone just won’t run properly.
I’m not trying to put Google on a pedestal here (they are just as if not more unscrupulous as Apple in terms of business practices), but the ability for Android to be forked at all is what sets it apart from iOS. GrapheneOS is probably the best example of a forking project done right, and something Apple will never allow as an option for the user to install (or at the very least, will never provide the core resources needed to make a project like GrapheneOS work on iPhones).
As for the proprietary blobs, that’s incumbent upon all hardware manufacturers. We have to be a bit pragmatic to say that a completely libre phone is still largely a pipedream for the majority of the userbase (similar to how linux is often installed on proprietary hardware without libreboot), but there is a difference between providing proprietary blobs to be used for development, and holding them under lock and key forever.
Gaming on macOS is most certainly not held back by the hardware. I’m not here to refute most of your opinions, other than to say dismissing Apple Silicon is a profoundly naive take on things.
I don’t believe Apple Silicon as a whole should be dismissed, but I do think because it is a standard that is not in line with the rest of the industry, it’s hard for the hardware to have widespread adoption for practical computing in a lot of areas.
ARM as a whole seems to be plagued with the issue of trying to standardize an incredibly fragmented ecosystem, and Apple does not help things by trying to maintain their software moat throughout their development.
As an electrical engineering student, I can recognize the achievements made through the universally good aspects of the hardware (battery life, for instance). The parts I have issue with are mostly related to how Apple does business (lack of repairability and trying to keep most development features behind a fee or internal use only).
I see no reason that those issues will change without Apple being forced to, and as such I do not have faith in the platform for wider usecases.
There’s plenty of their business practices that it’s fair to critique. I share many of those critiques.
But saying ARM is out of line with the industry is such a gamer-centric take– and 10+ year old one at that.
I will concede there are some decisions of Apples that are indeed anti consumer, but I believe most others (especially hardware related) have some nuance. Take for example soldered RAM. Anti Apple zealots will claim it’s simply an anti-repairablity tactic to increase sales; Apple fanboys will claim some technical improvement that has some basis in fact. I’m of the opinion that the truth lies somewhere in between; there’s some truth to both.
The problem with supporting apple’s RAM soldering is they also solder storage and parts pair it, which has no basis in performance or longetivity. (Leading myself and others to believe that it is just planned obsolescence)
You misinterpreted my statement about ARM - ARM is widespread but has issues with being a unified platform (ARM devices are often specialized rather than general purpose), so it’s less of the architecture being the problem and more a double whammy of Apple-isms and ARM devices tending to be relegated to certain applications compared to x86.