On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 15:24:00 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
And yet Apple found it necessary to put Linux on macOS, just to
get access to all that “UNIX” software that won’t actually run on >>>>> its “UNIX”?
No they didn't. The kennel, Darwin, is based on BSD not linux.
Precisely why they had to add the option for running an actual Linux
kernel, in a bag hanging off the side.
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple nor
anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and Microsoft obviously do,
there is no choice but Linux.
And then of course there is all that “Unix” software, most of which
seems designed for Linux and runs poorly if at all on Mac.
Most of that business stuff is cloud-based now.
We're talking desktop applications. They still need a compatible OS,
which most of the time isn't linux.
Most of that is cloud-based in the business world now. The “compatible OS” only needs to run a web browser, little more than that. A
chromebook would do the trick.
And that, of course, is Linux-based.
Also, as I mentioned before, note that AI development work
nowadays is happening predominantly or even exclusively on Linux.
There's been a huge demand for Macs and their huge unified memory
architecture not available elsewhere for training huge LLMs. Under
some workloads Apple Silicon is now efficient than nVidia.
All the high-end AI stuff continues to happen on Linux, though. Maybe
some folks are experimenting with Macs as a cut-price alternative.
You get what you pay for, I guess.
There’s a perception that Apple is falling behind the AI curve.
Apple is not in the same market and given recent swings seems to be
winning.
How can it “win” if it isn’t even in that market?
There is no “Apple Silicon” equivalent to an AI workstation like
the Spark DGX -- and not likely ever to be.
Agreed, but the M5 Max, which remember is a multipurpose processor, gives
it a very good run for its money with the bigger LLMs. It easily beats the >> VRAM restricted cards.
https://skorppio.com/blog/apple-m5-max-vs-nvidia-ai-deep-dive
Seems to be a handwaving-heavy article -- hard to find much in the way
of actual benchmarks, mostly a lot of “would be”, “could deliver”, “should shine” and other such weasel words.
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:19:00 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 21/08/2026 09:45, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple
nor anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and
Microsoft obviously do, there is no choice but Linux.
And then of course there is all that “Unix” software, most of which
seems designed for Linux and runs poorly if at all on Mac.
MacPorts has 41,567 active ports. Which of those run poorly on a
Mac?
Enough to force Apple to do something about it, obviously.
Have a look at this repository <https://hub.docker.com/> -- I
understand there is a reasonable choice of a few million container
images there. Just check to see if your little collection of MacPorts packages does a creditable job of rendering most of them unnecessary.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:19:00 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 21/08/2026 09:45, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple
nor anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and
Microsoft obviously do, there is no choice but Linux.
And then of course there is all that “Unix” software, most of
which seems designed for Linux and runs poorly if at all on Mac.
MacPorts has 41,567 active ports. Which of those run poorly on a
Mac?
Enough to force Apple to do something about it, obviously.
What exactly have Apple done?
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 15:24:00 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
And yet Apple found it necessary to put Linux on macOS, just to
get access to all that “UNIX” software that won’t actually run >>>>>> on its “UNIX”?
No they didn't. The kennel, Darwin, is based on BSD not linux.
Precisely why they had to add the option for running an actual Linux
kernel, in a bag hanging off the side.
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple nor
anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and Microsoft
obviously do,
Obviously? No one cares on a desktop other than niche users.
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
https://skorppio.com/blog/apple-m5-max-vs-nvidia-ai-deep-dive
Seems to be a handwaving-heavy article -- hard to find much in the way
of actual benchmarks, mostly a lot of “would be”, “could deliver”, >> “should shine” and other such weasel words.
lol. Short attention span much? Try looking at the tables of data.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 15:24:00 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
And yet Apple found it necessary to put Linux on macOS, just to
get access to all that “UNIX” software that won’t actually run >>>>>>> on its “UNIX”?
No they didn't. The kennel, Darwin, is based on BSD not linux.
Precisely why they had to add the option for running an actual Linux >>>>> kernel, in a bag hanging off the side.
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple nor
anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and Microsoft
obviously do,
Obviously? No one cares on a desktop other than niche users.
You’d think so, wouldn’t you? But niche stuff is best left to the third-party vendors, the niche suppliers, the -- what would you call
them -- minnows of the platform owner’s ecosystem. In terms of
cashflow, we would be talking peanuts -- at least from the viewpoint
of a trillion-dollar company.
Yet here we have Apple itself deeming the issue important enough to
offer its own branded product for doing the same sort of thing. Why
would such a massive and important corporation care about a “niche” market?
Obviously, because it isn’t so “niche” after all ...
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
https://skorppio.com/blog/apple-m5-max-vs-nvidia-ai-deep-dive
Seems to be a handwaving-heavy article -- hard to find much in the way
of actual benchmarks, mostly a lot of “would be”, “could deliver”, >>> “should shine” and other such weasel words.
lol. Short attention span much? Try looking at the tables of data.
You obviously didn’t did you? Else you would have noticed that they
are the kind of thing that impresses marketing types -- there wasn’t a single real-world benchmark among them.
Some more weasel words from the article: “would be a significant
advantage if the specs hold”, “If the M5 Max delivers on its specs”, “Based on the specifications” (i.e. not actual tests), “should be capable”, “should be suitable”, and, oh yes, “we’re preparing to receive ... as soon as they’re available”. So you see, as of the publication of the article, they haven’t actually done any tests yet.
If this doesn’t make it crystal-clear:
How these two platforms actually compare in real-world LLM
workloads is one of the most interesting unanswered questions in
edge AI hardware right now. We intend to find out.
That article dates from 5 months ago. They should have had enough time
to put all those rosy expectations to the test by now. Where is the
report on that?
In the meantime, it’s clear they haven’t a clue.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 15:24:00 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
And yet Apple found it necessary to put Linux on macOS, just to
get access to all that “UNIX” software that won’t actually run >>>>>>> on its “UNIX”?
No they didn't. The kennel, Darwin, is based on BSD not linux.
Precisely why they had to add the option for running an actual Linux >>>>> kernel, in a bag hanging off the side.
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple nor
anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and Microsoft
obviously do,
Obviously? No one cares on a desktop other than niche users.
You’d think so, wouldn’t you? But niche stuff is best left to the third-party vendors, the niche suppliers, the -- what would you call
them -- minnows of the platform owner’s ecosystem. In terms of
cashflow, we would be talking peanuts -- at least from the viewpoint
of a trillion-dollar company.
Yet here we have Apple itself deeming the issue important enough to
offer its own branded product for doing the same sort of thing.
Why
would such a massive and important corporation care about a “niche” market?
Obviously, because it isn’t so “niche” after all ...
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
Lawrence DOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:[...]
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
Your gratuitous snip where you were challenged to name applications with don't work on macOS is noted.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:19:00 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 21/08/2026 09:45, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple
nor anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and
Microsoft obviously do, there is no choice but Linux.
And then of course there is all that “Unix” software, most of
which seems designed for Linux and runs poorly if at all on Mac.
MacPorts has 41,567 active ports. Which of those run poorly on a
Mac?
Enough to force Apple to do something about it, obviously.
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
You can understand Microsoft having to do it, since their OS doesn’t
claim to be “Unix”. But Apple ...
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
On 21/08/2026 13:28, John Bokma wrote:
[..]
Yes. And people just work that way if they want containers on macOS, I
use it too. It works quite well although there is a slight overhead
spinning up a container (on my very old hardware) compared to on Linux.
Creating a local copy of Plurrrr using Docker on a Mac mini Late 2014:
❯ mp local-py
Building latest version of Plurrrr using Python via Docker
Number of days: 1860
Takes 32 seconds.
On 21/08/2026 18:48, John Bokma wrote:
On 21/08/2026 13:28, John Bokma wrote:
[..]
Yes. And people just work that way if they want containers on macOS,
I use it too. It works quite well although there is a slight overhead
spinning up a container (on my very old hardware) compared to on Linux.
Creating a local copy of Plurrrr using Docker on a Mac mini Late 2014:
❯ mp local-py
Building latest version of Plurrrr using Python via Docker
Number of days: 1860
Takes 32 seconds.
Just for the curious: on a GMKTec NucBox M6 Ultra AMD Ryzen™ 5 7640HS
Mini it takes about 5 seconds (!) to generate the 3056 HTML pages via Docker.
Can't wait for the Mac mini M6 (or M5).
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Neither is it anything like WSL2 nor is it there to run "UNIX" (sic)
software that won't run on macOS. It's simple an Apple Silicon native container solution.
On 22/08/2026 07:44, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:19:00 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 21/08/2026 09:45, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 04:10:34 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Nothing of the sort. There's no need for a linux kernel by Apple
nor anyone else.
But if you want access to container technology, and Apple and
Microsoft obviously do, there is no choice but Linux.
And then of course there is all that “Unix” software, most of which >>>> seems designed for Linux and runs poorly if at all on Mac.
MacPorts has 41,567 active ports. Which of those run poorly on a
Mac?
Enough to force Apple to do something about it, obviously.
So, you don't know.
Have a look at this repository <https://hub.docker.com/> -- I
understand there is a reasonable choice of a few million container
images there. Just check to see if your little collection of MacPorts
packages does a creditable job of rendering most of them unnecessary.
Those containers will run on macOS without an issue.
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
On 23/08/2026 03:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
Le sigh, why do you think there is docker on Linux Lawrence? Also
because the software apparently doesn't run so good natively?
There is no "need" for a linux kernel beyond being able to deploy
docker containers within docker.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 12:02:37 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Those containers will run on macOS without an issue.
Not through MacPorts, though. So not actually natively on Mac.
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas. The company that was so proud of its own innovations, is now reduced to copying wholesale from the Linux world.
Even its own value-add to that is doubtful; it is reducing its own
platform to little more than a vessel for containing Linux.
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
The company that was so proud of its own
innovations, is now reduced to copying wholesale from the Linux world.
Even its own value-add to that is doubtful; it is reducing its own
platform to little more than a vessel for containing Linux.
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Neither is it anything like WSL2 nor is it there to run "linux" (sic) software that won't run on macOS. It's simply an Apple Silicon native container solution. If you don't need to run containers then the vast majority of OSS applications available on linux will run just fine.
Like I've repeatedly said there is no *need * for containers for typical commandline junkies.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Neither is it anything like WSL2 nor is it there to run "linux" (sic) software that won't run on macOS. It's simply an Apple Silicon native container solution.
Apple sail their ship, the way they want to sail it. They're not in
a rush. Previous management aimed for results to be "magical".
When Microsoft made WSL (first cut) with no graphics, their
description/usage scenario, was particularly weak. The software may
have been released on a Friday, by Monday, someone had installed
XMing in Windows as an X server, and they had a browser running in
WSL. Even though WSL had no graphics. That entirely changed the
complexion of the launch, in that a seemingly useless thing, had
been rendered useful. It still didn't explain why they bothered, but
it did make something useful from it. Their follow-on of WSL2/WSLg
took advantage of how the users made use of it.
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:54:07 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Neither is it anything like WSL2 nor is it there to run "linux" (sic)
software that won't run on macOS. It's simply an Apple Silicon native
container solution.
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 05:45:54 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple sail their ship, the way they want to sail it. They're not in
a rush. Previous management aimed for results to be "magical".
And yet ...
When Microsoft made WSL (first cut) with no graphics, their
description/usage scenario, was particularly weak. The software may
have been released on a Friday, by Monday, someone had installed
XMing in Windows as an X server, and they had a browser running in
WSL. Even though WSL had no graphics. That entirely changed the
complexion of the launch, in that a seemingly useless thing, had
been rendered useful. It still didn't explain why they bothered, but
it did make something useful from it. Their follow-on of WSL2/WSLg
took advantage of how the users made use of it.
Nothing equivalent seems to have happened with Linux-on-Mac.
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely wasting
its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux market onto
the Mac could be entirely in vain.
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 14:10:34 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 23/08/2026 03:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
Le sigh, why do you think there is docker on Linux Lawrence? Also
because the software apparently doesn't run so good natively?
It *is* native Linux -- no VM involved.
Containers are isolation mechanisms
These are useful for resource-usage management, for security reasons,
and for rapid turnkey deployment of preinstalled, preconfigured
application suites.
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely wasting
its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux market onto
the Mac could be entirely in vain.
On 26/08/2026 09:03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 14:10:34 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 23/08/2026 03:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel to
the mix.
Le sigh, why do you think there is docker on Linux Lawrence? Also
because the software apparently doesn't run so good natively?
It *is* native Linux -- no VM involved.
But why is there a need to run containers on Linux?
Containers are isolation mechanisms
Exactly! And that's why "we" use them on macOS. And not because macports/homebrew/nix are not able to deliver native "Linux" software
for macOS.
[snip]
These are useful for resource-usage management, for security reasons,
and for rapid turnkey deployment of preinstalled, preconfigured
application suites.
Yup, and that's why "we" use them on macOS.
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely wasting
its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux market onto
the Mac could be entirely in vain.
On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:54:07 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:11:13 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:31 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
What exactly have Apple done?
Implement their own answer to Microsoft’s WSL2 -- their own
official mechanism for running Linux on Mac.
And yet you've shown no evidence of this.
You really have no clue??
<https://github.com/apple/container>
Neither is it anything like WSL2 nor is it there to run "linux" (sic)
software that won't run on macOS. It's simply an Apple Silicon native
container solution.
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
I have the feeling you don't have a clue what containers try to
solve.
If all that software runs flawlessly natively on Linux why does
Linux have containers?
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
Even if Apple adds nothing new, their "old" ideas are still so far
ahead of the curve that using Linux or Windows often leaves you with
software designed for the least common denominator.
Why not try to learn a bit about the systems you hate?
On Wed, 8/26/2026 10:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 05:45:54 -0400, Paul wrote:
When Microsoft made WSL (first cut) with no graphics, their
description/usage scenario, was particularly weak. The software
may have been released on a Friday, by Monday, someone had
installed XMing in Windows as an X server, and they had a browser
running in WSL. Even though WSL had no graphics. That entirely
changed the complexion of the launch, in that a seemingly useless
thing, had been rendered useful. It still didn't explain why they
bothered, but it did make something useful from it. Their
follow-on of WSL2/WSLg took advantage of how the users made use of
it.
Nothing equivalent seems to have happened with Linux-on-Mac.
When you do a fast prototype, it has minimal frippery, right ?
WSL was a first cut. WSL2 was the refinement.
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 12:05:39 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
I have the feeling you don't have a clue what containers try to
solve.
Why not talk to Apple and find out why they need to support them? You
folks are the Apple fans, how is it you are so out of touch with what
your own favourite company is doing?
If all that software runs flawlessly natively on Linux why does
Linux have containers?
So that your deployment building blocks are not just individual apps,
but entire software subsystem stacks.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 8/26/2026 10:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 05:45:54 -0400, Paul wrote:
When Microsoft made WSL (first cut) with no graphics, their
description/usage scenario, was particularly weak. The software
may have been released on a Friday, by Monday, someone had
installed XMing in Windows as an X server, and they had a browser
running in WSL. Even though WSL had no graphics. That entirely
changed the complexion of the launch, in that a seemingly useless
thing, had been rendered useful. It still didn't explain why they
bothered, but it did make something useful from it. Their
follow-on of WSL2/WSLg took advantage of how the users made use of
it.
Nothing equivalent seems to have happened with Linux-on-Mac.
When you do a fast prototype, it has minimal frippery, right ?
WSL was a first cut. WSL2 was the refinement.
No “refinement”: WSL2 was “OK, WSL1 won’t work, let’s abandon that approach and try again”.
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 8/26/2026 10:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 05:45:54 -0400, Paul wrote:
When Microsoft made WSL (first cut) with no graphics, their
description/usage scenario, was particularly weak. The software
may have been released on a Friday, by Monday, someone had
installed XMing in Windows as an X server, and they had a browser
running in WSL. Even though WSL had no graphics. That entirely
changed the complexion of the launch, in that a seemingly useless
thing, had been rendered useful. It still didn't explain why they
bothered, but it did make something useful from it. Their
follow-on of WSL2/WSLg took advantage of how the users made use of
it.
Nothing equivalent seems to have happened with Linux-on-Mac.
When you do a fast prototype, it has minimal frippery, right ?
WSL was a first cut. WSL2 was the refinement.
No “refinement”: WSL2 was “OK, WSL1 won’t work, let’s abandon that approach and try again”.
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
Actually, that’s an old tradition in the
Unix world, which Apple has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn’t deserve the name “Unix”, trademark or no trademark.
Even if Apple adds nothing new, their "old" ideas are still so far
ahead of the curve that using Linux or Windows often leaves you with
software designed for the least common denominator.
And yet, they have to add the ability to run Linux on their platform,
because native macOS is no longer enough.
Oh look, there’s actually a Mac user trying to compete here <https://www.reddit.com/r/unixporn/>.
Why not try to learn a bit about the systems you hate?
Who says I “hate” inferior systems? I just point out their--
inferiority.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 12:05:39 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
I have the feeling you don't have a clue what containers try to
solve.
Why not talk to Apple and find out why they need to support them?
You
folks are the Apple fans, how is it you are so out of touch with what
your own favourite company is doing?
If all that software runs flawlessly natively on Linux why does
Linux have containers?
So that your deployment building blocks are not just individual apps,
but entire software subsystem stacks.
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:[...]
Why not try to learn a bit about the systems you hate?
Who says I 'hate' inferior systems? I just point out their
inferiority.
On 28/08/2026 08:45, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 12:05:39 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
I have the feeling you don't have a clue what containers try to
solve.
Why not talk to Apple and find out why they need to support them? You
folks are the Apple fans, how is it you are so out of touch with what
your own favourite company is doing?
Containers were supported already for more than a decade on macOS.
If all that software runs flawlessly natively on Linux why does
Linux have containers?
So that your deployment building blocks are not just individual apps,
but entire software subsystem stacks.
And exactly for the same reason containers are used on macOS. Not
because macports/homebrew/nix are severely lacking in their support of
native "Linux" software.
On 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS, >> hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
It's not that, it's that having a Linux environment gives a uniquely pertinent way to work with software for it, the Unix software does work
under macOS natively though.
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS. Now you are flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are complaining about does not exist.
You sound deeply jealous of what macOS offers.
On 8/28/2026 9:17 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS. Now you are
flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are complaining about does not >> exist.
You sound deeply jealous of what macOS offers.
The irony is that he is critiquing the best part of macOS as if it's nonexistent - if he were attacking the Apple-centric parts, I'd likely
agree with a lot of it. The Unix side is immensely cool, if unnecessary
in a world that has Linux for free on almost any hardware.
On Aug 28, 2026 at 1:51:36 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote <116ssco$2mrp1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/28/2026 9:17 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS. Now you are
flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are complaining about does not >>> exist.
You sound deeply jealous of what macOS offers.
The irony is that he is critiquing the best part of macOS as if it's
nonexistent - if he were attacking the Apple-centric parts, I'd likely
agree with a lot of it. The Unix side is immensely cool, if unnecessary
in a world that has Linux for free on almost any hardware.
I like much of the "front end" -- but I get not all do and appreciate much of what Linux offers. I just do not get the pissing contests and the ego-ties to an OS or system. You hate macOS. I like it. OK. And? I have no issue with people having different preferences.
On 8/28/2026 5:43 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 28, 2026 at 1:51:36 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<116ssco$2mrp1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/28/2026 9:17 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS. Now you are
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done. >>>>
flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are complaining about does not >>>> exist.
You sound deeply jealous of what macOS offers.
The irony is that he is critiquing the best part of macOS as if it's
nonexistent - if he were attacking the Apple-centric parts, I'd likely
agree with a lot of it. The Unix side is immensely cool, if unnecessary >>> in a world that has Linux for free on almost any hardware.
I like much of the "front end" -- but I get not all do and appreciate much of
what Linux offers. I just do not get the pissing contests and the ego-ties to
an OS or system. You hate macOS. I like it. OK. And? I have no issue with
people having different preferences.
Right, the only reason I don't want macOS is that it requires Apple
hardware and is superfluous to using Linux, if it were about running
Unix software, it'd be great. Lawrence has this need to make Linux a
better Unix, which in limited respects it could be, but not for the
reasons he's suggesting.
On Aug 28, 2026 at 2:55:21 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote <116t049$2o54a$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/28/2026 5:43 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 28, 2026 at 1:51:36 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<116ssco$2mrp1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/28/2026 9:17 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS. Now you are
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done. >>>>>
flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are complaining about does not
exist.
You sound deeply jealous of what macOS offers.
The irony is that he is critiquing the best part of macOS as if it's
nonexistent - if he were attacking the Apple-centric parts, I'd likely >>>> agree with a lot of it. The Unix side is immensely cool, if unnecessary >>>> in a world that has Linux for free on almost any hardware.
I like much of the "front end" -- but I get not all do and appreciate much of
what Linux offers. I just do not get the pissing contests and the ego-ties to
an OS or system. You hate macOS. I like it. OK. And? I have no issue with >>> people having different preferences.
Right, the only reason I don't want macOS is that it requires Apple
hardware and is superfluous to using Linux, if it were about running
Unix software, it'd be great. Lawrence has this need to make Linux a
better Unix, which in limited respects it could be, but not for the
reasons he's suggesting.
His main complaint seems to be macOS users use open source... which is bizarre
on multiple levels.
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use
LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate
voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS, >> hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD layer but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
On 8/28/2026 11:39 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use
LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate
voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely >> agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are >> times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle >> them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
Oddly enough, if I were using a Mac, MS Office is one of the first
things I'd get. Whereas under Winblows all I want is Outlook (and
OneDrive and Copilot which come with 365). I don't mind that I have
Word and Excel there, for comparison, but I'd be far more likely never
to use either of them, but LO's stuff.
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:54:45 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116rbbl$23cfl$4@dont-email.me>:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
Have you considered leaning what Unix is?
On 26/08/2026 09:03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 14:10:34 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 23/08/2026 03:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:46:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
If you want to run *nix software natively, it's just as easy on
macOS as it is on linux.
Apparently not, else there would be no need to add a Linux kernel
to the mix.
Le sigh, why do you think there is docker on Linux Lawrence? Also
because the software apparently doesn't run so good natively?
It *is* native Linux -- no VM involved.
But why is there a need to run containers on Linux?
Containers are isolation mechanisms
Exactly! And that's why "we" use them on macOS.
And not because macports/homebrew/nix are not able to deliver native
"Linux" software for macOS.
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD layer but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use >>>> LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate
voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely
agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are
times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle >>> them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
Oddly enough, if I were using a Mac, MS Office is one of the first
things I'd get. Whereas under Winblows all I want is Outlook (and
OneDrive and Copilot which come with 365). I don't mind that I have
Word and Excel there, for comparison, but I'd be far more likely never
to use either of them, but LO's stuff.
I sometimes miss Excel -- Numbers does some things better but is lacking a LOT
of what Excel offers.
Pages serves me well... cannot think of the last time I
really missed Word... BUT the sidebar UI on Pages can be clunky when you are jumping from setting to setting. When I use LibreOffice it feels like it does a good job but lacks a LOT of polish and makes me jump through hoops. It DOES handle a lot of file types and in that is a great converter for me.
I did just move a client to it. She did not want to keep buying MS Office and was having issues with it crashing anyway. If LO does not work out for her I will work on what MS Office is doing wrong. Do not even know the full symptoms
she is having.
On 28 Aug 2026 13:10:20 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:54:45 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rbbl$23cfl$4@dont-email.me>:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
Have you considered leaning what Unix is?
Try straightening up. “Leaning”, particularly on someone like Apple,
is just setting yourself up for a (literal) fall.
On 28 Aug 2026 13:10:20 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:54:45 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rbbl$23cfl$4@dont-email.me>:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
Have you considered leaning what Unix is?
Try straightening up. “Leaning”, particularly on someone like Apple,
is just setting yourself up for a (literal) fall.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
On 8/28/2026 11:39 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use
LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate
voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely >> agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are >> times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle >> them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
Oddly enough, if I were using a Mac, MS Office is one of the first
things I'd get. Whereas under Winblows all I want is Outlook (and
OneDrive and Copilot which come with 365). I don't mind that I have
Word and Excel there, for comparison, but I'd be far more likely never
to use either of them, but LO's stuff.
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/28/2026 11:39 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use >>>> LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate
voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely
agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are
times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle >>> them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
Oddly enough, if I were using a Mac, MS Office is one of the first
things I'd get. Whereas under Winblows all I want is Outlook (and
OneDrive and Copilot which come with 365). I don't mind that I have
Word and Excel there, for comparison, but I'd be far more likely never
to use either of them, but LO's stuff.
For me that's the biggest strength of macOS. You get to run the software everyone else is using and can work with while having a full blown Unix machine with all the OSS goodness that comes with it.
Sadly I'm spending much more time in the MS side of things than the
Terminal than I used to. So, I could realistically work with Windows and WSL2, but I just prefer macOS.
Do you have containers for your macports/homebrew/nix packages?
Do you see my point yet?
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD layer but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:[...]
Why not try to learn a bit about the systems you hate?
Who says I 'hate' inferior systems? I just point out their
inferiority.
That's your zealotry talking. They are not 'inferior', they are *different*.
Does the fact that Linux can't run Windows software, make it
'inferior'? No, of course not, it's *different*. And the same the other
way around. And the same for macOS. And the same for all other
permutations.
And yes, from what you post, you *do* hate anything but Linux. Heavens
know why.
I second Brock's advice, but I'm sure you'll not take it. Your loss.
On Fri, 8/28/2026 9:45 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Why not try to learn a bit about the systems you hate?
Who says I 'hate' inferior systems? I just point out their
inferiority.
That's your zealotry talking. They are not 'inferior', they are
*different*.
Does the fact that Linux can't run Windows software, make it
'inferior'? No, of course not, it's *different*. And the same the other
way around. And the same for macOS. And the same for all other
permutations.
And yes, from what you post, you *do* hate anything but Linux. Heavens
know why.
I second Brock's advice, but I'm sure you'll not take it. Your loss.
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
On Sat, 8/29/2026 12:17 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But >>>> it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are
inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD >>> layer but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important
directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute
these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for
attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header >>> files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. >>> (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
I used to hang out on an enthusiast Apple site. Yes, they
know stuff like that is there. The distribution of "user types"
was different back then. Social media has ruined the planet.
Now people worry about the color of some little dot, on
their posting. They're not even aware they are on a computer
any more.
I didn't even use iTunes on my machine, considering that horrible
thing to be just so bad.
People lost access to their materials,
by making mistakes with it (iTunes early on). I was not interested
in this style of live action roulette. It's a wee bit different
as an application today. I still would not use it, just out of
habit :-)
Paul--
On 8/29/2026 12:17 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use >>>>> LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate >>>>> voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely
agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are
times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle >>>> them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
Oddly enough, if I were using a Mac, MS Office is one of the first
things I'd get. Whereas under Winblows all I want is Outlook (and
OneDrive and Copilot which come with 365). I don't mind that I have
Word and Excel there, for comparison, but I'd be far more likely never
to use either of them, but LO's stuff.
I sometimes miss Excel -- Numbers does some things better but is lacking a LOT
of what Excel offers.
I actually *might* end up using Excel, if there were some feature LO
Calc lacked, I don't know nearly enough about LO's app to really say,
but I would tend to be surprised if it lacked anything necessary.
Pages serves me well... cannot think of the last time I
really missed Word... BUT the sidebar UI on Pages can be clunky when you are >> jumping from setting to setting. When I use LibreOffice it feels like it does
a good job but lacks a LOT of polish and makes me jump through hoops. It DOES
handle a lot of file types and in that is a great converter for me.
I did just move a client to it. She did not want to keep buying MS Office and
was having issues with it crashing anyway. If LO does not work out for her I >> will work on what MS Office is doing wrong. Do not even know the full symptoms
she is having.
The lack of polish is actually kind of cool to me, requiring me to use ingenuity, but it's possible that Excel in particular would have
something beyond what Calc offers.
On 8/29/2026 12:17 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But >>>> it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are
inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD >>> layer but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important
directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you
execute these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for
attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header
files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. >>> (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
Few really do use or even know about it, but that doesn't mean there
aren't Apple enthusiasts who do.
I would say one could just run Linux
and not have to pay $200 for half of a 512 GB SSD, from Apple, but they
may want to use a mix of Apple GUI-centric stuff and Unix stuff.
On 28 Aug 2026 13:10:20 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:54:45 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rbbl$23cfl$4@dont-email.me>:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on
macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
Have you considered leaning what Unix is?
Try straightening up. “Leaning”, particularly on someone like Apple,--
is just setting yourself up for a (literal) fall.
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But
it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are
inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD layer
but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important
directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute >> these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for
attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header >> files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable.
(Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
To be fair: I *AM* behind on Word. Maybe it has improved in the last few years
and caught up.
On Aug 28, 2026 at 9:17:25 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116tmgk$2uf87$2@dont-email.me>:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But >>>> it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are
inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD layer
but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important
directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute
these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for
attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system.
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header
files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. >>> (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
Some do. Some do not. I know I wanted a Linux CLI long before Apple moved to macOS (OS X). Here are some public comments from 1995... though I said it elsewhere long before:
<http://goo.gl/0wHM> Jul 18 1995 <3uh4b8$be3@news.nevada.edu>
-----
if DOS were a combo of UNIX and Mac it would be cool. I
just wish we had something that combined the two. In theory
that is the way both UNIX and Mac are growing
-----
<http://goo.gl/EDip> Jul 19 1995 <3ujt0s$535@news.nevada.edu>
-----
But UNIX does have some advantages over the Mac... a CLI
would be a great addition to the Mac. I would say that
between Mac and UNIX you have the best operating systems
around.
-----
<http://goo.gl/vrLf> Aug 10 1995 <40d96e$7ke@news.nevada.edu>
-----
The Mac is not the end all in computer technology. Where it
fails, UNIX excels. Between the two, there is almost no task
that computers would be used for that can not be done. And
one or the other will beat the competition in almost every
area.
-----
In that last one I spoke of piping commands in a GUI. With Automator / Shortcuts, Apple does now have this to SOME extent. Would like to see that grow. They also have some of that with "Shortcuts" on iOS.
On 8/29/2026 1:49 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 28, 2026 at 9:17:25 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116tmgk$2uf87$2@dont-email.me>:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 08:09:41 -0400, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 8/28/2026 2:54 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 05:15:36 -0400, Paul wrote:
Apple could be doing a first cut, and checking the attach rate,
and how many people (attempt) to run it.
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. But >>>>> it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available on macOS,
hence the need to offer Linux running on their platform.
You are in luck.
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/FileSystemProgrammingGuide/FileSystemOverview/FileSystemOverview.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40010672-CH2-SW14
"Hidden Files and Directories: Simplifying the User Experience
UNIX-specific directories. The directories in this category are
inherited from traditional
UNIX installations. They are an important part of the system’s BSD layer
but are more useful
to software developers than end users. Some of the more important >>>> directories that are hidden include:
/bin - Contains essential command-line binaries. Typically, you execute
these binaries from command-line scripts.
/dev - Contains essential device files, such as mount points for >>>> attached hardware.
/etc - Contains host-specific configuration files.
/sbin - Contains essential system binaries.
/tmp - Contains temporary files created by apps and the system. >>>>
/usr - Contains non-essential command-line binaries, libraries, header
files, and other data.
/var - Contains log files and other files whose content is variable. >>>> (Log files are typically viewed using the Console app.)
They are simplifying the user experience for you.
I bet your copy of GREP is hiding in there.
So, do the Mac users find this sort of thing useful?
Some do. Some do not. I know I wanted a Linux CLI long before Apple moved to >> macOS (OS X). Here are some public comments from 1995... though I said it
elsewhere long before:
<http://goo.gl/0wHM> Jul 18 1995 <3uh4b8$be3@news.nevada.edu>
-----
if DOS were a combo of UNIX and Mac it would be cool. I
just wish we had something that combined the two. In theory
that is the way both UNIX and Mac are growing
-----
<http://goo.gl/EDip> Jul 19 1995 <3ujt0s$535@news.nevada.edu>
-----
But UNIX does have some advantages over the Mac... a CLI
would be a great addition to the Mac. I would say that
between Mac and UNIX you have the best operating systems
around.
-----
<http://goo.gl/vrLf> Aug 10 1995 <40d96e$7ke@news.nevada.edu>
-----
The Mac is not the end all in computer technology. Where it
fails, UNIX excels. Between the two, there is almost no task
that computers would be used for that can not be done. And
one or the other will beat the competition in almost every
area.
-----
In that last one I spoke of piping commands in a GUI. With Automator /
Shortcuts, Apple does now have this to SOME extent. Would like to see that >> grow. They also have some of that with "Shortcuts" on iOS.
You were prescient, Michael! :)
On 8/29/2026 1:45 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
To be fair: I *AM* behind on Word. Maybe it has improved in the last few years
and caught up.
It looks alright but LO has the classic interface that I prefer, you
can't do better than the way it always was, for something like that, Microsoft is brilliant people but sometimes their apps go too far in
trying to be cool, it works amazingly well for their Mac version of
Office, though, interestingly enough.
You were prescient [about Apple adopting Unix], Michael! :)
Thanks. I think I have a unique perspective on computing because I literally started using Macs, DOS, and UNIX on the same day... and had to learn quickly because it was my job to help others. I saw MS-DOS as a joke compared to the CLI I used on UNIX, but I also saw that for word processors and the like even the old Apple IIe shined (I had used those before). And when I saw the Mac I was sold. I was using (and soon after teaching) this at the time unknown app called MS Word. Others used Word Perfect 5.1 for DOS. I did not know if Apple or MS would be around in ten years, but I was confident the paradigm I was looking at -- what is now sometimes called the WIMP model -- was the future.
You can look at the old Macs and see much that is familiar. If you never worked with them:
https://jamesfriend.com.au/pce-js/pce-js-apps/
Certainly some "dumb" things compared to today -- the menus had to be "held" to keep showing, the multitasking is horrid, etc. But it was the future and I knew it.
When Windows 3.1 became popular I thought it was a joke... it was not until 95
that Windows started to be, in my view, at all competitive (in terms of UI issues).
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
It is quite clear from what you've shared that macOS can and does
run containers.
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has
done.
You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS.
Now you are flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are
complaining about does not exist.
On 8/29/2026 4:24 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
You were prescient [about Apple adopting Unix], Michael! :)
Thanks. I think I have a unique perspective on computing because I literally >> started using Macs, DOS, and UNIX on the same day... and had to learn quickly
because it was my job to help others. I saw MS-DOS as a joke compared to the >> CLI I used on UNIX, but I also saw that for word processors and the like even
the old Apple IIe shined (I had used those before). And when I saw the Mac I >> was sold. I was using (and soon after teaching) this at the time unknown app >> called MS Word. Others used Word Perfect 5.1 for DOS. I did not know if Apple
or MS would be around in ten years, but I was confident the paradigm I was >> looking at -- what is now sometimes called the WIMP model -- was the future. >>
You can look at the old Macs and see much that is familiar. If you never
worked with them:
https://jamesfriend.com.au/pce-js/pce-js-apps/
Certainly some "dumb" things compared to today -- the menus had to be "held" >> to keep showing, the multitasking is horrid, etc. But it was the future and I
knew it.
When Windows 3.1 became popular I thought it was a joke... it was not until 95
that Windows started to be, in my view, at all competitive (in terms of UI >> issues).
Windows 3.x was huge - among computer enthusiasts.
Windows 95, though,
began to turn the PC into a household appliance.
Windows 2000/XP,
ultimately, made the platform a mature entity. I never get tired of it, whether with Windows itself, or Linux.
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
Social media has ruined the planet. Now people worry about the color
of some little dot, on their posting. They're not even aware they
are on a computer any more.
I didn't even use iTunes on my machine, considering that horrible
thing to be just so bad.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”.
But it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available >>>> on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their
platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”.
But it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available >>>> on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their
platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”.
But it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available >>>> on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their
platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
Windows 2000/XP,
ultimately, made the platform a mature entity. I never get tired of it,
whether with Windows itself, or Linux.
XP/2000 absolutely made a huge difference and left Apple behind with its "cooperative" multitasking. Took Apple too long to migrate to OS X (now macOS)... though I guess that started in 2000, so not as bad as it felt at the
time.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird,
Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
On 8/29/2026 6:17 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Windows 2000/XP, ultimately, made the platform a mature entity. I
never get tired of it, whether with Windows itself, or Linux.
XP/2000 absolutely made a huge difference and left Apple behind
with its "cooperative" multitasking. Took Apple too long to migrate
to OS X (now macOS)... though I guess that started in 2000, so not
as bad as it felt at the time.
The thing is, Apple simply isn't genius at programming. When Windows
NT was created, they brought in the brains who could make it happen.
Apple simply copied Unix and worked its interface around it, not a
bad plan, but can't compete intellectually with even the lone soldier
Linus Torvalds, who completed a modern kernel alone, it went on to
become larger than just his project, but imagine working with that
first release of Linux with GNU, seeing the prototype OS boot -
that'd be cool AF.
At Sat, 29 Aug 2026 19:09:49 -0400, "Joel W. Crump"
<joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/29/2026 6:17 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Windows 2000/XP, ultimately, made the platform a mature entity. I
never get tired of it, whether with Windows itself, or Linux.
XP/2000 absolutely made a huge difference and left Apple behind
with its "cooperative" multitasking. Took Apple too long to migrate
to OS X (now macOS)... though I guess that started in 2000, so not
as bad as it felt at the time.
The thing is, Apple simply isn't genius at programming. When Windows
NT was created, they brought in the brains who could make it happen.
Apple simply copied Unix and worked its interface around it, not a
bad plan, but can't compete intellectually with even the lone soldier
Linus Torvalds, who completed a modern kernel alone, it went on to
become larger than just his project, but imagine working with that
first release of Linux with GNU, seeing the prototype OS boot -
that'd be cool AF.
I booted Linus' boot/root floppies back in the day.
Then at the end of 1992, I built a student-access Linux host that had
email, newsreaders, and "hytelnet", which was a thing back then.
Then we set it up with a hunt group on the campus switch, with a bank of
8 2400 baud modems, and an old serial card that was used for a defunct
Xenix system.
The system was an HP Vectra RS/20 tower w/2MB (yes, MB) of memory -- then we expanded memory to 16MB, which was way overkill for our needs.
From the experience we gained with that system, my biz partner and I started
an ISP.
Back in those days, ISP's were shell hosts -- then along came something called "TIA" (The Internet Adapter) which served up PPP (or maybe it was SLIP)
over the serial line. We bought a bunch of licenses so our customers
could use it...then saw the writing on the wall, and started buying Portmaster terminal servers.
Now we sell 10Gbit/s fiber-to-the-home...what a long, strange trip it's been.
On 8/29/2026 6:17 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Windows 2000/XP, ultimately, made the platform a mature entity. I
never get tired of it, whether with Windows itself, or Linux.
XP/2000 absolutely made a huge difference and left Apple behind
with its "cooperative" multitasking. Took Apple too long to migrate
to OS X (now macOS)... though I guess that started in 2000, so not
as bad as it felt at the time.
The thing is, Apple simply isn't genius at programming. When Windows
NT was created, they brought in the brains who could make it happen.
Apple simply copied Unix and worked its interface around it,
On 8/29/2026 6:17 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Windows 2000/XP,
ultimately, made the platform a mature entity. I never get tired of it, >>> whether with Windows itself, or Linux.
XP/2000 absolutely made a huge difference and left Apple behind with its
"cooperative" multitasking. Took Apple too long to migrate to OS X (now
macOS)... though I guess that started in 2000, so not as bad as it felt at the
time.
The thing is, Apple simply isn't genius at programming. When Windows NT
was created, they brought in the brains who could make it happen. Apple simply copied Unix and worked its interface around it, not a bad plan,
but can't compete intellectually with even the lone soldier Linus
Torvalds, who completed a modern kernel alone, it went on to become
larger than just his project, but imagine working with that first
release of Linux with GNU, seeing the prototype OS boot - that'd be cool AF.
On 28 Aug 2026 13:17:03 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:46:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rarc$23cfl$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has
done.
You have been whining nonstop about how containers work on macOS.
Now you are flip-flopping and saying the very thing you are
complaining about does not exist.
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
Hint: the README itself starts off
container is a tool that you can use to create and run Linux
containers as lightweight virtual machines on your Mac.
Apple’s own words, not mine. Clear enough for you? Want to continue
to try to dodge and prevaricate about the issue some more?
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:20:30 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
It is quite clear from what you've shared that macOS can and does
run containers.
It runs *Linux* containers. There are no “macOS” containers. macOS userland can’t be “contained”; Linux userland can.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird,
Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:28:57 -0400, Paul wrote:
Social media has ruined the planet. Now people worry about the color
of some little dot, on their posting. They're not even aware they
are on a computer any more.
Surely that’s not just social media, that’s become the whole raison d’être of proprietary computing platforms: when new releases come out,
the reviews invariably focus on some tweak or other to the UI, it
seems like actual underlying functionality doesn’t matter any more.
Remember, on these platforms, there is no separation between the GUI
and the OS kernel anyway.
When a new version of the Linux kernel comes out, you have to
concentrate on its new functionality, because it doesn’t have a GUI --
that comes from elsewhere.
--I didn't even use iTunes on my machine, considering that horrible
thing to be just so bad.
My mother had an early Ipod. Because I didn’t have a Mac, I had to use libgpod (with some custom Python scripting) to convert and transfer
music files to the device for her. Unlike Itunes, libgpod could do
two-way transfers: Itunes wouldn’t (still won’t?) let you copy files
from the device to your PC.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:57:03 -0400, Paul wrote:
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
No “stalemate”. Linux continues to gain market share. It dominates new markets (e.g. mobile, handheld, entertainment centre, home server, AI)
where Microsoft and Apple would like to gain a foothold, but cannot
manage it with their proprietary platforms.
Linux, Windows, and macOS all get updates.
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:36:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116vmsk$3jcff$11@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
What makes you think Asterisk does not run on macOS?
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird,
Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:57:03 -0400, Paul wrote:
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
No 'stalemate'. Linux continues to gain market share. It dominates new markets (e.g. mobile, handheld, entertainment centre, home server, AI)
where Microsoft and Apple would like to gain a foothold, but cannot
manage it with their proprietary platforms.
On 30 Aug 2026 02:38:13 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Linux, Windows, and macOS all get updates.
When new releases of proprietary platforms come out, the reviews
invariably focus on some tweak or other to the UI, it seems like
actual underlying functionality doesn’t matter any more.
When a new version of the Linux kernel comes out, you have to--
concentrate on its new functionality, because it doesn’t have a GUI --
that comes from elsewhere.
On 30 Aug 2026 02:36:55 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:36:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vmsk$3jcff$11@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
What makes you think Asterisk does not run on macOS?
The fact that it doesn’t.
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird, >>> Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
<https://kb.shells.com/tutorials/macOS/Kamailio/>
On 30 Aug 2026 02:38:13 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Linux, Windows, and macOS all get updates.
When new releases of proprietary platforms come out, the reviews
invariably focus on some tweak or other to the UI, it seems like
actual underlying functionality doesn’t matter any more.
When a new version of the Linux kernel comes out, you have to
concentrate on its new functionality, because it doesn’t have a GUI --
that comes from elsewhere.
My mother had an early Ipod. Because I didn?t have a Mac, I had to use libgpod (with some custom Python scripting) to convert and transfer
music files to the device for her. Unlike Itunes, libgpod could do
two-way transfers:
Itunes wouldn?t (still won?t?) let you copy files
from the device to your PC.
On 8/29/2026 4:27 AM, Chris wrote:
Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/28/2026 11:39 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I have MS Word installed, with my 365 subscription, but I actually use >>>>> LO Writer, I use what I like best, regardless of cost. I can donate >>>>> voluntarily to LO, for that matter.
I have turned in a number of LO bugs, so contributed in that way. Completely
agree with your take on using what works.
I do not have MS Office currently, and mostly use Apple Pages. BUT there are
times I am working with Markdown files and Pages does not currently handle >>>> them well (already been announced it will in the future, but I am in the now).
Anyway, LibreOffice handles them mostly well... so I open them with that, save
as MS Word, and then open in Pages. A bit convoluted but if it was something I
had to do a lot I could likely script it.
Oddly enough, if I were using a Mac, MS Office is one of the first
things I'd get. Whereas under Winblows all I want is Outlook (and
OneDrive and Copilot which come with 365). I don't mind that I have
Word and Excel there, for comparison, but I'd be far more likely never
to use either of them, but LO's stuff.
For me that's the biggest strength of macOS. You get to run the software
everyone else is using and can work with while having a full blown Unix
machine with all the OSS goodness that comes with it.
Sadly I'm spending much more time in the MS side of things than the
Terminal than I used to. So, I could realistically work with Windows and
WSL2, but I just prefer macOS.
I really think MS Office for Mac is the superior edition, it's strange,
like some of Microsoft's very best work is for macOS or Linux, rather
than their own OS.
I'm using Win11 more like as if it were desktop
Linux, than a lot of WinDrones would.
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:18:47 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116vls6$3jcff$6@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:57:03 -0400, Paul wrote:
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
No “stalemate”. Linux continues to gain market share. It dominates new >> markets (e.g. mobile, handheld, entertainment centre, home server, AI)
where Microsoft and Apple would like to gain a foothold, but cannot
manage it with their proprietary platforms.
I am happy they all exist and celebrate where each has strengths. Your ego-tie
to Linux is weird to me.
On 8/29/2026 10:38 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:18:47 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vls6$3jcff$6@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:57:03 -0400, Paul wrote:
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
No “stalemate”. Linux continues to gain market share. It dominates new >>> markets (e.g. mobile, handheld, entertainment centre, home server, AI)
where Microsoft and Apple would like to gain a foothold, but cannot
manage it with their proprietary platforms.
I am happy they all exist and celebrate where each has strengths. Your ego-tie
to Linux is weird to me.
Lawrence is pretty bad, but not as bad as Larry, and the Mac zealots are really worse than the Linux ones, not to say you and Alan are such, I
respect the two of you as Apple fans, but there are some snooty-ass ones
out there.
On Aug 30, 2026 at 11:04:54 AM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote <1171rc6$9emg$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/29/2026 10:38 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:18:47 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vls6$3jcff$6@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:57:03 -0400, Paul wrote:
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
No “stalemate”. Linux continues to gain market share. It dominates new >>>> markets (e.g. mobile, handheld, entertainment centre, home server, AI) >>>> where Microsoft and Apple would like to gain a foothold, but cannot
manage it with their proprietary platforms.
I am happy they all exist and celebrate where each has strengths. Your ego-tie
to Linux is weird to me.
Lawrence is pretty bad, but not as bad as Larry, and the Mac zealots are
really worse than the Linux ones, not to say you and Alan are such, I
respect the two of you as Apple fans, but there are some snooty-ass ones
out there.
No doubt... but I would say at least in the past the Linux ones were more extreme. With Mac fans they can get TOO caught up in the usability issues I speak of (though they often understand them less well) and pretend without them other systems are barely usable. No. Of course not. Take PDF Services. I like it. I use it pretty much daily. It streamlines things. But saving a PDF and opening with another app, or taking a moment to pick a location is hardly UNUSABLE. Same with the other things I have listed. They ARE benefits. Real ones. For the most part ones I use (though some I list I do not often). But they are conveniences, and even though I do think they add up, not having them
is not some horrible devastation to people's workflows.
With Linux some see it as a religion... it is not about what it does or even what it is per se, but about the philosophy. Being "open" and "free". Stallman
pushes this HARD. Does not mean I do not appreciate the idea of being open source and the GPL. Amazing things. But I have no religious devotion to that, either.
On 8/30/2026 2:14 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 30, 2026 at 11:04:54 AM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<1171rc6$9emg$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/29/2026 10:38 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:18:47 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vls6$3jcff$6@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 06:57:03 -0400, Paul wrote:
I consider the OS wars to be over.
It's a kind of complex stalemate.
No “stalemate”. Linux continues to gain market share. It dominates new
markets (e.g. mobile, handheld, entertainment centre, home server, AI) >>>>> where Microsoft and Apple would like to gain a foothold, but cannot
manage it with their proprietary platforms.
I am happy they all exist and celebrate where each has strengths. Your ego-tie
to Linux is weird to me.
Lawrence is pretty bad, but not as bad as Larry, and the Mac zealots are >>> really worse than the Linux ones, not to say you and Alan are such, I
respect the two of you as Apple fans, but there are some snooty-ass ones >>> out there.
No doubt... but I would say at least in the past the Linux ones were more
extreme. With Mac fans they can get TOO caught up in the usability issues I >> speak of (though they often understand them less well) and pretend without >> them other systems are barely usable. No. Of course not. Take PDF Services. I
like it. I use it pretty much daily. It streamlines things. But saving a PDF >> and opening with another app, or taking a moment to pick a location is hardly
UNUSABLE. Same with the other things I have listed. They ARE benefits. Real >> ones. For the most part ones I use (though some I list I do not often). But >> they are conveniences, and even though I do think they add up, not having them
is not some horrible devastation to people's workflows.
With Linux some see it as a religion... it is not about what it does or even >> what it is per se, but about the philosophy. Being "open" and "free". Stallman
pushes this HARD. Does not mean I do not appreciate the idea of being open >> source and the GPL. Amazing things. But I have no religious devotion to that,
either.
Can't argue with your points, there.
I would add Stallman is a creepy guy... him being so closely tied to Linux does it no favor (even though he has contributed excellent things).
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”.
But it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available >>>>> on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their
platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples> <https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. >>>>>> But it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available >>>>>> on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their
platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
On Aug 30, 2026 at 5:03:22 AM MST, "John Bokma" wrote <117166c$1rl4$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird, >>>> Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
<https://kb.shells.com/tutorials/macOS/Kamailio/>
He really just makes things up as he goes. LOL!
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 30, 2026 at 5:03:22 AM MST, "John Bokma" wrote
<117166c$1rl4$1@dont-email.me>:
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like Thunderbird, >>>>> Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
<https://kb.shells.com/tutorials/macOS/Kamailio/>
He really just makes things up as he goes. LOL!
It's worse than that. He simply has no idea what he's talking about.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 28/08/2026 08:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
First cut at what, though? People keep saying macOS is “Unix”. >>>>>> But it’s clear that most of the “Unix” software is not available >>>>>> on macOS, hence the need to offer Linux running on their
platform.
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
On 8/30/2026 2:41 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I would add Stallman is a creepy guy... him being so closely tied to Linux >> does it no favor (even though he has contributed excellent things).
He's weird, but frankly, Microsoft is a megacorp and I use Winblows,
Apple is Satanic with their prices on hardware, you can't win,
basically.
I just say use what's best for you.
Even if it's Apple, OK,
I can accept that from someone intelligent, I just don't like the lamers
who claim Apple is so great, when they don't even know what they're
doing with it in truth.
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:20:30 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
You've just demonstrated it can. Are you *that* dense?
Maybe you need to go back and reread the docs for what Apple has done.
It is quite clear from what you've shared that macOS can and does
run containers.
It runs *Linux* containers. There are no “macOS” containers. macOS userland can’t be “contained”; Linux userland can.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
It runs *Linux* containers. There are no “macOS” containers. macOS
userland can’t be “contained”; Linux userland can.
You're just arguing semantics.
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:13:57 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116vlj5$3jcff$4@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:20:30 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
It is quite clear from what you've shared that macOS can and does
run containers.
It runs *Linux* containers. There are no “macOS” containers. macOS
userland can’t be “contained”; Linux userland can.
They are Linux containers on macOS. Which is the point. You have
gone on and on and on but have yet to make any real point.
On Aug 26, 2026 at 7:28:34 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116o7ch$14ar5$3@dont-email.me>:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
Yet you have been bitching about how they DO so ...
... with Linux ...
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
Actually, that’s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn’t deserve the
name “Unix”, trademark or no trademark.
You are complaining a system uses open source. Hint: you might want
to look into how much open source Linux uses. LOL!
Compete at changing their wallpaper and icons? Who cares?
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
<https://kb.shells.com/tutorials/macOS/Kamailio/>
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
but he picks that Apple and macOS allows for easy use of open source solutions. How is that bad?
On Mon, 31 Aug 2026 06:11:49 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
It runs *Linux* containers. There are no “macOS” containers. macOS
userland can’t be “contained”; Linux userland can.
You're just arguing semantics.
What does “semantics” mean, again?
<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/semantics>
On 30 Aug 2026 02:33:23 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:13:57 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vlj5$3jcff$4@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:20:30 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
It is quite clear from what you've shared that macOS can and does
run containers.
It runs *Linux* containers. There are no “macOS” containers. macOS
userland can’t be “contained”; Linux userland can.
They are Linux containers on macOS. Which is the point. You have
gone on and on and on but have yet to make any real point.
Funny how you concede the point, while still denying it.
On 27 Aug 2026 15:35:16 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 26, 2026 at 7:28:34 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116o7ch$14ar5$3@dont-email.me>:
Apple’s OS can’t do containers.
Yet you have been bitching about how they DO so ...
No.
... with Linux ...
Got the point yet?
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that’s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn’t deserve the
name “Unix”, trademark or no trademark.
You are complaining a system uses open source. Hint: you might want
to look into how much open source Linux uses. LOL!
Linux contributed much of that. Apple didn’t.
Compete at changing their wallpaper and icons? Who cares?
But isn’t that the sort of thing Microsoft and Apple users make a big
deal out of, when new OS releases come out?
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 14:03:22 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
What, no prebuilt package?
Got to apply about 250 lines of unsupported
patches just to build it from source?
or this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/net/kamailio>.
<https://kb.shells.com/tutorials/macOS/Kamailio/>
You know, it’s odd, I went to <https://brew.sh/>, tried searching for “kamailio”, but it couldn’t find any matches.
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:54:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux
functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
The question asked of me was “why can't you name the software that's
not available via macports/homebrew/nix?” I gave examples of that, did
I not? Don’t try to retrospectively add more conditions just because
you don’t like the answer.
On 28 Aug 2026 13:51:52 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
but he picks that Apple and macOS allows for easy use of open source
solutions. How is that bad?
If only that were true. But the examples haven’t been very convincing
so far.
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 14:03:22 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
What, no prebuilt package? Got to apply about 250 lines of unsupported patches just to build it from source?
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:[...]
Compete at changing their wallpaper and icons? Who cares?
But isn?t that the sort of thing Microsoft and Apple users make a big
deal out of, when new OS releases come out?
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence DOliveiro" wrote <116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence DOliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the
name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
On Aug 31, 2026 at 9:21:21 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1175js0$1g77m$4@dont-email.me>:
But isn’t that the sort of thing Microsoft and Apple users make a big deal out of, when new OS releases come out?
No, Not at all. Heck, look at the info on macOS 27. The closest to that might be noting the rounded corners are now consistent and changes to Liquid Glass, but there is a LOT more to it than that:
On 01 Sep 2026 06:18:59 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 31, 2026 at 9:21:21 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote[UI]
<1175js0$1g77m$4@dont-email.me>:
I just LOVE rounded corners. But generally I'm happy to have my brown wallpaper and comic sans font; what else would I want a computer for </sarcasm>
But isn’t that the sort of thing Microsoft and Apple users make a big
deal out of, when new OS releases come out?
No, Not at all. Heck, look at the info on macOS 27. The closest to that might
be noting the rounded corners are now consistent and changes to Liquid Glass,
but there is a LOT more to it than that:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the
name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they
don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does
it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX guy.)
[...]
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:[...]
Compete at changing their wallpaper and icons? Who cares?
But isn?t that the sort of thing Microsoft and Apple users make a big
deal out of, when new OS releases come out?
No, it isn't. The *users* - at least the Windows ones - don't make a
big deal out of changes like that, quite the contrary. They *dislike*
change for the sake of change.
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:31:48 AM MST, "Frank Slootweg" wrote <117725o.17i8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open >>>>>>>> source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the
name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they
don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does
it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX
guy.)
[...]
I know you can get Dock / Finder replacements, which gets you partly there, but you still have a lot of the underpinnings. This, of course, has advantages
that Lawrence will never speak of or acknowledge.
On 01/09/2026 20:13, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:31:48 AM MST, "Frank Slootweg" wrote
<117725o.17i8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote >>>>>>> <116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open >>>>>>>>> source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the >>>>>> name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they
don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does
it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX >>> guy.)
[...]
I know you can get Dock / Finder replacements, which gets you partly there, >> but you still have a lot of the underpinnings. This, of course, has advantages
that Lawrence will never speak of or acknowledge.
One can also replace the application icons quite easily. I did so for Alacritty because I didn't like the one that came with it.
I guess Lawrence means stuff like <https://www.enlightenment.org/>. I
never saw any advantage of pimping the desktop my own way, but that's
just me. I like macOS for its looks and stability. I work most of the
time in the cli (Alacritty right now) and vim/emacs (Aquamacs).
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:54:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux
functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
The question asked of me was “why can't you name the software that's
not available via macports/homebrew/nix?” I gave examples of that, did
I not?
Don’t try to retrospectively add more conditions just because
you don’t like the answer.
On Aug 31, 2026 at 9:29:17 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1175kat$1g77m$6@dont-email.me>:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:54:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux
functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
The question asked of me was “why can't you name the software that's
not available via macports/homebrew/nix?” I gave examples of that, did
I not? Don’t try to retrospectively add more conditions just because
you don’t like the answer.
OK, that is fair. I blamed you of moving goal posts but you did not, My apologies and I appreciate the correction.
If these packages are in demand, why are they not on homebrew? What stops them
from being complied on macOS?
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:54:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux
functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
The question asked of me was “why can't you name the software that's
not available via macports/homebrew/nix?” I gave examples of that, did
I not?
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't run on
macOS and consistently refused to provide examples. When you did, you only pointed to the totality of the debian repository. Your final attempt to support your assertion was your own github repo. Desperate.
I mean if that's the bar, then I can share my repo where all the software will run on macOS.
Don’t try to retrospectively add more conditions just because
you don’t like the answer.
I don't like the answer because it doesn't match your original assertion. Simple as that.
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open
source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently?
A modular GUI layer, for one.
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple
has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the
name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they
don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does
it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX guy.)
On Sep 1, 2026 at 11:34:35 AM MST, "John Bokma" wrote <11775rt$230vk$1@dont-email.me>:
On 01/09/2026 20:13, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:31:48 AM MST, "Frank Slootweg" wrote
<117725o.17i8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote >>>>>>>> <116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:A modular GUI layer, for one.
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open >>>>>>>>>> source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently? >>>>>>>
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple >>>>>>> has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the >>>>>>> name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they
don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does >>>> it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX >>>> guy.)
[...]
I know you can get Dock / Finder replacements, which gets you partly there, >>> but you still have a lot of the underpinnings. This, of course, has advantages
that Lawrence will never speak of or acknowledge.
One can also replace the application icons quite easily. I did so for
Alacritty because I didn't like the one that came with it.
True... though it will revert when the app is updated.
I guess Lawrence means stuff like <https://www.enlightenment.org/>. I
never saw any advantage of pimping the desktop my own way, but that's
just me. I like macOS for its looks and stability. I work most of the
time in the cli (Alacritty right now) and vim/emacs (Aquamacs).
I think he means with desktop Linux you can swap out your DE and file browser.
Cool. Some are lighter on resources, set menus to be where you want (window or
top), taskbar type, and much more. But can you get tabbed windows in your word
processor and spread sheet and file browser that all work in similar ways? Can
you get similar language so you are not splitting Exit and Quit or Settings and Preferences? Can you get PDF Services or full screen apps that integrate with the virtual desktops? On and on... for the most part, no (though KDE does
allow for tabs, even with mixed apps I think, it is clunky -- or was years ago
when I tested it and I bet it still is).
With Linux I often feel like I am using a system that is not coordinated with itself and many features exist to do little more than hit some checkbox.
Do not get me wrong -- there are also places where macOS is wonky and sometimes I see a feature elsewhere and wish it was built in to macOS (say better file copy dialogs). But it feels GENERALLY like a professionally built system where Linux often feels like someone's hobby (or a lot of someone's). Nobody is really accountable for making the whole system be unified.
On Sep 1, 2026 at 3:04:54 PM EDT, "Brock McNuggets" <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 11:34:35 AM MST, "John Bokma" wrote
<11775rt$230vk$1@dont-email.me>:
On 01/09/2026 20:13, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:31:48 AM MST, "Frank Slootweg" wrote
<117725o.17i8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote >>>>>>> <116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote >>>>>>>>> <116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:A modular GUI layer, for one.
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open >>>>>>>>>>> source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently? >>>>>>>>
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple >>>>>>>> has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the >>>>>>>> name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they >>>>> don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does >>>>> it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX >>>>> guy.)
[...]
I know you can get Dock / Finder replacements, which gets you partly there,
but you still have a lot of the underpinnings. This, of course, has advantages
that Lawrence will never speak of or acknowledge.
One can also replace the application icons quite easily. I did so for
Alacritty because I didn't like the one that came with it.
True... though it will revert when the app is updated.
I guess Lawrence means stuff like <https://www.enlightenment.org/>. I
never saw any advantage of pimping the desktop my own way, but that's
just me. I like macOS for its looks and stability. I work most of the
time in the cli (Alacritty right now) and vim/emacs (Aquamacs).
I think he means with desktop Linux you can swap out your DE and file browser.
Cool. Some are lighter on resources, set menus to be where you want (window or
top), taskbar type, and much more. But can you get tabbed windows in your word
processor and spread sheet and file browser that all work in similar ways? Can
you get similar language so you are not splitting Exit and Quit or Settings >> and Preferences? Can you get PDF Services or full screen apps that integrate >> with the virtual desktops? On and on... for the most part, no (though KDE does
allow for tabs, even with mixed apps I think, it is clunky -- or was years ago
when I tested it and I bet it still is).
With Linux I often feel like I am using a system that is not coordinated with
itself and many features exist to do little more than hit some checkbox.
Do not get me wrong -- there are also places where macOS is wonky and
sometimes I see a feature elsewhere and wish it was built in to macOS (say >> better file copy dialogs). But it feels GENERALLY like a professionally built
system where Linux often feels like someone's hobby (or a lot of someone's). >> Nobody is really accountable for making the whole system be unified.
That's because Linux IS someone's hobby (or a lot of someone's). Nothing wrong
with that. If you want to learn all there is to know about software and OSes and compilers and tinkering with settings and compiler flags and EVERYTHING, then Linux is for you. You are an actual computer hobbyist. Have fun!
OTOH if you just want an appliance that you turn on and use without having to think about how it all works, then Linux probably is not for you. Nothing wrong with THAT either.
That's where Apple comes in. A whole range of products and services that all work together. Automatically. No setup involved. All deliberately running the same UNIX OS and apps on the same hardware.
Or you can go the Windows/Dell/HP/Android/Samsung/Google/etc route and try to cobble things together on your own. Sort of a Linux Lite thing, with different OSes and apps and hardware and vendors. For people who still want a
challenge and do a LITTLE tinkering. I tried that for a few years and gave up.
Its all about choices folks. You get to make YOUR choices and I get to make MY choices. This whole "Us vs Them" mentality is stupid, pointless and childish.
We might as well argue about pizza toppings. I like pepperoni and you like canadian bacon. Who cares?
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:16:06 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <116vln5$3jcff$5@dont-email.me>:
Hint: the README itself starts off
container is a tool that you can use to create and run Linux
containers as lightweight virtual machines on your Mac.
So Apple *DOES* support containers.
Apple’s own words, not mine. Clear enough for you? Want to continue
to try to dodge and prevaricate about the issue some more?
You are flip flopping back and forth saying they do and do not back
them. Make up your mind.
On 27/08/2026 04:31, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely
wasting its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux
market onto the Mac could be entirely in vain.
There is already Docker desktop, Orbstack, Rancher Desktop, etc. for
years. So the capturing was already there. I have been running
containers on macOS for nearly a decade (!).
The difference is (as far as I know) that Apple Container spins up a
light weight micro virtual machine per container.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely wasting
its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux market onto
the Mac could be entirely in vain.
Huh?
You don’t get how big and diverse the computing world is.
In fact, Apple offers several UIs for their UNIX OS. Macs, iPhones,
iPads and Watches all run the same underlying UNIX OS. All run the
exact same kernel. The difference IS the UIs are different.
Yes, it IS UNIX. Lawrence will stomp his feet and deny it.
Of course, your typical Apple customer does not buy a watch or an
iPad to "be running UNIX". They would have no idea what UNIX is or
even what an OS is.
But in fact, they ARE running UNIX.
On 01/09/2026 06:27, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 14:03:22 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 30/08/2026 00:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
With a little effort: <https://github.com/nedimzecic/asterisk-macos>
What, no prebuilt package? Got to apply about 250 lines of
unsupported patches just to build it from source?
As wild as installing docker the official way, no? <https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/ubuntu/>.
On Tue, 01 Sep 2026 20:59:41 +0000, Nick Charles wrote:
In fact, Apple offers several UIs for their UNIX OS. Macs, iPhones,
iPads and Watches all run the same underlying UNIX OS. All run the
exact same kernel. The difference IS the UIs are different.
If that were true, and they were all running “the exact same kernel”, then you could take a GUI from one product and run it on another. But
you can’t. Because not only are they NOT “the exact same kernel”, but the GUI is itself part of those major differences between the kernels!
Yes, it IS UNIX. Lawrence will stomp his feet and deny it.
All I have to do is point out all the Unix stuff that Apple doesn’t support. Like the UI modularity.
Of course, your typical Apple customer does not buy a watch or an
iPad to "be running UNIX". They would have no idea what UNIX is or
even what an OS is.
I wonder why Apple bothered to license the trademark, then ... clearly
even the customers agree that it is meaningless.
But in fact, they ARE running UNIX.
They are running systems that license the trademark. Which I think
only applies to the Mac platform, not the phones or tablets.
On Aug 30, 2026 at 12:02:34 AM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1170kia$3rm3i$3@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 02:36:55 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:36:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vmsk$3jcff$11@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk>
What makes you think Asterisk does not run on macOS?
The fact that it doesn’t.
What do you think prevents it...
.. kamailio?
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, that is fair. I blamed you of moving goal posts but you did
not, My apologies and I appreciate the correction.
It is not fair. Claiming that a home-grown script is representative
of the linux software ecosystem is a real reach.
If these packages are in demand, why are they not on homebrew? What
stops them from being complied on macOS?
They are calling low-level linux filesystem functions. The principle
would absolutely apply to macOS, but the calls would be different
given macOS uses a different filesystem and uses Unix system calls.
On 30 Aug 2026 14:19:28 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 30, 2026 at 12:02:34 AM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1170kia$3rm3i$3@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 02:36:55 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:36:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vmsk$3jcff$11@dont-email.me>:
What makes you think Asterisk does not run on macOS?
The fact that it doesn’t.
What do you think prevents it...
The fact that macOS isn’t “Unix” enough.
.. kamailio?
Same answer.
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:40:02 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, that is fair. I blamed you of moving goal posts but you did
not, My apologies and I appreciate the correction.
It is not fair. Claiming that a home-grown script is representative
of the linux software ecosystem is a real reach.
Gee, that’s too bad. Don’t you have “home-grown scripts” in your macOS
“software ecosystem”, too?
We’re not all passive users of Open Source over here in the Linux
world; some of us contribute back too, you know. (And where do you
think all that code comes from, anyway?)
If these packages are in demand, why are they not on homebrew? What
stops them from being complied on macOS?
They are calling low-level linux filesystem functions. The principle
would absolutely apply to macOS, but the calls would be different
given macOS uses a different filesystem and uses Unix system calls.
Could you find similar enterprise-strength packages that rely
crucially on non-Unix, macOS-specific system calls?
Somehow I don’t think you can. Linux has evolved in order to satisfy
the needs of the community that uses it (and contributes back to it);
in the process it has developed entirely new capabilities not
available on other Unix-type systems -- containers being one major
example that has come up in this discussion.
Meanwhile, Apple it seems has not been trying to contribute anything
to the “Unix” idea at all
-- instead, it has been burying what is left
of that “Unix” core deeper and deeper under an ever-thickening layer
of glitz and glam, concentrating ever more on form at the cost of
function.
And so the mantle of “a Unix fit for the 21st century” falls, I would say, very firmly on Linux.
On 30 Aug 2026 14:19:28 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 30, 2026 at 12:02:34 AM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1170kia$3rm3i$3@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 02:36:55 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:36:04 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vmsk$3jcff$11@dont-email.me>:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 12:13:55 +0200, John Bokma wrote:What makes you think Asterisk does not run on macOS?
Exactly which ones are not available as a direct port (like
Thunderbird, Firefox, Gimp, etc.) a mac ports / homebrew / nix?
How about this one: <https://packages.debian.org/forky/comm/asterisk> >>>>
The fact that it doesn’t.
What do you think prevents it...
The fact that macOS isn’t “Unix” enough.
.. kamailio?
Same answer.
On 9/1/2026 5:41 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 01 Sep 2026 20:59:41 +0000, Nick Charles wrote:
In fact, Apple offers several UIs for their UNIX OS. Macs, iPhones,
iPads and Watches all run the same underlying UNIX OS. All run the
exact same kernel. The difference IS the UIs are different.
If that were true, and they were all running “the exact same kernel”,
then you could take a GUI from one product and run it on another. But
you can’t. Because not only are they NOT “the exact same kernel”, but >> the GUI is itself part of those major differences between the kernels!
Yes, it IS UNIX. Lawrence will stomp his feet and deny it.
All I have to do is point out all the Unix stuff that Apple doesn’t
support. Like the UI modularity.
Of course, your typical Apple customer does not buy a watch or an
iPad to "be running UNIX". They would have no idea what UNIX is or
even what an OS is.
I wonder why Apple bothered to license the trademark, then ... clearly
even the customers agree that it is meaningless.
But in fact, they ARE running UNIX.
They are running systems that license the trademark. Which I think
only applies to the Mac platform, not the phones or tablets.
Who are you kidding, dude? macOS is indeed a full edition of Unix.
It's just not one I'm going to pay $1500 or whatever to have, when I
already have an inexpensive mini PC with Debian collecting dust, because
I replaced it with one to run Win11.
On Tue, 01 Sep 2026 20:59:41 +0000, Nick Charles wrote:
In fact, Apple offers several UIs for their UNIX OS. Macs, iPhones,
iPads and Watches all run the same underlying UNIX OS. All run the
exact same kernel. The difference IS the UIs are different.
If that were true, and they were all running “the exact same kernel”,
then you could take a GUI from one product and run it on another.
But
you can’t. Because not only are they NOT “the exact same kernel”, but the GUI is itself part of those major differences between the kernels!
Yes, it IS UNIX. Lawrence will stomp his feet and deny it.
All I have to do is point out all the Unix stuff that Apple doesn’t support. Like the UI modularity.
Of course, your typical Apple customer does not buy a watch or an
iPad to "be running UNIX". They would have no idea what UNIX is or
even what an OS is.
I wonder why Apple bothered to license the trademark, then ... clearly
even the customers agree that it is meaningless.
But in fact, they ARE running UNIX.
They are running systems that license the trademark. Which I think
only applies to the Mac platform, not the phones or tablets.
On 27 Aug 2026 13:39:59 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely wasting
its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux market onto
the Mac could be entirely in vain.
Huh?
You don’t get how big and diverse the computing world is.
Maybe Apple understands it better than you do.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 12:48:18 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 27/08/2026 04:31, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely
wasting its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux
market onto the Mac could be entirely in vain.
There is already Docker desktop, Orbstack, Rancher Desktop, etc. for
years. So the capturing was already there. I have been running
containers on macOS for nearly a decade (!).
Wonder why Apple feels the need to bring out their own product, then,
if Docker is already catering for the existing Mac market adequately.
The difference is (as far as I know) that Apple Container spins up a
light weight micro virtual machine per container.
What exactly is a “light weight micro virtual machine”?
Is it somehow
a subset of the Linux kernel, not capable of running full-function
Linux apps?
Seems like you are regurgitating Apple’s PR-speak without
understanding what it means (if anything).
On 30 Aug 2026 02:32:39 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 29, 2026 at 3:16:06 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<116vln5$3jcff$5@dont-email.me>:
Hint: the README itself starts off
container is a tool that you can use to create and run Linux
containers as lightweight virtual machines on your Mac.
So Apple *DOES* support containers.
You omitted the “Linux” part. Also note the “virtual machines” part. Linux can do Linux containers without bringing virtual machines into it. Apple cannot.
Apple’s own words, not mine. Clear enough for you? Want to continue
to try to dodge and prevaricate about the issue some more?
You are flip flopping back and forth saying they do and do not back
them. Make up your mind.
Just read the words again.
Remember, they are Apple’s own words, not mine. You’re not saying
Apple is “flip flopping back and forth” and not being able to make up their mind, are you?
On Sep 1, 2026 at 3:04:54 PM EDT, "Brock McNuggets" <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 11:34:35 AM MST, "John Bokma" wrote
<11775rt$230vk$1@dont-email.me>:
On 01/09/2026 20:13, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:31:48 AM MST, "Frank Slootweg" wrote
<117725o.17i8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>:
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2026 13:15:49 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 27, 2026 at 11:50:34?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote >>>>>>> <116rb3p$23cfl$3@dont-email.me>:
On 26 Aug 2026 14:07:47 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Aug 25, 2026 at 11:57:39?PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote >>>>>>>>> <116m2p2$cm6v$5@dont-email.me>:A modular GUI layer, for one.
On 23 Aug 2026 03:11:09 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I still have no clue why you are bothered by people using open >>>>>>>>>>> source solutions.
Apple has run out of ideas.
What "ideas" do you think the Linux world has offered recently? >>>>>>>>
You think that is recent?
You ignored this:
Actually, that?s an old tradition in the Unix world, which Apple >>>>>>>> has abandoned. Another reason why its platform doesn?t deserve the >>>>>>>> name ?Unix?, trademark or no trademark.
In what way has Apple 'abandoned' "A modular GUI layer"? That they >>>>> don't *offer* different GUIs, doesn't mean they can't be *added*, does >>>>> it? (Any comments from the Apple folks? I'm just a (non-Apple) Unix/UNIX >>>>> guy.)
[...]
I know you can get Dock / Finder replacements, which gets you partly there,
but you still have a lot of the underpinnings. This, of course, has advantages
that Lawrence will never speak of or acknowledge.
One can also replace the application icons quite easily. I did so for
Alacritty because I didn't like the one that came with it.
True... though it will revert when the app is updated.
I guess Lawrence means stuff like <https://www.enlightenment.org/>. I
never saw any advantage of pimping the desktop my own way, but that's
just me. I like macOS for its looks and stability. I work most of the
time in the cli (Alacritty right now) and vim/emacs (Aquamacs).
I think he means with desktop Linux you can swap out your DE and file browser.
Cool. Some are lighter on resources, set menus to be where you want (window or
top), taskbar type, and much more. But can you get tabbed windows in your word
processor and spread sheet and file browser that all work in similar ways? Can
you get similar language so you are not splitting Exit and Quit or Settings >> and Preferences? Can you get PDF Services or full screen apps that integrate >> with the virtual desktops? On and on... for the most part, no (though KDE does
allow for tabs, even with mixed apps I think, it is clunky -- or was years ago
when I tested it and I bet it still is).
With Linux I often feel like I am using a system that is not coordinated with
itself and many features exist to do little more than hit some checkbox.
Do not get me wrong -- there are also places where macOS is wonky and
sometimes I see a feature elsewhere and wish it was built in to macOS (say >> better file copy dialogs). But it feels GENERALLY like a professionally built
system where Linux often feels like someone's hobby (or a lot of someone's). >> Nobody is really accountable for making the whole system be unified.
That's because Linux IS someone's hobby (or a lot of someone's). Nothing wrong
with that. If you want to learn all there is to know about software and OSes and compilers and tinkering with settings and compiler flags and EVERYTHING, then Linux is for you. You are an actual computer hobbyist. Have fun!
OTOH if you just want an appliance that you turn on and use without having to think about how it all works, then Linux probably is not for you. Nothing wrong with THAT either.
That's where Apple comes in. A whole range of products and services that all work together. Automatically. No setup involved. All deliberately running the same UNIX OS and apps on the same hardware.
Or you can go the Windows/Dell/HP/Android/Samsung/Google/etc route and try to cobble things together on your own. Sort of a Linux Lite thing, with different OSes and apps and hardware and vendors. For people who still want a
challenge and do a LITTLE tinkering. I tried that for a few years and gave up.
Its all about choices folks. You get to make YOUR choices and I get to make MY choices. This whole "Us vs Them" mentality is stupid, pointless and childish.
We might as well argue about pizza toppings. I like pepperoni and you like canadian bacon. Who cares?
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 31, 2026 at 9:29:17 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1175kat$1g77m$6@dont-email.me>:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:54:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux
functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
The question asked of me was “why can't you name the software that's
not available via macports/homebrew/nix?” I gave examples of that, did >>> I not? Don’t try to retrospectively add more conditions just because
you don’t like the answer.
OK, that is fair. I blamed you of moving goal posts but you did not, My
apologies and I appreciate the correction.
It is not fair. Claiming that a home-grown script is representative of the linux software ecosystem is a real reach.
If these packages are in demand, why are they not on homebrew? What stops them
from being complied on macOS?
They are calling low-level linux filesystem functions. The principle would absolutely apply to macOS, but the calls would be different given macOS
uses a different filesystem and uses Unix system calls.
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:54:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 08:27:06 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:59:42 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
If it's so clear, why can't you name the software that's not
available via macports/homebrew/nix?
I already showed you where to find one bunch of them.
Here <https://packages.debian.org/stable/> is another.
That's not an answer.
Want something more specific?
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples>
<https://gitlab.com/ldo/inotipy_examples/-/blob/master/doc_server?ref_type=heads>
Lol. Pointing to your own python code which is dependent on linux
functionality is not the gotcha you think it is.
Am guessing your scripts aren't available in the debian repos either.
The question asked of me was “why can't you name the software that's
not available via macports/homebrew/nix?” I gave examples of that, did
I not?
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't run on
macOS and consistently refused to provide examples. When you did, you only pointed to the totality of the debian repository. Your final attempt to support your assertion was your own github repo. Desperate.
I mean if that's the bar, then I can share my repo where all the software will run on macOS.
Don’t try to retrospectively add more conditions just because
you don’t like the answer.
I don't like the answer because it doesn't match your original assertion. Simple as that.
macOS can run a large percentage of Linux software. Linux cannot run most macOS software. That means more choice on macOS.
On Sep 1, 2026 at 2:36:46 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1177ghe$26ea4$8@dont-email.me>:
On 27 Aug 2026 13:39:59 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of
macOS users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely
wasting its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux
market onto the Mac could be entirely in vain.
Huh?
You don’t get how big and diverse the computing world is.
Maybe Apple understands it better than you do.
Maybe, but not relevant. YOU do not get it.
On 9/1/2026 8:09 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
macOS can run a large percentage of Linux software. Linux cannot run most
macOS software. That means more choice on macOS.
Certainly, the best reason to $pend on a Mac is its native software.
It's nice that it can *also* utilize Unix software, though.
On 01 Sep 2026 23:45:21 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 2:36:46 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1177ghe$26ea4$8@dont-email.me>:
On 27 Aug 2026 13:39:59 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of
macOS users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely
wasting its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux
market onto the Mac could be entirely in vain.
Huh?
You don’t get how big and diverse the computing world is.
Maybe Apple understands it better than you do.
Maybe, but not relevant. YOU do not get it.
You may be right about Apple not being relevant.
I had a slightly
deeper look into Apple’s “container” stuff on GitHub, and unlike regular virtualization, it involves the building of a custom Linux
kernel. But get this: this Makefile <https://github.com/apple/containerization/blob/main/kernel/Makefile>
only mentions kernel version 6.18.5, and the Docker recipe <https://github.com/apple/containerization/blob/main/kernel/image/Dockerfile>,
<https://github.com/apple/containerization/blob/main/kernel/image/sources.list>
only seems to support Ubuntu Focal Fossa for its userland. But that
version is from 6 years ago!
On Sep 1, 2026 at 2:49:02 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1177h8e$26ea4$11@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 14:19:28 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What do you think prevents it...
The fact that macOS isn’t “Unix” enough.
So no actual answer. OK.
.. kamailio?
Same answer.
A non-answer. Right. You have nothing.
But say macOS lost its UNIX label. As long as it works why would I
care?
Do you sit there crying that Linux does is not certified UNIX?
On 01 Sep 2026 23:36:03 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 2:49:02 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1177h8e$26ea4$11@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 14:19:28 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What do you think prevents it...
The fact that macOS isn’t “Unix” enough.
So no actual answer. OK.
.. kamailio?
Same answer.
A non-answer. Right. You have nothing.
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it won’t change that fact.
But say macOS lost its UNIX label. As long as it works why would I
care?
Because it doesn’t work, as I already pointed out.
Do you sit there crying that Linux does is not certified UNIX?
Companies like Apple have cheapened the “UNIX” trademark to the point
of irrelevance. It’s no longer a meaningful selling point. That’s all there is to it.
On 01 Sep 2026 23:36:03 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 2:49:02 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1177h8e$26ea4$11@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 14:19:28 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What do you think prevents it...
The fact that macOS isn’t “Unix” enough.
So no actual answer. OK.
.. kamailio?
Same answer.
A non-answer. Right. You have nothing.
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it won’t change that fact.
But say macOS lost its UNIX label. As long as it works why would I
care?
Because it doesn’t work, as I already pointed out.
Do you sit there crying that Linux does is not certified UNIX?
Companies like Apple have cheapened the “UNIX” trademark to the point
of irrelevance. It’s no longer a meaningful selling point. That’s all there is to it.
On Sep 1, 2026 at 7:54:01 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1178348$2bobr$5@dont-email.me>:
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it
won’t change that fact.
Many? You have shown TWO and both were written by YOU.
I am not even a coder and I have written software that works on macOS but not Linux.
You have no point to make.
On 9/1/2026 10:54 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On 01 Sep 2026 23:36:03 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 2:49:02 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1177h8e$26ea4$11@dont-email.me>:
On 30 Aug 2026 14:19:28 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What do you think prevents it...
The fact that macOS isn’t “Unix” enough.
So no actual answer. OK.
.. kamailio?
Same answer.
A non-answer. Right. You have nothing.
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it
won’t change that fact.
But say macOS lost its UNIX label. As long as it works why would I
care?
Because it doesn’t work, as I already pointed out.
Do you sit there crying that Linux does is not certified UNIX?
Companies like Apple have cheapened the “UNIX” trademark to the point
of irrelevance. It’s no longer a meaningful selling point. That’s all
there is to it.
Do you think it would be non-trivial to make your obscure software work
under macOS? Heh.
On 9/1/2026 11:42 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 7:54:01 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1178348$2bobr$5@dont-email.me>:
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it
won’t change that fact.
Many? You have shown TWO and both were written by YOU.
I am not even a coder and I have written software that works on macOS but not
Linux.
You have no point to make.
If he thought for a couple seconds, he might grok that Linux apps
compiled for one distro don't necessarily run properly on another
distro. It's the same phenomenon with his ridiculous point, if he
*ported* his code to macOS, magically it would work, it wouldn't be that hard, but it doesn't happen by snapping one's fingers.
I am not even a coder and I have written software that does not work
on Linux.
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't run
on macOS and consistently refused to provide examples.
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:36:14 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't run
on macOS and consistently refused to provide examples.
To be precise, I claimed that the majority of “Unix” software these
days would run on Linux but not macOS.
I was looking into the details of Apple’s “Unix” certification, and came across this rather interesting report <https://www.osnews.com/story/141633/apples-macos-unix-certification-is-a-lie/>.
First of all, you’d think that the certification that Apple has got
would be against the most recent version of the official “Unix” spec.
But it’s not. Besides which, the applicant is allowed to handwave away specific failures by providing suitable excuses -- a loophole which
Apple has used quite liberally.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 12:48:18 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 27/08/2026 04:31, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On 26 Aug 2026 16:10:57 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Right. I have never needed a container. The vast majority of macOS
users do not.
That could very well be true. Apple could indeed be completely
wasting its time; its efforts to try to capture some of the Linux
market onto the Mac could be entirely in vain.
There is already Docker desktop, Orbstack, Rancher Desktop, etc. for
years. So the capturing was already there. I have been running
containers on macOS for nearly a decade (!).
Wonder why Apple feels the need to bring out their own product, then,
if Docker is already catering for the existing Mac market adequately.
The difference is (as far as I know) that Apple Container spins up a
light weight micro virtual machine per container.
What exactly is a “light weight micro virtual machine”? Is it somehow
a subset of the Linux kernel, not capable of running full-function
Linux apps?
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 09:14:46 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 01/09/2026 06:27, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 14:03:22 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
As wild as installing docker the official way, no?
<https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/ubuntu/>.
Notice that none of those steps involves building anything from source
or applying any patches: they just require replacing distro-specific
packages with ones supplied from upstream.
You asked above about packages “available as a direct port” --
obviously Docker fits this description on Linux (no big surprise).
But to get back to Asterisk -- where is the “direct port ... mac ports
/ homebrew / nix” for that package on macOS?
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:36:14 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't run
on macOS and consistently refused to provide examples.
To be precise, I claimed that the majority of “Unix” software these
days would run on Linux but not macOS.
I was looking into the details of Apple’s “Unix” certification, and came across this rather interesting report <https://www.osnews.com/story/141633/apples-macos-unix-certification-is-a-lie/>.
First of all, you’d think that the certification that Apple has got
would be against the most recent version of the official “Unix” spec.
But it’s not. Besides which, the applicant is allowed to handwave away specific failures by providing suitable excuses -- a loophole which
Apple has used quite liberally.
On 02 Sep 2026 04:00:05 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
I am not even a coder and I have written software that does not work
on Linux.
Could you call it “Unix” software? I doubt it, somehow. It would be
all full of proprietary Apple APIs based on Swift or Objective C or AppleScript or proprietary stuff like that.
On 9/1/2026 11:42 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 7:54:01 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1178348$2bobr$5@dont-email.me>:
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it
won’t change that fact.
Many? You have shown TWO and both were written by YOU.
I am not even a coder and I have written software that works on macOS but not
Linux.
You have no point to make.
If he thought for a couple seconds, he might grok that Linux apps
compiled for one distro don't necessarily run properly on another
distro.
It's the same phenomenon with his ridiculous point, if he
*ported* his code to macOS, magically it would work, it wouldn't be that hard, but it doesn't happen by snapping one's fingers.
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:50:21 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote <11786dv$2cvv2$1@dont-email.me>:
On 9/1/2026 11:42 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 7:54:01 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1178348$2bobr$5@dont-email.me>:
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it >>>> won’t change that fact.
Many? You have shown TWO and both were written by YOU.
I am not even a coder and I have written software that works on macOS but not
Linux.
You have no point to make.
If he thought for a couple seconds, he might grok that Linux apps
compiled for one distro don't necessarily run properly on another
distro.
I looked into this. Maybe someone wiser than me can fact check this:
On 9/2/2026 9:45 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 8:50:21 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<11786dv$2cvv2$1@dont-email.me>:
On 9/1/2026 11:42 PM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 1, 2026 at 7:54:01 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1178348$2bobr$5@dont-email.me>:
It’s one of many pieces of “Unix” software that doesn’t work on macOS.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you pay any attention what I say, it >>>>> won’t change that fact.
Many? You have shown TWO and both were written by YOU.
I am not even a coder and I have written software that works on macOS but not
Linux.
You have no point to make.
If he thought for a couple seconds, he might grok that Linux apps
compiled for one distro don't necessarily run properly on another
distro.
I looked into this. Maybe someone wiser than me can fact check this:
I expressed that loosely, but it's clear, to make software work properly within a distro takes a bit of customization. It's not that different
with macOS's Unix side.
On Sep 2, 2026 at 12:11:29 AM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <1178i71$2gvnl$5@dont-email.me>:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:36:14 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't
run on macOS and consistently refused to provide examples.
To be precise, I claimed that the majority of “Unix” software these
days would run on Linux but not macOS.
I was looking into the details of Apple’s “Unix” certification, and
came across this rather interesting report
<https://www.osnews.com/story/141633/apples-macos-unix-certification-is-a-lie/>.
First of all, you’d think that the certification that Apple has got
would be against the most recent version of the official “Unix”
spec. But it’s not. Besides which, the applicant is allowed to
handwave away specific failures by providing suitable excuses -- a
loophole which Apple has used quite liberally.
Yesterday you said you do not care what is "UNIX" ...
... because the term has no meaning any more.
On 02 Sep 2026 13:39:40 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 2, 2026 at 12:11:29 AM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<1178i71$2gvnl$5@dont-email.me>:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:36:14 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
You claimed many times that the majority of linux software won't
run on macOS and consistently refused to provide examples.
To be precise, I claimed that the majority of “Unix” software these
days would run on Linux but not macOS.
I was looking into the details of Apple’s “Unix” certification, and >>> came across this rather interesting report
<https://www.osnews.com/story/141633/apples-macos-unix-certification-is-a-lie/>.
First of all, you’d think that the certification that Apple has got
would be against the most recent version of the official “Unix”
spec. But it’s not. Besides which, the applicant is allowed to
handwave away specific failures by providing suitable excuses -- a
loophole which Apple has used quite liberally.
Yesterday you said you do not care what is "UNIX" ...
Feel free to reference where I said that, because I don’t recall
saying I “do not care”.
... because the term has no meaning any more.
That much is true. And the above is documentary evidence to that
effect.
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:40:02 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, that is fair. I blamed you of moving goal posts but you did
not, My apologies and I appreciate the correction.
It is not fair. Claiming that a home-grown script is representative
of the linux software ecosystem is a real reach.
Gee, that’s too bad. Don’t you have “home-grown scripts” in your macOS
“software ecosystem”, too?
We’re not all passive users of Open Source over here in the Linux
world; some of us contribute back too, you know.
(And where do you
think all that code comes from, anyway?)
If these packages are in demand, why are they not on homebrew? What
stops them from being complied on macOS?
They are calling low-level linux filesystem functions. The principle
would absolutely apply to macOS, but the calls would be different
given macOS uses a different filesystem and uses Unix system calls.
Could you find similar enterprise-strength packages that rely
crucially on non-Unix, macOS-specific system calls?
Somehow I don’t think you can. Linux has evolved in order to satisfy
the needs of the community that uses it (and contributes back to it);
in the process it has developed entirely new capabilities not
available on other Unix-type systems -- containers being one major
example that has come up in this discussion.
Meanwhile, Apple it seems has not been trying to contribute anything
to the “Unix” idea at all -- instead, it has been burying what is left
of that “Unix” core deeper and deeper under an ever-thickening layer
of glitz and glam, concentrating ever more on form at the cost of
function.
And so the mantle of “a Unix fit for the 21st century” falls, I would say, very firmly on Linux.
p Lawrence D´Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 20:40:02 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, that is fair. I blamed you of moving goal posts but you did
not, My apologies and I appreciate the correction.
It is not fair. Claiming that a home-grown script is representative
of the linux software ecosystem is a real reach.
Gee, that’s too bad. Don’t you have “home-grown scripts” in your macOS
“software ecosystem”, too?
Sure. I don't claim that it is an example of all macOS software not working on linux, however.
We’re not all passive users of Open Source over here in the Linux
world; some of us contribute back too, you know.
Contributing to open source community is not unique to linux users, you
know. I run teams who develop OSS and most of them run macOS.
(And where do you
think all that code comes from, anyway?)
Industry. Including Apple at No. 22.
https://opensourceindex.io/
If these packages are in demand, why are they not on homebrew? What
stops them from being complied on macOS?
They are calling low-level linux filesystem functions. The principle
would absolutely apply to macOS, but the calls would be different
given macOS uses a different filesystem and uses Unix system calls.
Could you find similar enterprise-strength packages that rely
crucially on non-Unix, macOS-specific system calls?
Not possible. It can't be both non-Unix and macOS specific given that macOS is a Unix.
The reason your scripts don't run on macOS is because they (and linux) are not Unix compliant.
Somehow I don’t think you can. Linux has evolved in order to satisfy
the needs of the community that uses it (and contributes back to it);
in the process it has developed entirely new capabilities not
available on other Unix-type systems -- containers being one major
example that has come up in this discussion.
And yet containers *are* available on macOS.
Meanwhile, Apple it seems has not been trying to contribute anything
to the “Unix” idea at all -- instead, it has been burying what is left >> of that “Unix” core deeper and deeper under an ever-thickening layer
of glitz and glam, concentrating ever more on form at the cost of
function.
You clearly have no clue regarding what can and can't be done in macOS.
And so the mantle of “a Unix fit for the 21st century” falls, I would
say, very firmly on Linux.
Linux is not a Unix.
| Sysop: | Scott Duensing |
|---|---|
| Location: | Freeburg, IL, USA, Earth |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 496870:41:45 |
| Calls: | 8 |
| Messages: | 23,579 |