105
What happened to elementary OS?
(news.itsfoss.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
105 points (94.1% liked)
Linux
48376 readers
1920 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
So your take is that instead of trying to make Windows binaries run Linux it would be way easier to just get macOS binaries because it is all BSD. That's an interesting take indeed.
They are probably saying the shared POSIX underpinnings means greater commonality between macOS and Linux and therefore easier porting. That is likely true to some extent but real apps are written to Apple proprietary APIs and therefore that advantage is largely nullified.
In terms of effort to bring apps over, there has been far, far more effort put into porting Windows apps and so that task ( at this point ) is generally easier. It may have been less effort to port macOS at the start ( eg. GNUstep ) but that work has still largely never been done.
It is easy to move POSIX world apps to macOS. It is not as easy to go the other way.
I think (aka speculate) that the fact that Windows is the largest OS plays into the fact that Linux-Mac compatibility isn't more developed.
I bet some 90% of desktop software is available on Windows (even many core KDE are on Windows!) so targeting them brings most Apple apps onto Linux "for free". Especially since Apple's insistence on trying to make Metal a thing hurts gaming support, which is a big driver behind Linux compatibility development.
The few applications that MacOS has over both Linux and Windows are usually so embedded into the Apple ecosystem that you're not getting much by porting them anyway. iTunes? The App Store? Garage Band? Probably doesn't help that many of those apps also use Apple's own UI framework which isn't really portable.
However, stuff not designed to live in Apple land like Teams for Mac or Adobe CC might be more possible. But still far too few applications to necessitate the effort to bring them over.
Absolutely.
A lot of it is just the organization and leadership within the projects themselves. The GNUstep guys struggled for a long time. Just agreeing to implement the Mac APIs instead of just the NeXTstep ones is a thing.
Regardless of how attractive projects are, they can be run well or badly. Without trying to disparage anybody, look at the progress of WINE vs ReactOS for example. And if you think it is just because kernels are hard, look at Linux or Haiku or SerenityOS vs ReactOS instead.
But the popularity of Windows made the Win32 APIs more commercially viable as well and so you get companies like CodeWeavers and Valve that really accelerate the WINE effort. That wind at your back really helps.