Comment on 7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux

• AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  So is windows for most users. I technically have so many windows licences that I don’t use because the system has long ago been wiped…
  There used to be a big movement to get windows refunded if you didn’t use it. I think you could get 20 euros if you managed to jump through all the hoops. And I’m not even sure it’s still possible.

  source
• Tortellinius@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Technically not. MacOS wouldn’t be what it is today if apple didn’t get any money out of it. They get that money from selling the hardware the software is exclusively on among other things. Let’s say i. e. Ubuntu: When it first got released then it relied on its owners personal revenue for a long time. None of the hardware sold financed Ubuntu, because Ubuntu didn’t earn money through hardware. It’s obvious that the money earned by apple through its sales also go back into macOS, because if the hardware didn’t make any money, macOS ceases to be developed as well.

  With OPs logic, every software is technically free.

  source
• bitjunkie@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Is hackintosh not still a thing? Did they neuter it somehow? Or are we just not considering that since it’s a pain in the ass to set up and works out of the box on a very limited selection of hardware?

  source

  • DJDarren@sopuli.xyz ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I believe macOS 26 will be the last that’ll run on Intel hardware. So functionally, a year from now, Hackintosh is dead. Well, Hackintosh running the current macOS, of course. I imagine there’ll be a thriving community working to keep existing hardware chugging along.

    It’ll be interesting to see the momentum of Linux on Macs though. If Asahi manages to crack those last few hurdles with the M1/2 hardware, it’ll be a rock solid OS, particularly as ARM64 software becomes more common. Suddenly you’ll have a bunch of incredibly capable Macs going cheap because they can’t run the largest macOS.

    source
• floo@retrolemmy.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I don’t understand this argument. It makes no sense. Just because a piece of software is included for free with an Apple computer doesn’t mean you’re paying for it. It’s like you see the word “free” and just decide it means something different than what it really means.

  source

  • Statick@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Do you also think the engine that comes with your car is free because the manufacturer doesn’t sell it as a separate item and it’s not listed on the receipt?

    source

    • floo@retrolemmy.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t see how cars and engines have anything to do with the fact that macOS is free.

      source

      • enthusiasm_headquarters@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        again, if you think osx is free you are deeply, cripplingly ignorant of how Apple makes money.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • WilloftheWest@feddit.uk ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        The OS is a component of the whole product by Apple’s own reporting and marketing material. If you bought a Macbook directly from Apple and it came without MacOS preinstalled, would you consider that a fulfilled transaction?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Natanael@infosec.pub ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        If including it with a paid product has a cost for the manufacturer, then you did pay for it as a part of the price of the product which you did pay for.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Zorque@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Because I am capable of critical and complex thinking. Just because something is labeled as “free” does not necessarily mean there are no costs associated with procuring or using a product. If you’re handed a proprietary piece of technology for “free”, but the only way to use it is to pay for another piece of technology or software that you have to pay for… it’s not free. It’s complementary, but it’s not free. You still need to pay some amount to use it.

    source

    • floo@retrolemmy.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      This is the same faulty logic as arguing that Linux also costs money because you have to pay for a computer to run it on. Any operating system requires that you own a compatible device to run it on.

      You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple computers. It makes no sense.

      source

      • enthusiasm_headquarters@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        What? No. Your “payment” to Apple continues as you use OSX.

        You don’t need to pay “Linux” anything (though you can donate to distros and app devs if you’re a sweetie).

        You don’t even need to pay for a computer. You can steal one or find one in the garbage. Apple hates recycling hardware, that’s why they sue 3rd party Apple repair and maintenance shops. I used OSX for a decade. They were cool for a little while, being somewhat novel for adopting a UNIX-like as their backbone, but that goodwill and logic is long dead.

        I hate them as much as I hate Microsoft, perhaps even more, because not only have they abandoned the ideals they marketed in the 00’s, they are draconian in their enforcement of their control. Their planned obsolescence is absolutely criminal. They embezzle tens of billions of dollars overseas to avoid taxation. And Tim Cook now blows Donald Trump for breakfast.

        To hell with Apple and their whole shitty thing.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Natanael@infosec.pub ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        To be extremely pedantic, there’s licensing costs involved with a bunch of 3rd party libraries included in the OS (HDR, h265, radios, etc), but they cover those royalties / fees via hardware sales and the license to use it follows the hardware

        source

        • -> View More Comments