10

Unpopular opinion: macOS is better for working on the go than Linux.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Linux... for servers and desktops. Linux, particularly Arch, is incredible at running only the bare minimum of what you need in a system, so that you use the power of the machine to fullest. Don't get me started on the out-of-the-box compatibility with development in general.

However, I just spent 2 days trying to get the freaking wifi working on my Linux laptop. When I opened up my Macbook, it *just worked.* I really don't have the time to be dicking around with configs when I am working on the go.

Especially with technologies such as Docker, Git, and SSH, it's actually really easy to have the same development environment on my macbook and Linux desktop... and as much as I hate to say it, I think it's no more Linux on laptops for me anymore.

Comments
  • 22
    Uses Arch linux for the minimal install experience. Gets mad he has to set up wifi manually. 🙄
  • 1
    Its not an unpopular opinion, a lot of great devs and admins use and love macs. It just depends of what you like more and which is more comfortable for you
  • 1
    @lelp I guess... Where I come from, having to deal with Linux's bullshit is almost a right of passage.

    While Linux is vastly superior in desktop/server/actual use, when I'm in a hotel, I just want to get my work done!
  • 4
    uh well ya. you opened your book with the same manufacturer as the os makere. ofc it "just worked"

    (actually - you know what? i say "ofc" but today that is a bit of a shocker)
  • 6
    @agupta628 then why don't you use a distro that works out of the box like, oh I don't know Ubuntu? Or solus?
  • 0
    @fuck2code If you have tried to configure WPA2 Enterprise on Ubuntu, you will know that it isn't much better.

    The only reason I'd used linux on my laptop before was for i3, but I realized that the only software that I used was vim, tmux, docker, and ssh. Those tools are really easy to install on macOS as well, and helps me recreate my dev environment really easily.
  • 2
    MacOS runs on a controlled sat of hardware configurations, so is configured out of the box.

    Linux is not, neither is Windows.

    Windows has driver support from hardware vendors for more devices than Linux, so hardware should be more thoroughly compatible, at least on the driver front.

    The answer to a platform not working as expected isn't Linux, nor Windows, nor MacOS.

    It's configuring the machine properly, with drivers compatible to the hardware that's in it, regardless of the OS.

    This is more likely to happen with a Mac than any other manufacturer.
  • 1
    @Torbuntu The probably isn't setting up the wifi... the problem is how many times I have to set it up.

    I'm totally ok dumping a couple days of time into the computer if it will run smoothly afterwards. I'm not ok with having dumped a couple of days, and still having to configure it every time I connect to a new network.
  • 4
    @agupta628 You're just proving my point further. This isn't a "linux" issue. This is an arch feature.
  • 0
    @oudalally You also have to take into account the popularity of the software. As macOS is getting more and more popular, it is beneficial for companies to increase support for macOS in order to appeal to the larger demographic.
  • 0
    @Torbuntu Sure, arch is notorious for this type of behavior, but for my purposes, its benefits far outweigh its drawbacks. However, some services, such as bluetooth and WPA2 Enterprise are known and constantly recurring issues across distros.

    If your workplace recognizes that there is a linux community, and accommodates for it, then linux is the obvious choice. If not, then having to deal with something as fundamental as networking can be a huge productivity sink.
  • 2
    @agupta628 Just saying you have contradictory statements. That's all. You say a comparatively bloated OS "just works" compared to the manual minimal custom arch distribution. Duh.
  • 0
    @Torbuntu Well, yeah.. duh. But I'd rather deal with the bloat of macOS (and believe me, there is quite a bit of it) for the certainty that it will work. I understand that having a minimal install will have its problems, and that's why I've stopped using that for OTG work. However, the reason why I'm not switching to a more popular distro like Ubuntu or Fedora is that for the amount of bloat that I'm getting (less than macOS for sure, but way more than I would like), I wouldn't want to ever run into any problems. As we all know, that is not often the case.
  • 2
    @agupta628 Granted, more manufacturers are providing driver support for macOS these days, but on the most part, the core issues with a Linux install are chipsets on the main board itself.

    Weird wifi cards which require some proprietary firmware usually - I've had serious issues with an iwl card with almost every distro I've used on the machine.

    The main reason I run macs is that I can install the OS, and it's ready to use. No further installs necessary at all.

    On my mac pro, the audio interface is class compliant, but I do use the driver from Line6 as it gives me a nice control panel. That said, audio hardware has been well supported on the mac by vendors for decades.

    Audio on Linux has been up in the air until pretty recently before you factor any external devices into the equation.
  • 4
    lwlwifi package solves the wifi problem.
  • 0
    Bookmarked because this is a really interesting thread.
  • 0
    Well, i see your point, but i still find a GNU/Linux laptop a perfectly usable OTG solution. I've been running Arch with KDE Plasma (i know, it's not i3, but still) in my laptop for a few months now and, aside from the initial setup and the occasion AUR fuckup, it has been a smooth experince overall
  • 0
    Here I am getting sad that my days with arch are numbered. Probably getting a MacBook Pro and given that the 2017 one worked horribly with Linux, there isn't much of a chance of improvement and I will be stuck in a walled garden just so I can have access to a godamn OS.
  • 0
    Docker was actually built for Linux. What you get on the Mac is a hack really. Just run "Docker info" and see.
Your Job Suck?
Get a Better Job
Add Comment