Coz Apple 🤦🏻‍♂️

Aaand of course it’s not true. If someone really want to pay for Mac just to install Linux on it, security features of T2 can be disabled which allows installation of third party OS.

And anyway, Microsoft was first with that kind of „protection” ;)

Actually it's not Apple's fault but linux's for not implementing the required interfaces for working with the chip it was already like that with secure boot (and some Linux distrib still don't boot with it enabled)

Glad I have no money for the new one with the T2 chip

@FrodoSwaggins I know, the software piece that allow window to run on new Macs was probably provided by apple and they probably won't make one for Linux or it won't be accepted because it'll definitely be a proprietary blob.

On a hardware and security standpoint the T2 chip is a good chip albeit completely proprietary.

@FrodoSwaggins yeah, it makes sense but how does it come that Ubuntu and Fedora can install on secure boot enabled machines? But then again, I had to enroll my own Machine Owner Key to have kernel modules for VirtualBox to work on my Fedora with secure boot enabled so ...

Also my point was that at first it wasn't supported and then it got so on the T2 chip matter, just wait and see.

After further research it seems that apple doesn't provide keys or a way to generate secure keys for their T2 chips and disabling Secure Boot doesn't help.

So ignore my original comment.

On an other note if you dropped 1500+$ on a Mac device, drop 80 more on a parallels desktop license it will probably run Linux better than native, at least you won't have to fight with the propietary hardware. Sure you won't have peak performance but if you want to run Linux natively there are some nice constructors making Linux compatible machines, system76 and purism for example, there's also a German one but I don't remember their name and the website was fuck ugly.

damn...dodged a fuckin bullet

Worn out faces