> compatible with macOS filesystems (HFS+ and APFS)
How far along is this? I think she's underestimating how hard it is to implement a modern filesystem that won't eat users' data. I've been working on a Linux APFS driver[0] for several years, and it's not fully functional yet. It's a pity that she is working with FreeBSD, or it could have been of use to her.
Is there a particular reason to reimplement a proprietary FS (a gargantuan task) when FreeBSD already has a world class (cross-platform!) FS in ZFS/OpenZFS? Is there something about Mac apps that rely on HFS+/APFS-specific features?
> source compatibility with macOS applications (i.e. you could compile a Mac application on Airyx and run it)
Hard to see how this can be done legally. The libraries (sorry, Frameworks) that make up the user-space runtime for macOS are all proprietary. There's no replacement for the most important parts of it.
Airyx’s developer may want to say hello to the developers of Hello, who are doing something very complementary to this with UX—and are quite far along already. https://hellosystem.github.io/docs/
This looks super cool. Reminds me of GoboLinux a bit but with BSD and the goal of being an open Mac environment. This has my interest cause I'm looking into trying to do something similar but using Linux instead (mainly because of hardware and graphics support) but without the goal of being Mac compatible.
I downloaded the preview ISO. I looks a lot like another BSD project I know that aimed to be an open BSD based Mac desktop. IDK if they renamed the project or if this is the same project I was thinking of.
However, who really wants a "global menu bar". It made sense for the original mac, when people just used one app at a time. And it's left in the current MacOS for legacy reasons. But now people usually have multiple 27" monitors. So, instead of having menus where the app is, you need to move the mouse all the way to the top and then back. Im not sure why anyone would want to replicate it.
Not sure about GNUstep, but Darling is akin to Wine, in that it is a re-implementation of the Mac APIs within a Linux environment, allowing you to run MacOS apps on Linux without recompilation. Whereas Airyx is a full FreeBSD OS (distribution?) that tries to mimic MacOS as a whole.
As someone who regularly takes on projects that are bigger on the inside, than the outside, I wish her well.
It seems well-organized. She has her work cut out for her, but it can def be done (I seem to recall a certain trashmouth Finn, doing something similar...).
Projects like these will be always one step behind the thing they are trying to replicate (MacOS in this case). It is better to spend one's creative energy innovating and coming up with better solutions rather than re-implementing what Apple is doing.
I disagree. NeXT / macOS has been a pretty stable target for a very, very long time. If you’re going to clean room implement anything, a stable thing is a great target.
macOS has, however, been making superficial changes that people don’t care about. A free macOS desktop alternative would build on a stable set of core technologies, and let people do the crazy things that they want, and not do the crazy things that they don’t want.
Given that there’s 20 years of “behind,” and many of those machines are no longer getting updates, what’s the harm? The dev learns something and the community gains knowledge from the project.
I was once critical of ReactOS for similar reasons, but I’ve realized just how beneficial that project has been to OSS as a whole. Even if they fail they will uncover a lot of interesting stuff if the project continues long-term.
> Projects like these will be always one step behind the thing they are trying to replicate (MacOS in this case).
No, they won't. MacOS and Windows are both going backwards in innovations (according to many HN commenters at least). At some point this project (and ReactOS) will get better than the originals.
Eh, I don't see much difference between older MacOS versions such as Mountain Lion compared to Big Sur.
Similarly, I don't see much difference between Ubuntu desktop distros in terms of differences across versions , say from 16 to 20.
Therefore... I don't see a being "one step behind" as any kind of issue. I've never run into an issue with past versions (such as those menntioned above) of OSes not running what I need them to run.
Personally, I'd like to see a Linux version which is very close to Apple so I can use it (such as OP's), instead of expensive Apple computers.
It could be argued that just by being community-driven and open source, projects like these are in fact better. It all depends what "better" means to you. (E.g. not phoning home to Apple every time you open a program...)
Can I compile iOS apps on this? That's honestly the only thing holding me to macOS, I really wish Apple didn't force every iOS developer to use macOS to do so.
Not to diminish the effort, but I think replicating the look and design (as in how things work) of MacOS (or Windows 10) is a pitfall that very few alternative OS developers manage to avoid.
It's just a bad idea. They'll never get even close, and those screenshots on Imgur prove it.
What I'd prefer is if these definitely brilliant developers would "own" the Unix history more, and build upon Motif. Put the effort do create a mimicry of MacOS into modernising Motif. Hopefully not just make the chrome translucent, but really think about how Motif would look if invented in 2021.
One thing I wonder is why they're using FreeBSD as a base and not Darwin. I use FreeBSD myself and it's great, but if you're really going for Mac compatibility I would use the same kernel considering it's FOSS.
I think this could be more successful if they break it into parts. E.g. a window manager, and separate macOS emulator. And allow other BSD/Linux/Unix distributions to use them as well and install them as packages.
The obvious answer, of course, is that you do want to eat meat and run macOS for some reasons, but don't want to for other reasons, so I'm not sure what you really mean. Should we forget the good parts of things with bad aspects and not chase facsimiles, or embrace the bad aspects of things with good parts..? Neither one really makes sense to me; fake meat and fake macOS make sense to me, though I eat meat and use macOS. Or perhaps just that we should find substitutes that don't attempt mimicry.
> If you dont want to eat meat, why try and replicate the taste, texture and sensation of eating meat?
What is this taste, texture, and sensation of meat in regards to bacon you're talking about? Bacon is the opposite of the actual taste, texture, and sensation of meat. It's cooked, salted, and processed to give it that taste, texture, and sensation.
It's the same with people making fun of plant-based burgers and sausages. Well, guess what, burgers and sausages don't exist in nature, neither as meat nor plant. Well, actually... Cucumbers and a few other plants seem quite like sausages. Anyways. The burger, sausage, and bacon form factor is what makes it attractive. It's why people have liked it for so long, and why people like it still when they switch to a plant-based diet.
I guess it's the same reason why some people are into Airyx OS.
Here is a reason: Mac OS telemetry is just as bad as Windows. Few months ago app launches on Mac OS slowed down because the service that received the "app launch event" degraded. /Facepalm
It's awful how very few in the tech community challenge Apple for their false privacy claims.
Simple. Meat is delicious, but for some it comes with ethical issues. If you they replicate the taste (or sufficiently delude yourself), they can enjoy "meat" once again and sleep at night.
If you don‘t want to rape people, why try and have sex at all?
And even more absurd to use this kind of argument in the software world. Imagine back then...
„If you don‘t like Unix, why...“, or the first GUI implementations on Linux trying to achieve what apple or microsoft did...
Oh well, what our hacker world would be like if more people thought that way...
Sorry, not trying to offend, but these projects are what I live for. „Stickin‘ it to the big guys“ - after all, we are hackers, aren‘t we?
> If you dont want to eat meat, why try and replicate the taste, texture and sensation of eating meat?
Because the taste and texture of meat are pretty great, it's just that whole "raising and killing a sentient being" thing that's the problem.
The argument for something like Airyx is pretty similar: there are things to like about MacOS and things to not like about it, and it'd be great to get an alternative that has fewer negatives.
I agree. It doesn't make particular sense. Even if you aren't a complete fanatic about MacOs UI, you wouldn't choose FreeBSD as a base, but rather Linux, which has a lot of advantages for the average user, I'd say.
I think macOS has too large of an API nowadays to try to copy. There are a whole smorgasbord of frameworks. This can only really help with the simplest of Cocoa applications.
This might be OK though, because I think what a hacker interested in this is really interested is the parts of macOS that are common with NextSTEP. Which are all the parts 20+ years old!
I'd love to throw an investment into something like this with GUI, marketing and supply chain resources to build a solid computer under $300 for a developing world.
Go up against Fuchia and Google hardware in less time and with more clarity.
[+] [-] 3np|4 years ago|reply
The main design goals are:
* source compatibility with macOS applications (i.e. you could compile a Mac application on Airyx and run it)
* similar GUI metaphors and familiar UX (file manager, application launcher, top menu bar that reflects the open application, etc)
* compatible with macOS filesystems (HFS+ and APFS) and folder layouts (/Library, /System, /Users, /Volumes, etc)
* self-contained applications in folders or a single file and a (mostly) installer-less experience for /Applications
* mostly maintain compatibility with the FreeBSD base system and X11 - a standard Unix environment under the hood
* compatible with Linux binaries via FreeBSD's Linux support
* eventual compatibility with x86-64 macOS binaries (Mach-O) and libraries
* pleasant to use, secure, stable, and performant
[0] https://github.com/mszoek/airyx
[+] [-] eafer|4 years ago|reply
How far along is this? I think she's underestimating how hard it is to implement a modern filesystem that won't eat users' data. I've been working on a Linux APFS driver[0] for several years, and it's not fully functional yet. It's a pity that she is working with FreeBSD, or it could have been of use to her.
[0] https://github.com/eafer/linux-apfs-rw
[+] [-] infogulch|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PaulDavisThe1st|4 years ago|reply
Hard to see how this can be done legally. The libraries (sorry, Frameworks) that make up the user-space runtime for macOS are all proprietary. There's no replacement for the most important parts of it.
[+] [-] orra|4 years ago|reply
It's a tall order, but sometimes projects like this take off.
[+] [-] atmosx|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sdrinf|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shortformblog|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Drybones|4 years ago|reply
I downloaded the preview ISO. I looks a lot like another BSD project I know that aimed to be an open BSD based Mac desktop. IDK if they renamed the project or if this is the same project I was thinking of.
Screenshots from the Live CD: https://imgur.com/a/q3hp0np
[+] [-] Drybones|4 years ago|reply
0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28068864
[+] [-] fluxem|4 years ago|reply
However, who really wants a "global menu bar". It made sense for the original mac, when people just used one app at a time. And it's left in the current MacOS for legacy reasons. But now people usually have multiple 27" monitors. So, instead of having menus where the app is, you need to move the mouse all the way to the top and then back. Im not sure why anyone would want to replicate it.
[+] [-] cable2600|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gizdan|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ChrisMarshallNY|4 years ago|reply
It seems well-organized. She has her work cut out for her, but it can def be done (I seem to recall a certain trashmouth Finn, doing something similar...).
[+] [-] azinman2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] qwerty456127|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vzaliva|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] peatmoss|4 years ago|reply
macOS has, however, been making superficial changes that people don’t care about. A free macOS desktop alternative would build on a stable set of core technologies, and let people do the crazy things that they want, and not do the crazy things that they don’t want.
[+] [-] shortformblog|4 years ago|reply
I was once critical of ReactOS for similar reasons, but I’ve realized just how beneficial that project has been to OSS as a whole. Even if they fail they will uncover a lot of interesting stuff if the project continues long-term.
[+] [-] Wowfunhappy|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wmf|4 years ago|reply
What if you spend your entire career innovating and the result is still worse than Snow Leopard?
(/me kicks GNOME into a bottomless pit)
[+] [-] fsflover|4 years ago|reply
No, they won't. MacOS and Windows are both going backwards in innovations (according to many HN commenters at least). At some point this project (and ReactOS) will get better than the originals.
[+] [-] aeoleonn|4 years ago|reply
Similarly, I don't see much difference between Ubuntu desktop distros in terms of differences across versions , say from 16 to 20.
Therefore... I don't see a being "one step behind" as any kind of issue. I've never run into an issue with past versions (such as those menntioned above) of OSes not running what I need them to run.
Personally, I'd like to see a Linux version which is very close to Apple so I can use it (such as OP's), instead of expensive Apple computers.
[+] [-] zepto|4 years ago|reply
I’d argue that there is room for both.
But, who is attempting anything better?
[+] [-] HomeDeLaPot|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cercatrova|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] suction|4 years ago|reply
It's just a bad idea. They'll never get even close, and those screenshots on Imgur prove it.
What I'd prefer is if these definitely brilliant developers would "own" the Unix history more, and build upon Motif. Put the effort do create a mimicry of MacOS into modernising Motif. Hopefully not just make the chrome translucent, but really think about how Motif would look if invented in 2021.
[+] [-] GekkePrutser|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jrsj|4 years ago|reply
Could be something else, I know there were projects attempting to do things with Darwin in the past and none were successful.
[+] [-] amelius|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shapefrog|4 years ago|reply
If you dont want to eat meat, why try and replicate the taste, texture and sensation of eating meat?
If you dont want to use macOS, why try and replicate the taste, texture and sensation of using macOS?
[+] [-] theonemind|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fredsir|4 years ago|reply
> If you dont want to eat meat, why try and replicate the taste, texture and sensation of eating meat?
What is this taste, texture, and sensation of meat in regards to bacon you're talking about? Bacon is the opposite of the actual taste, texture, and sensation of meat. It's cooked, salted, and processed to give it that taste, texture, and sensation.
It's the same with people making fun of plant-based burgers and sausages. Well, guess what, burgers and sausages don't exist in nature, neither as meat nor plant. Well, actually... Cucumbers and a few other plants seem quite like sausages. Anyways. The burger, sausage, and bacon form factor is what makes it attractive. It's why people have liked it for so long, and why people like it still when they switch to a plant-based diet.
I guess it's the same reason why some people are into Airyx OS.
[+] [-] Accacin|4 years ago|reply
The fact that I could enjoy meat without any of those downsides is appealing to me :)
[+] [-] gouggoug|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] factorialboy|4 years ago|reply
It's awful how very few in the tech community challenge Apple for their false privacy claims.
/Happy and productive onna Linux desktop
[+] [-] fny|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 1_player|4 years ago|reply
Enjoy the off topic comment chain.
[+] [-] wraptile|4 years ago|reply
- expensive.
- unergonomic.
- locked in.
I need macbook for work but I use Linux personally. Would be great if I could have native toolset on both.
Also there are hundreds of perfectly valid reasons to not want to support or deal with Apple.
[+] [-] animal_spirits|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] endofreach|4 years ago|reply
And even more absurd to use this kind of argument in the software world. Imagine back then... „If you don‘t like Unix, why...“, or the first GUI implementations on Linux trying to achieve what apple or microsoft did... Oh well, what our hacker world would be like if more people thought that way...
Sorry, not trying to offend, but these projects are what I live for. „Stickin‘ it to the big guys“ - after all, we are hackers, aren‘t we?
[+] [-] AnIdiotOnTheNet|4 years ago|reply
Because the taste and texture of meat are pretty great, it's just that whole "raising and killing a sentient being" thing that's the problem.
The argument for something like Airyx is pretty similar: there are things to like about MacOS and things to not like about it, and it'd be great to get an alternative that has fewer negatives.
[+] [-] klemcijada|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bayesian_horse|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mike_hock|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] etaioinshrdlu|4 years ago|reply
This might be OK though, because I think what a hacker interested in this is really interested is the parts of macOS that are common with NextSTEP. Which are all the parts 20+ years old!
[+] [-] pjmlp|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] oceankid|4 years ago|reply
Go up against Fuchia and Google hardware in less time and with more clarity.
[+] [-] kaybe|4 years ago|reply
https://airyx.de/
[+] [-] forgotpwd16|4 years ago|reply
Why not build on Darwin which basically forms macOS's core?
And how it differs from helloSystem?