[diragon]

Currently probably because M1 is absurdly better than the competition. They will certainly draw users away from Linux unless either this porting effort gets done, or unless other ARM options that support Linux better become available.

[p4bl0]

> They will certainly draw users away from Linux

And the beauty of non commercial software is that we don't actually have to care about that. If people choose performance increase over freedom, you can't really chose for them.

Now I'm not saying that we should not port free software to the M1. I'm saying that the good reason to do so is because the people porting it want to have it there, rather than thinking in term of user retention.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

> And the beauty of non commercial software is that we don't actually have to care about that.

If that's really true, then why are so many so intent on increasing Linux Desktop adoption? Popularity means more people working on it, more people making software for it, more hardware having drivers, etc.

[nixpulvis]

The problem, as I see it, is that "free software" becomes unfree when you have to pay to port it.

Back in the glory of more universal general computers this was perhaps a lesser spoken requirement of the system.

Today, it's clear to me that we are slipping back into chaos.

EDIT: Seems like FSF's "freedom to run" might fit the definitional benchmark for me. I'm not really sure how people are going to react to that though ;)

[DonHopkins]

But the point is that Apple's software that runs on the M1 is absurdly better than the competition, especially on the M1, because both the macOS software and the M1 hardware were designed to work together hand-in-hand fast and efficiently.

So even if you could get all the hardware drivers working properly, Linux/Gnome still will lose out to macOS because that hardware simply wasn't designed for that software, and that software simply wasn't designed for that hardware, while macOS and M1 were both designed to work together.

But Gnome was originally designed to run on X-Windows, whose hardware model is a MicroVAX framebuffer on acid.

https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398...

The color situation is a total flying circus. The X approach to device independence is to treat everything like a MicroVAX framebuffer on acid. A truly portable X application is required to act like the persistent customer in Monty Python’s “Cheese Shop” sketch, or a grail seeker in “Monty Python and the Holy Grail.” Even the simplest applications must answer many difficult questions:

WHAT IS YOUR DISPLAY?

   display = XOpenDisplay("unix:0");

WHAT IS YOUR ROOT?

    root = RootWindow(display, DefaultScreen(display));

AND WHAT IS YOUR WINDOW?

    win = XCreateSimpleWindow(display, root, 0, 0, 256, 256, 1,
                              BlackPixel(
                                  display,
                                  DefaultScreen(display)),
                              WhitePixel(
                                  display,
                                  DefaultScreen(display)));

OH ALL RIGHT, YOU CAN GO ON.

    (the next client tries to connect to the server)

WHAT IS YOUR DISPLAY?

    display = XOpenDisplay("unix:0");

WHAT IS YOUR COLORMAP?

    cmap = DefaultColormap(display, DefaultScreen(display));

AND WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE COLOR?

    favorite_color = 0; /* Black. */
    /* Whoops! No, I mean: */
    favorite_color = BlackPixel(display, DefaultScreen(display));
    /* AAAYYYYEEEEE!! */

    (client dumps core & falls into the chasm)

WHAT IS YOUR DISPLAY?

    display = XOpenDisplay("unix:0");

WHAT IS YOUR VISUAL?

    struct XVisualInfo vinfo;
    if (XMatchVisualInfo(display, DefaultScreen(display),
                         8, PseudoColor, &vinfo) != 0)
        visual = vinfo.visual;

AND WHAT IS THE NET SPEED VELOCITY OF AN XConfigureWindow REQUEST?

    /* Is that a SubstructureRedirectMask or a ResizeRedirectMask? */

WHAT??! HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT? AAAAUUUGGGHHH!!!!

    (server dumps core & falls into the chasm)

[zamadatix]

The "it was all designed by Apple so can't be outperformed in parts" has got to be a trope at this point.

If that's the case why is Chrome able to put benchmark Safari on my M1?

Not to mention the OS shouldn't be the bottleneck for anything performance related in a desktop type system anyways.

[heavyset_go]

Recent Ryzen chips perform better than M1 chips.

[floatboth]

Not in most workloads, no. M1 is made on a better fab. Future chips might be better, provided the next process they use (rumors are, TSMC "6nm") is close enough to TSMC "5nm".

[johan_felisaz]

I'm curious, sources ?

[cr3ative]

Define "perform". Power efficiency? Raw processing speed? Both?

[h4x0r12345]

The M1 significantly outperforms Ryzen when measured by performance/watt and single-core performance