Why Run Linux On Macs?

jones_supa writes Apple has always had attractive and stylish hardware, but there are always some customers opting to run Linux instead of OS X on their Macs. But why? One might think that a polished commercial desktop offering designed for that specific lineup of computers might have less rough edges than a free open source one. Actually there's plenty of motivations to choose otherwise. A redditor asked about this trend and got some very interesting answers. What are your reasons?

Comments

a better question

[kuzb]

Why run a mac at all if your goal is to use Linux? PCs are a ton cheaper and in most cases just as good.

Re:a better question

[C3c6e6]

and in most cases just as good.

Well, that's where I respectfully disagree! PCs might be cheaper but I have yet to find a PC that is "just as good" as a Mac, hardware-wise. For instance, I find the trackpads on Macs highly superior than those on PCs. Also, display quality is unparalleled, IMHO

Re:a better question

[Kjella]

More like there's a ton of markets that Apple choose not to compete in and if you want to force a square peg into a round hole it gets real expensive. Like not offering a machine with drive bays, if you want more than one drive you should buy some wildly expensive Thunderbolt 2 enclosure. Or offering any cheap solutions, no cheap HDDs, no cheap screens, it's all high end or not at all. But their laptops are pretty much the same as everybody else's, the form factor hasn't allowed them to turn it into an art project. If I was in the market for a $1000+ laptop I'd consider a MacBook no matter what OS I was going to run on it. Not least because I could change my mind, even though dual booting (or even triple booting) is a hassle.

Re:a better question

[quenda]

The best question is "Why buy a Mac to run Linux", and the answer is conspicuous consumption. To show that you can.

If you already have the Mac, OS-X vs Linux is usually just a matter of personal preference. They both do the job.

Re:a better question

[hcs_$reboot]

Lighter, thinner, longer time (battery), nicer... Boot on Linux for some work, boot on Mac for the rest.

Re:a better question

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is because those PC's counted in those margins are low end and mid range models. When you move into the high end, the margins grow much closer and even beyond Apple with companies like HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc. Companies like Samsung, Toshiba, Asus, etc do not even compete for the high end.

Try adding more memory to the competition's laptops, it's almost exactly the same. And yes, it's been proven that people aren't paying attention to the finer details when making these comparisons...such as using low power DDR when others were simply using standard DDR. You're right about them becoming a worse deal over time.

Re:a better question

[Megol]

Right... If one can find a position where the screen glare doesn't ruin it all. I personally can't use an Apple as the glare drives me insane unless seated in a pitch black room - not the best way to do some work...

In fact that isn't true at all - PCs often have better colors, contrast and/or brightness. Just don't buy the bargain basement level of stuff, select computers with IPS screens.

Re: a better question

[TWX]

Yeah! I can enjoy those Blu-Rays I have on my 5K iMac amd make use of the high resolution!

Re:a better question

[lkcl]

because people pay apple more money, so they can afford better designers and can get better components. [longer post explains more, see http://slashdot.org/~lkcl%5D

lenovo *used* to do this when they were IBM. IBM *used* to buy the more expensive components then run them at lower clockrates, which *used* to result in much more reliable products. the thermal stresses (even during normal operation) placed on ceramic packaging causes them to develop micro hairline cracks; high temperatures also cause migration of solder as well as the heavy metals within the silicon ICs themselves.

Re:a better question

[Anonymous Coward]

He was too busy masturbating over how awesome Apple is to read your silly comment.

Re:a better question

[TWX]

Typing this on a MackBook Pro, I wholeheartedly agree that the shiny reflective screen thing is a huge annoyance. In complex lighting I'm having to adjust the screen angle as I change my seating position from time to time.

I'm running OSX on this MacBook, but mainly because while I'm a Linux geek first, I work in a Windows/AD shop that formerly was a Netware shop that has had Macintoshes and Linux servers. I can use anything. OSX gives me enough command-line to be functional doing network administration easily and lets me interface to Linux boxes, and with the multitouch touchpad is quite good, the touchpad on my Lenovo Thinkpad Yoga running Windows is *almost* as good, the touchpad on my Alienware 17" running Linux kind of sucks compared all of the others.

To me it doesn't matter, the software I want to use runs on just about everything, and all of the platforms have their strengths and weaknesses.

Re:a better question

[Knuckles]

However, the Apple trackpads are limited to two fingered use on non-Apple operating systems through the use of crippled drivers and therefore something like a Logitech T650 is far superior when using a non-Apple OS.

Wrong. At least on my 2009 MB Pro 3- and 4-finger touch has been working out of the box on Ubuntu for many years.

To answer the question from TFS, I can only echo what others already wrote. When I purchased this laptop, the MB Pro had by far the nicest product design for my needs, and the PC laptops I found in the same price range did not come close: Full-body aluminium instead of plastic, smooth outer shell instead of little knobs and slits everywhere (important, e.g., when having to remove the laptop from the bag at airport security check), low-key LEDs instead of a blinking christmas tree telling me useless stuff like my wifi working (I know, no need to blink for every packet!!!) but require the use of tape when you want to watch a movie.

Re:a better question

[pakar]

I run Xubuntu on a Macbook pro laptop because it was cheaper for the wanted hardware.. The requirements i had where:
- Good keyboard (i like it anyway)
- Good screen (1080 pixels high is just bad..)
- Good battery time. (getting 7-8 hours without problem)
- No dual gfx card.. Intel only...
- Good CPU.
- Size/Weight of laptop including AC adapter.. (since i do travel a bit)
When searching around i found a couple of laptops.. but none fit the requirements i had.. Either it had a good cpu and keyboard, but not a good screen or battery time. Or it was good screen/keyboard/battery-time but a slow CPU..

So in the end i found 2 options... Either one that was a bit heavy and price at around 2500EUR or the current macbook that i got for 2000EUR..

It is not perfetct hardware, but it does give back for the buck.. There are several negative things with it like lack of docking, non-replacable battery etc, but none of those are too important for me..

Re: a better question

[Applehu Akbar]

When I run Windows, it's safely in a VM inside OS X.

Re: a better question

[Anonymous Coward]

PCs are a ton cheaper and in most cases just as good.

Nothing compare to the Air or the 5k iMac.

In laptops? The Dell XPS 13 competes with the Macbook Air. Similar config is $150 more than a MBAir. It does have better screen resolution.
The Lenovo X1 Carbon costs more too. (Lots more if you get the high res screen.)

In all-in-ones, the Dell XPS 27" w/ 16GB ram is $2599. The 5k iMac w/ 16GB RAM is $2699. That isn't "a ton cheaper" in my book.

And sure, you can buy crap systems for less. People who are buying Macbook Air and 5k iMacs aren't shopping against the crap systems. Apple tax? What Apple tax? (Yeah, haters gonna hate. Mod me down, I don't give a crap.)

Re:a better question

[lolocaust]

If you already have the Mac, OS-X vs Linux is usually just a matter of personal preference.

Exactly. I bought my Mac back in 2011 because nothing came close to the battery life and those specs at that price while being slim enough to be able to fit in my bag every day. Now, Yosemite really does look like an awful OS upgrade, visuals aside, there are some seriously bad bugs, the new spotlight (desktop search) sends every query to Apple (no idea why) and Microsoft (for Bing) and the fact that most of the new features require a recent iPhone. I'm clinging on to OSX Mavericks for now, but I will move to Linux if the battery life is decent.

Re:a better question

[NicBenjamin]

Apparently you don't live near a big American City. There's nothing wrong with that, but one of the trade-offs for doing that is you there are no Apple stores.

I've gotten free repairs on them for parts I admitted I broke simply by going to the Apple Store in-person and being polite. For example, there was one time I spilled Dr. Pepper on the keyboard. Another time the MagSafe board (a daughterboard attached to the motherboard that allows the laptop to connect to the AC Adapter) died. It was out of warranty/ Any company but Apple would have charged me $500, forced me to do the two-week shipping thing you hated so much, and probably fucked it up because the guy reading the work order did the wrong thing. They charged me some ridiculously tiny fee for the part ($10-15) and that was it.

Re: a better question

[Buck Feta]

(Yeah, haters gonna hate. Mod me down, I don't give a crap.)

You posted AC. Nobody gives a crap.

Re: a better question

[TWX]

...and apparently no one got the joke, since Macintoshes don't have internal blu-ray drives or software to play blu-ray discs...

Re:a better question

[danbob999]

Try to do the opposite now. Build a $800 desktop PC and try to build a Mac with similar specs and look at the price. You will end-up with that expensive Mac Pro.

Re: a better question

[bazmonkey]

"Wrong. At least on my 2009 MB Pro 3- and 4-finger touch has been working out of the box on Ubuntu for many years." Yeah, and how many apps in Ubuntu understand and use it?

Re:a better question

[Jesus_666]

The price/performance ratio for Macs has always been highly dependent on what kind of device you're getting. Since the G4 iBook (which is when I started using Macs) their notebooks have been a pretty good value for what they did, especially if you want to run some kind of unixoid without having to fiddle around or compromise on capability. Since the unibody MBP they're pretty damn robust, too.

Their desktops, on the other hand, cater exclusively to a) people who need big workstations and b) people who see a sleek form factor, no fans and fewer cables on the desk as serious value-adds. I fall into neither of these categories, which is why my desktop is built from COTS parts.

Unfortunately even the notebooks are becoming less attractive as Apple is focusing on the "I want my notebook to be as light and thin as possible" demographic at the expense of everyone else. My next notebook will still run OS X because I'm used to it but it won't come from Apple.

Re: a better question

[Knuckles]

Yeah, and how many apps in Ubuntu understand and use it?

None apart from Unity itself as far as I am aware of, but the claim I responded to was "However, the Apple trackpads are limited to two fingered use on non-Apple operating systems through the use of crippled drivers".

Re: a better question

[BasilBrush]

Most people buying an iMac get the base version, not the 5k display one.

You complain about anecdotes, then pull that out of your ass?

Re:a better question

[Thumper_SVX]

You know what? I'm a "lapsed Apple guy"... ran MacBook pros for years, had iPhones... now I'm Android and Windows. Reason? The "Genius Bar". Yeah... I'm going to take 2 hours out of my day to go to the closest Apple store... which is in the mall... which sucks because I hate malls. I have to fight for parking, battle my way past the Starbucks stand where the hipsters are yelling at the Barista because the milk has .01% too much foam on their triple-espresso low fat low carb mocha latte frappucino hot... to finally put my name on the list for the Genius where I'm in a one hour queue to get some just-out-of-college hipster who was probably earlier yelling at that same barista to waggle his waxed moustache ends at my laptop and tell me that it's broken. I freaking know that. Then they tell me how they could fix it there but this is a return-to-base factory warranty and that I now need to go fight my way to the FedEx store in a different freaking mall to ship the tucker to Cupertino and be sans laptop for a fortnight.

You know what? When my Alienware dies, Dell will SEND A FREAKING TECH TO MY HOUSE. On my schedule... not a cable-company "sometime-between-10am-and-2020", but a guy who calls me up and makes an appointment to make sure I'm home. If he doesn't bring the part he'll take it with him and either ship it return-to-base himself or he'll get the part overnighted. I don't need some 20-something hipster telling me it's broken... I have being working in technology since before he was born (most likely) and I can diagnose this shit in my sleep.

Oh, and you know what? Every MacBook Pro I've ever purchased has gone back to base for some warranty repair. All of them. Except my last one which suffered a GPU problem literally the week after the warranty expired (one of the many 2011 model 15" units with cracking solder balls that Apple still won't admit is a problem). That latter was the last straw for me... Apple products are beautiful but every one of them has been fundamentally flawed, and their support is a joke. My Alienwares (I have three) have been rock solid... only a lid replacement on an M11xR1... and again Dell sent a tech to my house to fix it. I have an AW15 on order too to replace the MBP... which is away to get the solder balls repaired AT MY COST and then will find its way to eBay. Thus will end my Apple experience.

Oh, and as much as Apple fanboys like to give Microsoft shit, I am typing this on a first-gen Surface Pro that is my take-everywhere PC, has traveled extensively and has been absolutely rock solid. Five years ago if you had told me I'd EVER say that about a Microsoft product I would've seriously laughed in your face.

Re: a better question

[Billly Gates]

Windows 7 is a good solid OS with true color support that matches Apple if you have a decent monitor. Not sexy but just boring solid.

I use vmware and virtual box is free for my turnkey Linux appliances for backend stuff like php. Best of both worlds. Check out www.turnkey linux.Com if you want something that turns on and just works?

If I did own Mac I would still use vmware workstation which is much much cheaper on a mac for Linux stuff so I can keep Dreamweaver and office on my host.

Re:a better question

[thecombatwombat]

I've found two reasons for this in the more than a decade since I got my first PowerBook. There's two things: there's always a few hardware features that come at a premium, and the mac stuff has some hardware niceties that I like regardless of what OS I'm running.

Everything comes and goes in cycles, feature parity is always shifting around.

For example, when I got my first G4, comparable PC laptops didn't have:

- bluetooth
- firewire
- target disk mode
- a widescreen IPS display
- gigabit ethernet

without getting really expensive.

When I got my first intel mac it was:

- dual link DVI
- a backlit keyboard
- a builtin camera

On my current macboor pro, which I bought about two years ago it was:

- thunderbolt and the ability to drive an insane number of displays
- that screen, when the first retina came out, that screen was unmatched

Laptops that had all these features have always come in at similar costs. There's sort of an 80/20 rule in play, and Apple just doesn't bother too much with things below the 80, but this seems to change a little more every year.

Also, I really love how my current MBP plugs into my display. One cable for power, USB, and display. The thunderbolt displays are basically a solid docking station.

If you dig the hardware and want some premium features (usually really current IO options) the cost makes sense to me.

Re: a better question

[Aighearach]

Most people buying an iMac get the base version, not the 5k display one.

You complain about anecdotes, then pull that out of your ass?

It makes sense, he omitted the anecdote and jumped straight ahead to an unsupported assertion.

Personally I prefer the bare assertion, it takes less time to suffer through and laugh down than the anecdote. I don't know how many times somebody has threatened to stab me for insulting their grandpappy when actually no, I just wasn't interested in weighing the anecdote about him.

Re: a better question

[retchdog]

perhaps, but what can linux do that OS X cannot?

Vanity vs Logic

[bgibby9]

Vanity < Logic after all :)

Debian on shiny Retina Macbook Pro

[Ivan Stepaniuk]

My company buys apple hardware for everybody and I have been working on GNU/Linux for 15 years. I use the operating system where I'm most productive, which is GNU/Linux. Also, nowadays OSX seems to be more prone to problems that were reserved for windows users in the past, like unexplicable slugginesh, tons of crap loading at startup, etc. No thanks.

Re:Debian on shiny Retina Macbook Pro

[sribe]

Well Mac OS X doesn't kill applications when you press the "close" button, it only kills/detaches/hides/whatever the window
So I think what he thinks is residual inactive memory is probably used memory from any "closed" application.

Actually, there's some weird stuff going on in Yosemite.

1) They now name the per-page webkit processes with the url of the page. So if you look at your processes, you can see which pages are hogging CPU and/or RAM. You'll also see that in many cases, long after you close a page, the process is still running.

2) Starting way back, I noticed that when you close a document in Preview, the file is still kept open by preview. But in Yosemite it's worse, fucking *quit* Preview, then run lsof, and you'll see the files still open in some preview process.

Also, an unused application with all windows closed should not slow down the machine. Prior to Mavericks I would have stated "will not", but now I have to say "should not, but may well do so, considering how badly Apple seems to have fucked up the performance of virtual memory."

systemd

[Dan East]

Why run linux on mac hardware? To get systemd, of course.

Because OS X is no longer supported on my Mac

[the_humeister]

Power Mac G4: Debian 8 runs like a champ. The latest Mac OS won't even install.

Re:Mac OS is too susceptible to viruses

[quenda]

You know that hackers are always attacking mainstream OS. Use an obscure one and everyone leaves you alone.

BSD?

I can think of one reason: Predictable hardware.

[Qbertino]

Apple still has one thing going for it: Predictable hardware. Even after 15 years or so of OS X, the range of devces is fairly overseeable. If a crew gets Linux to run on a mac, they've like also gotten the drivers and all the extras to run halfway properly.

But that's about the only reason to get a mac to run linux. Besides, I'd pick up this device these days. Awesome project - deserves every support they can get.

Bottom line:
You buy a mac for the awesome hard- and software integration and their sleek product design. Using a mac without its OS isn't that smart, IMHO.

A lot of people here are missing the point...

[MMC Monster]

(I'm not an Apple fanboy, I think. Of the 8 computers in my house, only two are Apple hardware, and one of them is > 5 years old.) The rest are either Acer or System76.

A lot of people buy Apple hardware because it's a known quality and (relatively) easy to get fixed. You (probably) know you're going to pay a little extra, but you know the build quality is generally consistently good and if there are hardware issues you can take it into an Apple Store and get it fixed fairly quickly.

It's fine for people that buy PC hardware all the time to say that a particular brand or model is good price and excellent quality. Most people don't want to do that much research for a laptop or desktop. And many have burnt themselves with buying something expensive and had it go bad in a couple years or need to be troubleshooted over the phone or mailed back due to some obscure issue. Better to drag it to the local Apple Store for many.

Because of service

[bananaquackmoo]

Here's the deal. I am not a fan of Apple. If I weren't recommending a laptop to someone I would never recommend an Apple product. BUT! When it comes to laptops, Apple is really the only option. Why? Because you can walk down to the apple store and someone will fix any hardware problems for you. You can't get that with any PC maker. Heck, the best rated PC maker for customer support took a month to repair something for me, and that's after it took me weeks to get them to even look at it. If you think your laptop hardware is ever going to break or die within the timeframe of a warranty (hint: they almost always do), then Apple is really the only option.

Actually, not a single interesting answer

[davids-world.com]

Sorry, but I couldn't find interesting answers in that Reddit thread. It's mostly that people choose to run OSX over Linux, and why.

The few GNU/Linux users do it for idealistic reasons, or because they're developers, or because they like the latest OS on very old cheap hardware and don't mind to deal with whatever this entails.

The more interesting question is really if freedom exists when you never make use of it. (Do you actually hack the kernel or fix somebody's proprietary binary-only drivers as a GNU/Linux user?)

A good reason not to:

[zerofoo]

EFI updates. On Mac hardware, they can only be delivered by a Mac OS update. Run Linux exclusively, and you will not get firmware updates.

I'm as Mac a fanboy as one can be - but if you want to run Linux, build yourself a nice PC - far less pain that way.

My reason

[grahamlee]

I switched from Debian to OS X in 2004, then from OS X to Ubuntu in 2014. The story of the switch back is told in full here. That meant that the cheapest route for me was to install a distro on my MacBook, because I already owned it :). And it really is good hardware, so I'm happy with the amount I paid for a high-quality laptop that fulfils my needs. The interesting part of the switch for me is the question "why not use OS X"? There are all sorts of bugs in OS X and its applications, just as there are in Linux, GNU and their applications. The difference is that I'm allowed to fix the bugs in GNU, and other people can take advantage of those fixes. So I've been learning about GTK+ and Vala, as well as getting back up to speed with GNUstep, so that when I find a bug I can contribute a fix back. Plenty of other posters have discussed that there are cheaper GNU/Linux-compatible laptop choices, and indeed had I not already owned a MacBook I probably would've considered some of those. But "cheapest" is a non-goal for me, or at least far down the chain below reliable wifi, good battery, solid construction and (to the extent that this is at all an option on any laptop) decent keys.

Re:Exaggeration, much?

[Thumper_SVX]

You realize of course that every time I've called the toll-free number, they've told me to go to the Genius Bar with a service request ID? Yeah... they want to "verify the problem" before they've fixed it. That alone is enough reason for me to say "Nope!"