Someone asked strange question: Does an app being cross-platform diminish its value to the user?
Nope. Several times no. Example: Affinity Designer is cross-platform and thank to this my production workflow can live without "active scanning" from some corporate overlord.
Too much Apple brainwashing is going around, too much.
The added restrictions of recent times (e.g. SIP, the move to a non-GNU build toolchain, hard read-only restrictions on the OS region of the filesystem, etc) aren't so much a FOSS issue as them just adopting conventions that aren't present on the Linuxes. The breakage of packages and porting efforts feel very similar to when we used to have to worry about how a package would work on HP-UX, Irix, Solaris, and the various systems that were all similar but not quite identical. That was never a function of FOSS or not - it was just a function of not being all the same.
I find it very frustrating that people try to treat OSX as a Linux - it's not, and it never will be. If you want to support macOS, then support macOS - don't try to bash Linux-isms onto it since they will always feel like a hack since it isn't and never will be a Linux. If that's important to you, there's an easy solution - use Linux. I do that - I have my MacBook that I use as a Mac, and for the stuff that's simply too awkward to use natively there, I just ssh to my Linux workstation and carry on.
I've disabled SIP since day one and stick to 10.14. I urge others to disable SIP if they're developers -- each crash report includes its status and as you need it turned off to be able to debug everything, it sends a signal to apple reminding them to not shut the gate on their walled garden.
That is 'cos it was developed by the same developers, hired by Apple, who also created the ports system on FreeBSD.
MacPorts has excellent support for older macOS versions. It is built with C and TCL and is compact and blazing fast, compared to HomeBrew which is a bunch of Ruby scripts. MacPorts has the highest number of packages available for macOS, and all other Package Managers trail behind it (last I remember, it had like 5 times more packages than HB). HomeBrew packages sometimes have dependency on the installed OS packages. This is good for saving space. MacPorts however maintains and installs all dependencies separate from the OS. So there is no danger of corrupting OS installed packages or vice versa. Another advantage is you never know whether Apple has customised some packages for their own use, and if it will behave differently.
MacPorts doesn't do any kind of data collection. HomeBrew has Google Analytics integrated within it (it can, and has to, be turned off). MacPorts adheres to the unix philosophy better than HomeBrew, both in terms of security and where packages are stored in the OS.
Here's a good FAQ to peruse - https://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ
Here are a few potential downsides:
- The 'kool kids' tend to use brew -- so sometimes you end up with packages that are not in the ports ecosystem. That said, the total number of ports is, I believe, about 4x larger than brew's formulae. But take that number with a pinch of salt.
- Every time you upgrade the OS (e.g. 10.14 to 10.15) you need to effectively reinstall ports. This sounds hard, but it isn't -- it's also well documented . It's because they link against various OS-specific foundations.
- Very rarely you run into apt-style "dependency hell". This has only happened to me once or twice in ~15 years of using it, and is easily fixed.
- All that being said, it's rock stable
- The documentation is excellent
- It doesn't come with google analytics by default (unlike brew -- which is opt-out, I should say)
- Macports retains the entire dependency tree of a package and offers both source and binary builds
A more detailed comparison could be found e.g. here: https://saagarjha.com/blog/2019/04/26/thoughts-on-macos-pack...
With minimal effort I have professional environment with enough animation an GUI is responsive and blisteringly fast.
There is no denying that macOS is polished GUI-wise, but as UX for professional work is nothing special. I used Pathfinder for years (shorturl.at/lrxER) to suppress Finder lack of functions.
Another example: In Finder you cannot compress a file and add a password protection.
In Dolphin this is integrated and you have a choice of file compression and type of password protection.
Apple is changing visual language of macOS to give impression of advancements and iOS like appearance. In reality the advancements are related to more deep integration to the ecosystem and further closing of the platform.
For people, who are asking what professional GUI must look like, I always give the interface of Soundtrack Pro as an example. This was the pinnacle of MacOS GUI and UX design, clean, with clear separation of controllers and professional color scheme with balanced contrast.
Warning: Some skeumorphism ahead:
Because a list of cross-platform, *nix or electron apps in any state of release doesn’t mean much.
Although mine is more opinionated I think, based on what I use. (And has a section with freeware/paid software at the end)
Regardless, both Firefox and Thunderbird are and remain open source.
It's actually faster just to use the keyboard shortcuts though.
No, thank you!
The only two things which bother me are bad situation with keyboard shortcuts and some hidpi issues on Wayland.
I don't care if macOS goes open source since I have none of Apple's hardware and I am quite happy with my NixOS setup.