Not an apple user, but I've heard that xcode is an ide+build system. Which means that you can't compile an application if you don't have the exact version of xcode installed. How true is that?
I'm not sure what you mean by "the exact version of xcode installed" but you can compile most applications with any recent version. Of course when new SDKs are released you need to update the Xcode version but it's not a big deal (and maybe a once a year thing).
It is an IDE + build system but you can totally write code in a different editor and compile it on the command line with xcodebuild.
LXC is needed to run the services that Android provides, for Android applications (Surfaceflinger, Audioflinger etc..)
Android ships with it's own init system that does a lot more than just starting/stopping services. And integrating those services manually into regular Linux desktop's init system would have been painful to say the least.
That's the reason Anbox runs the whole Android subsystem in it's own LXC container - to avoid having to patch the Android init system and various system libraries to load Android libraries from non AOSP paths. (Like /system/ , /vendor etc..)
From what i remember, The original Anbox used patched version of Android frameworks, that sent the application render data to the Anbox session manager running outside the container [1] , which then created the application windows and rendered it there. This was okay on desktop systems, but on mobile phones (Sailfish OS, Ubports devices) that were trying to use Anbox to provide app compatibility, this had a significant amount of overhead, that made it unusable.
Back then there was the sfdroid project, that tried to patch the Android frameworks running inside Anbox Container to directly create Wayland windows and render the applications directly (kind of like how Chrome OS used to do), instead of having the Anbox session manager do it [2,3], bringing back most of the lost performance.
From the looks of it, Waydroid seems to be doing something similar [4]
Ahh, I think I was mistaken. I think Anbox already used LXC (which was good because it wasn't emulating the whole OS). The key difference that Waydroid brings is that it is written for Wayland. I guess this is an advantage over X because of how Wayland exposes device hardware.
Let's be honest here, windows is going to be slow as a moonwalking Michael Jackson with that processor. Windows is, I kid you not, an order of magnitude slower than linux/macos.
What? Windows 10 isn’t particularly slow on my i7-4770K. You’re telling me that the i5-1135G7 (which benchmarks faster) is going to perform worse than my 8 year old CPU in general OS use?
If you’re only used to windows you might not notice how inefficient it is, and you may also be doing the “right” kind of workload for windows. On an i7 6700hq thinkpad I did the experiment and ran both windows and linux for an extended period. In my experience linux was about 30% faster for typical web development tasks (npm install, angular build, …), but performed around the same for web browsing, and was much slower in video calls.
Solaris (commercial and open-source derivatives), freebsd, openbsd, at least a dozen linux distros (from debian to things like gentoo, sourcemage, LFS...), MacOS, Windows... a handful of "toy" OSes... I've run a lot of different OSes over the years. I've used heavyweight desktops, lightweight desktops, straight X, straight terminal... across a large variety of hardware from the 90s until maybe 2016 or so. The point being, that I actually do have a lot of experience in a wide variety of environments with a wide range of interactive experiences.
Currently, my primary working environments are some sort of Unix, with CDE, stumpwm, or dwm - pretty ultralight environments by today's standards. I do think these environments can be described as "fast".
As to the actual machine in question (with the i7-4700k), that's my gaming desktop. It's run mostly Windows over the years, with some OS X thrown in there. For the past year or so it's been pretty much just OS X, but I do boot into Windows from time to time for this or that. Neither of these OSes are as fast as the stripped down environments that I prefer, but neither is appreciably faster or slower than the other, either, in my experience (unless something is broken; I could of course tell you horror stories about both platforms). From my perspective, both of them are enormous inefficient monstrosities, but the hardware is also really fast.
> In my experience linux was about 30% faster for typical web development tasks (npm install, angular build, …)
Yeah, these types of things aren't great on Windows. Especially if you run into corner cases, a lot of tools that were written for Unix environments go to dog on Windows. I don't know what most of the individual issues are, and I don't really know that it's even a matter of CPU (vs. operative latency, deadlocks, etc.). But the poster I was responding to seemed to be saying that Windows itself is too much for a modern i5 to handle, and that just isn't my experience.
You don't know what you're missing out on. I have a ryzen 3600+nvme and it takes less time to boot into Linux, unzip a large file, and boot back into windows than it takes to unzip the file on windows, even if anti-virus is disabled.
Unzipping is a single threaded task, so it's going to run at the same speed even on a 5950x.
On the hardware side, sure, it would be great to have cutting-edge tech. Money is a factor. Realistically, my hardware is good enough for my present needs.
On the software side, I am absolutely aware of what is available.
File operations do seem pretty slow on Windows. What I've noticed is that latency for individual access seems really bad. Does that latency actually scale with CPU speed?
Edit: btw, what were you using to unzip the file on Windows? How about Linux (unzip?)
What Linux kernel/distro, what sort of zip file (large files vs small, encrypted?)
