Much like you said though, with Apple you never know. Hell, there's compelling evidence that Apple simply uses that functionality to flash testing firmware onto Macbooks, and the Linux compatibility is just a nice side-effect. Apple's "contributions" to Asahi mostly amount to adding a feature that pre-existed on x86 machines, and probably intended for Bootcamp/Windows rather than Linux. I think this fully extends to Apple Silicon as well. If said bagel causes an electrical fire or doesn't toast as well as the previous model did, it doesn't matter if ~1% of users will encounter it it probably needs to get fixed before it ships. I think most toaster manufacturers will at least test what happens when you put a bagel inside, though. Does it make commercial sense to support the 0.01% use case?įair enough. > Switching it round though, 99.99% of customers are buying a toaster. It's the same reason we don't have third-party images for most Android phones that are anything beyond tweaks of existing Android images. For developers the work is never really done Even after a driver is upstreamed, maintenance and optimisation is sometimes required, for example if Apple introduce a breaking change to any firmware we are required to interface with.
Every new feature requires reverse engineering the relevant hardware, writing drivers, testing those drivers, then getting them upstreamed. > Development for an undocumented platform is a treadmill of work. I'll leave you with a quote from the Asahi docs At this rate it's going to be years before it's "done" and we already have a successor generation of hardware. the fixed function / low power consumption hardware for the majority of user tasks). Asahi doesn't have 3D acceleration, video encode/decode acceleration, or support for many of the things that make Apple Silicon any good (i.e. In the intervening time more hardware generations were released - It's been 18 months since the M1 release. The problem with these 100% vertically integrated stacks is that every hardware release could be completely different and it'll take years to catch up with just that release. Requiring that a community exist that is willing to spend many years of collective time reverse engineering your products when you could have just released documentation is still a massive middle finger to everyone. There is a huge difference between not physically locking people out of running custom software and legitimately being able to claim you support other operating systems.
0 kommentar(er)
