To give a particular example, I started playing GTAV on Windows after building a new PC since I had no spare drives. After finally installing Linux I decided to try GTAV on Linux just to see how well it would run. And it runs amazingly well, and yes, it runs a few percent points slower than Windows, but the only tradeoff I did was slightly increase FSR4 and the game still looks amazing. I didn't really notice any graphics issues, especially not during actual gameplay (if I stayed at the same place and started to nitpick I could notice differences).

Otherwise, it doesn't really make sense. The only reason we have things like Rust and other memory safe languages is because we want to create safer programs in the existing imperfect OSes that we have currently.

Maybe coreutils is so old that most security vulnerabilities was solved before CVE even existed. But I think this is also a good argument why we are replacing a solid piece of C code to Rust just because it is "memory safe" and then have lots of CVEs related to things like TOCTOUs (that Rust will not save you).

And I didn't really miss any features to be honest, it has the basic that you expect (things like tabs). It is less customizable than other options, but the defaults were good enough for me.

As an author of some homebrewed Go software in the past and trying to distribute in all 3 big OSes, I completely understand the blog post author's points. The problem is not Gatekeeper per see, it is just the combination of things that makes everything infuriating:

- I could justify going for the whole "Apple Developer Program" even with all the bullshit things you need to do to get certified if this was a one time payment like in Google Play Store. But it is yearly. Like the author, I would probably get 0 (or close to 0) dollars in recurrent revenue for those apps, I could justify a one time payment but a yearly one is ridiculous, it is not like Apple needs this money to be profitable (they probably get a much higher margins on selling things on Apple Store)

- Gatekeeper UX is infuriating. The equivalent on Windows (SmartScreen, as the author also cited) is still basically the same as Gatekeeper as far I understand (e.g., you need to have a valid certificate on your app or SmartScreen will deny the app execution until you clear the safety bit). But SmartScreen, different from Gatekeeper, has an actual good UX, as the error messages are clear and actionable (and also don't require a command line command to bypass)

- The author was still in a more "happy path" than me since their app seems to be a CLI only app. In this case just removing the quarantine bit with `xattr` works fine. In my case I was trying to distribute a desktop app, and I needed some special permissions to show notifications. This means I need to package my app in a proper `.app` bundle, include the required XML requesting the permissions and I am now required to sign the app. And since I am required to sign my app, I either pay the yearly payment fee to Apple to get a certificate to sign my app or I ask the users to resign the app with a self-signed certificate before launching

So really, I don't want that much actually. I can definitely handle all bullshit Apple wants, but I want at least a cheaper way to develop apps in their ecossystem. Maybe a new basic certification program that you have a one time fee and you can sign your apps but not notarize them. That way Gatekeeper would still complain, but at least my app would work without resign.

Or limit notarization to X amount of users (non-stabled notarized apps talks with Apple servers during the app first run, so they could just limit the amount of allowed tickets to X amount of users). If my app ever pass X amount of users, I will gladly pay the Apple tax, but 99USD/year for something that I will never see it back is too much.

Edit: BTW, I know, maybe 99USD/year doesn't seem too much for some. But Apple also doesn't do any regional pricing as far I know, and 99USD/year is crazy expensive in the country where I come from for example.

Edit 2: I am sure things are better nowadays with Claude/ChatGPT, but also trying to understand how to do the correct thing for your app is very difficult, especially if you're not using Xcode, since Apple assumes you're using it so all documentation refers to Xcode.

For the unique part of this laptop that AFAIK a Dell XPS won't have is the Coreboot BIOS, that also probably means better support in the long term for BIOS updates.

To be clear, this is also not a laptop for me (but I did pre-order a Framework 13 Pro), but saying "nerd tax" or "anyone who buys one is either giving a donation or an idiot" like the other comment is just focusing in one part (the price) and not looking at the other.

Nope, their complaint about having an API ask if you should delete or not clearly shows the author has no idea how API works. They could have said that a deletion API could require 2 different requests, one for the deletion request that returns a token and another for confirmation with the token returned by the first request, but this is not what they said so.

Also as others have said, this wouldn't have helped anyway because the AI could just call both APIs one after another and the result would be the same, especially if the first request returns "call this other endpoint with this token to confirm your deletion request".

The fact that this seems to be written by AI makes it even more ironic.

Yes sure, there seems to be lots of ways this issue could have been mitigated, but as other comments said, this mostly happened because the author didn't do its proper homework about how the service they rely their whole product works.

One reason to set `mutableUsers = false`: https://mynixos.com/nixpkgs/option/users.mutableUsers.

> And if you activate and enable incus, for instance, it will probably create a bridge device: the device will remain in place after you remove incus, which will have implications for how your network/firewall works that your configuration will depend on but will not enforce or be able to reproduce.

Impermanence: https://github.com/nix-community/impermanence.

To be clear, I don't use neither. But you can get NixOS to be almost completely stateless (if this is something you care) with a few changes. The power is there, but it is disabled by default because it is not the pragmatic choice in most cases.

For me the macOS Display management experience is absolute dreadful. I had the same issues as the author's and I even had to pay actual money for a third party application (BetterDisplay) to fix some of the issues.

The most infurienting one for me is that I can't disable the internal MacBook display when I am connected to an external monitor without closing the lid. Why you may ask? Because I want to keep using the TouchID. However this is impossible in macOS without an external app.

I am actually really excited for a Apple laptop for once, since it is kind the perfect replacement for my Chromebook Duet 3 that I was looking for.

Now this webpage may be out-of-date, so take my claims with a grain of salt.

However, the price argument doesn't make sense. I bought a EUR300 laptop for my wife 3 years ago that has a Intel Core i3 N305 CPU (https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/231805/...), and that CPU, like any modern CPU from Intel, has virtualization instructions.

Heck, my Chromebook Duet with a Snapdragon 7c Gen 2, that compared to this A18 Pro chip is laughable underpowered, also has virtualization instructions (this is why Crostini, the Linux virtual environment for ChromeOS, works).

Of course the 8GB of RAM is also limiting for running any kind of VM, but this notebooks are almost exactly what I was looking for, except for the 8GB of memory.