For example, the latest version of Mac OS broke docker - literally today we discovered this.
That's wrong, Docker will run fine on M1/Big Sur after an ARM release and probably some patching. Not too different what you'd expect on any major OS release.
And Docker has the motivation and means to patch and build the M1 Arm version.
You can take it directly from the Docker people:
> Thanks. We're working closely on this with Apple. This is expected right now (and indeed there's nothing we can do about it yet) as the new chips don't have virtualisation support yet.
https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/4733
Notice the lack of panic or any mention of "it'll never be done", even implied.
I haven't had to spends days configuring anything for over a decade.
I play along, but I haven't compiled a single thing in years. I don't even think proper build tools are installed on my PC.
My history of using Linux desktop is riddled with crap like that.
The Dell XPS 13 is supposedly good too although I don't have personal experience.
I use Macs quite a bit but the idea that running Linux on a properly-selected modern laptop is likely to be an exercise in frustration is just a myth at this point.
But you are absolutely correct, and my Linux laptop is a Thinkpad X1 Carbon. It's also well supported under OpenBSD but for what I do with it (mostly media consumption and some light gaming mixed in with the usual laptop stuff), Linux works out better.
Developers never use apple because it has tons of compatibility issues.
Can you maybe also comment further on the compatibility issues? Mac is perfectly fine for any general-purpose frontend/backend development. Unless you work in a Windows-centric environment or in a setting that clearly rules out a Mac (e.g. Linux system programming), I cannot really imagine what compatibility issue would prevent you from using a Mac e.g. for Typescript, Java, Python or Go development. Not sure why Poland would be less friendly for developer Macs than the rest of the world.
Good PC laptops are much better if you're using them like a developer would (move it twice a day, code on it for hours without moving).
Thermal design is awful on apple laptops, they are basically running half-speed by design. Can't fix anything if it breaks.
Why would people value brand over all these concerns is beyond me. Must be consumer patriotism, like with Harley-Davidson :)
Ubuntu's been really solid. Boring even. Which may not seem like a compliment, but I don't nerd out on OS stuff, I just want a computer that I can do stuff with when I need it. And I personally found previously with mac and windows my ability to 'just do work' wasn't there.
How could it be that people are all about freedom when it comes to governments but have no problem if private companies censor and controll what they write and do?
I.e. if you take away the rights to privately create and distribute software, the current situation will become permanent.
Nobody wants to take away their right to do so (ok well maybe some do; I'm not one of them). Just that there should be rules we all agree to when we do.
We accept this in other venues. Seatbelts. Stoplights. Nutrition labeling on packaging. etc..
No such rules exist for software, which is odd. It does seem to suggest the industry is ripe for regulation. It's always disappointing to me that we only accept limits when the law places them, as though ethics and morals are somehow not good things to pursue for their own reasons.
Which goes back to OP's point: just because a company CAN be as dystopian as they can imagine, doesn't mean they should be.
Only a very small set of products have special regulations, generally those which we deem unsafe for consumers unless regulated.
“Seatbelts. Stoplights. Nutrition labeling on packaging. etc.”
A good set of examples. Every one of them is about consumer health and safety. This is consistent with liberal democracy - people should be free to do what they want unless it hurts someone else. That is why all product related regulations are related to safety.
It seems reasonable to assume you are arguing for rules which prevent the installation of unsafe software on computers which are sold to consumers.
Apple would be the most compliant company with such rules, and would benefit greatly.
If you don’t, you don’t have to use their products.
Wish it was as good on the alternatives. Hopefully it works 100% out of the box, but I wouldn’t bet my life on it.
Computers are a tool we use to do our work. Setting up the computer cannot become a job by itself.