Yeah, I think people were overly optimistic given the initial progress. The Asahi team has done incredible work to be sure with just getting it running and the GPU driver. But there is a long tail of things to fix to make it truly usable as a daily driver.

For me personally, I thought the project was awesome, installed it, booted it, and realized the trackpad felt really janky. I start playing with the acceleration settings and then caught myself and remembered that not having to deal with that exact thing was why I bought a Mac to begin with.

One major problem is in the fact that Hector/Asahi has very little experience with distribution maintenance, and is mainly suited to the role of reverse engineering the M1 chip and implementing the driver. It would be far better if he put all of his focus into the M1 driver itself and let others handle the surrounding distro variants. In fact this recently came up when he misconfigured GRUB during updates and soft-locked Macs until they ran a list of sudo commands to fix the error.

That's the whole point of their new partnership with Fedora

That didn't help as the parent mentioned as Fedora Asahi Remix shipped a bug that caused people's grub config to be overwritten with one that didn't work preventing the machine from booting. There was no way to remotely fix users and a solution took days to come out for people to manually fix it by typing in commands to the bootloader.

To their credit, this is a more challenging than your standard Linux distro. Lots of software just has a bunch of subtle bugs on arm which don't exist on x86_64. Other software has a bunch of subtle bugs on 16k page sizes. Those problems aren't ones you'll face as a distro maintainer for some x86_64 Linux distro. Then there's the issue that Arch Linux ARM is itself not always super competently managed, so it's not a solid foundation to build on top of.

I think it'll be very good for them to leave all the distro responsibilities to Fedora and focus on the hardware specific stuff. But I don't think they'll stop facing weird issues related to not being part of the 4k page size x86_64 monoculture.

But was the grub issue caused by the 16k page size?

Ok, but the page size is something they chose themselves?

My understanding is that the chosen page size is optimal for the M-series integrated memory.

It doesn't really matter all that much for userspace; the page size really is a choice. It can improve performance in some cases and regress them in a handful of others. That said, the pain of having to deal with apps that need updates is entirely on Asahi by their own volition.

do you not understand the underlying architecture or do you think they just chose it willy nilly? if you don't understand why are you commenting

Please don't post in the flamewar style. We want curious conversation here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I wonder, wouldn’t a NixOS Asahi fork make sense? It has proper, fail-safe updates (you can select the previous version in the boot menu) and reproducible package builds even for very finicky configs.

The only actual problematic update I'm aware of was the one where grub broke, and if grub breaks, being able to select the previous system state from grub doesn't really help.

It should be noted GRUB itself didn’t break at all. Hector used a bad config which broke things, and the fix was to replace that config with a new one. GRUB did exactly what it was told to do.

This was, to put it uncharitably, kind of predictable if you were familiar with their social circles...

Such accusations should be backed up with facts and examples.

Okay, so, without pointing fingers, it's not particularly weird or surprising that a few people gathered up from mostly the RE/console hacking/security scene have a penchant for breaking things and lack releng expertise. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, though I'd consider that in itself good reason to side-eye relying on their software, more or less the same way I'd side-eye running suckless or, idk, MAS_AIO.cmd in production.

But then it also happens that they sit adjacent to one of the most drama-infested intersections of a few scenes; I'm probably brain-poisoned by bad experiences there and not extremely comfortable airing that dirty laundry in public, but it's not secret or anything—their mastodon instance is pretty representative.

Those are all fairly critical things for me. Thanks for the comment.

does the original Apple recovery partition remain so that you could return it back to the original OS if one was to try this but prefer to go back?

If you have access to a second Mac, you can restore macOS even after a complete disk wipe, no recovery partition needed:

> Will this break my machine? How safe is it?

[...]

> Apple Silicon machines are almost completely unbrickable: you can boot them in a special burned-in recovery mode and recover them, using another machine connected via a USB cable. For those who don’t have another macOS machine to act as a host, we have open source tools that work on Windows and Linux too.

https://asahilinux.org/2022/03/asahi-linux-alpha-release/

https://support.apple.com/guide/apple-configurator-mac/reviv...

Yep, Apple Configurator 2. Been there done that with an unfixable partitioning. Eventually I learned about AC2 and a clean install solved all of my partitioning problems.

Super handy for resetting other Apple devices in weird states too. I've picked up "bricked" HomePod Minis from eBay, reset them with AC2, and ended up with 100% functional HomePods for a fraction of the price of a new one.

You can just run OSX beside Asahi. You don't need to uninstall OSX if you don't want to.

The other responses are answering everything but the actual question: You can NOT remove the recovery partition when installing Asahi. It's required to boot Asahi.

In regards to the comment about not needing to uninstall OSX (actually macOS 13 at this point) if you don't want to: you almost definitely do want a side-by-side install. macOS is the only way to get firmware updates right now and there are certain scenarios you could run into on the Asahi side that may require you to install macOS to be able to fix them. If you really really wanted, it is technically correct that you could uninstall the non-recovery macOS though.

This is my feeling as well. I guess that's just the way it goes once low-hanging fruit has been picked. But I would at the very least have expected one of: External displays, audio or stable bluetooth/WiFi.

And Apple is always releasing a moving target. This was the same case even back when they were running on PC architecture with Intel hardware.

I'm not sure the "moving target" argument holds up to much scrutiny. Asahi has been able to re-use the UART driver from the Samsung SoCs that went into the earliest iPhones, the I2C driver from PA Semi's PowerPC chips, and the GPU reverse engineering was greatly helped by the PowerVR heritage. There's clearly a fair bit of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in Apple's hardware design strategy. Meanwhile, on the Wintel side the past ~decade has seen a complete overhaul in how systems sleep, and CPU features like TSX and SGX and MPX have come and gone, presenting OS developers with plenty of churn to deal with.

I wouldn't say Apple is any less a moving target rather they've only released 2 generations of the M series so far. As an example it's looking like the 3rd generation will swap the GPU architecture you mentioned for something completely new.

Sure, there are plenty of things that don't change much, and that I2C driver is a good example, but that doesn't really mean the target as a whole is particularly stable it just means they don't feel the need to rewrite I2C every chip revision. Meanwhile many of the things churning on the x86 side, like memory encryption, don't really matter for projects like this.

I wasn't trying to say that Apple's platform is remarkably stable, only that there's no evidence it is particularly unstable. Even if their next GPU architecture requires a more or less complete re-write of the drivers, that on its own still wouldn't justify considering Apple's platform to be more of a moving target than the PC/Wintel platform—though it would bolster complaints about the necessity of reverse engineering rather than having documentation available (complaints that apply just as much against NVIDIA's GPUs). It'll probably take at least one or two more generations of Apple hardware before one can reasonably accuse them of being a constantly moving target. For now, the best evidence we have to go on is the fact that it took Asahi about a week to bring M2 support up to parity with the M1 support they had at that time.

That the first updated version didn't just boot automatically is 100% evidence it's more unstable than your typical system family. It partially comes down to Apple putting absolutely nothing into Linux, even Nvidia does better than that these days, but even then you can at least expect to boot year old Linux on a new PC even if it doesn't support the latest CPU scheduling optimizations for it or whatever.

I'm also not sure I'd even agree M2 is even at parity with M1 in Asahi yet, let alone the first week. They did get a lot of things working quickly but I think that's far overselling what happened.

> but even then you can at least expect to boot year old Linux on a new PC even if it doesn't support the latest CPU scheduling optimizations for it or whatever.

It's still extremely common that booting a year-old distro on brand new hardware leaves you with a blank screen due to missing GPU drivers, or leaves you with unaccelerated graphics on par with what Asahi currently offers by default. And it's hardly unheard of to have issues with power management and even audio with new x86 platforms in recent years. Going a bit further back, Intel has been known to break NVMe and not require OEMs to offer a BIOS option to put the chipset in the standards-compliant mode.

And yet if all that happened it would still be a better state than the M2 support in Asahi at launch.

You're not being particularly fair. You seem be be wanting to hold Asahi Linux to a standard of having day-1 support for all the critical subsystems of new Apple hardware, while excusing or ignoring all the historical instances of Linux not having usable support for corresponding components in the Wintel ecosystem by the time new hardware is in the hands of end users.

> When a certain chipset has an issue with NVMe at least you can still boot other ways than the internal NVMe drive.

A laptop that cannot boot off its internal storage is pretty much useless as a laptop. The theoretical capability to work around this with external USB storage is a pathetic workaround that does not strengthen your argument.

> When the GPU acceleration doesn't work at least the display output can.

Except when it doesn't. Sure, a sufficiently skilled user can usually figure out a working configuration, but let's not pretend like a black screen early in the boot process is unheard-of, and a showstopper for many users.

> Certainly not more than x86, where I can boot a decade old distributor and still at least get video output.

As long as your decade-old distro had UEFI support (which most did, by then). But otherwise, it is possible to run into issues with a BIOS CSM no longer being an option (eg. on the last three years of Intel integrated graphics).

And again, I'm not trying to say Apple's hardware platform is unusually stable and backwards-compatible. I'm trying to refute an unwarranted claim that after only two generations it's already proven significantly unstable—a claim you seem to agree with based on a selective memory of the history of Linux on x86. The conventional wisdom still is that running an x86 Linux distro older than your hardware is asking for trouble, especially for laptops. Hardware vendors in the x86 ecosystem ship breaking changes fairly often; only a few of them even try to get Linux driver support in place before the hardware launches, and those drivers still frequently miss the deadlines for making it into major distro releases prior to the hardware shipping.

I'm not trying to hold Asahi Linux to any standard - I'm trying to find a single standard in which Apple's platform could be viewed as generationally stable.

If we look at M1->M2:

- It doesn't have backwards compatibility even with the manufacturer's own OS. The gap here is 2 years yet I can get farther in support than that just booting a 10 year old stock installer on my 13900k system.

- You can't natively boot launch-day Linux at all, by any means or know-how.

- Getting the kernel to boot, display output is flat impossible. The keyboard and external input doesn't work. Hardly anything just works really.

- Once you get past those kinds of base things the Wi-Fi doesn't work, any type of backlight is not adjustable, the GPU doesn't work, the speakers don't work. Some of these do just need minor tweaks to make as functional as they were on the M1, others still aren't as functionally equal to this day. Anything that might sometimes be broken on x86 is broken but it's not "some new chipsets have broken that before" or "some basic users may get a black screen and get stuck not knowing what to do" they just plain do not work at all. To get it to do so again someone needs to do 100% of the programming work needed with zero no participation from the manufacturer.

Meanwhile the basis a traditional x86 system is supposed to be no different:

- When the many year old Linux release boots, non-advanced users can sometimes end up with a black screen and not know what to do

- Certain examples of chipsets have had broken day 0 support for one of their storage protocols

- Not every operating system from 10 years ago had native support for UEFI boot

- Despite booting, lease day versions of your Linux distro may not have e.g. working graphics hardware acceleration

Next to me I have my M2 running Asahi. It's been a little over a year since the release and it's still not up to support parity of my M1 at the time of launch. Next to me I've also got a few Intel and AMD boxes, they all boot many years old Linux with more working hardware than the M2 has in Asahi to this day.

I haven't been selective on the history of x86 support but even if I was to do so and intentionally only pick every bad thing that happened in a single generation x86 upgrade, over a 5x longer period than we're looking at Apple, and put it in context of a single release to compare to the M1->M2 transition... it would arguably still have been in better shape and, at worst, have been the same. From that I cannot conclude the new Apple hardware has shown itself to be any more stable a target, if anything it's looking even worse these days.

As a linux user why would you buy hardware from a company that do not provide any modicum of support for it?

Because the hardware is really good. Better than any other hardware you can find (especially for a performance/watt standpoint, which for a laptop is somewhat important). Touchpad and keyboard are also top tier, screen is really nice, speakers are good and I ran out of adjectives.

Obviously everyone has to make their own decisions on tradeoffs, but for me there's no such thing as hardware good enough to put up with all the complications that Asahi Linux will face for some time to come (as they work to iron out all the kinks).

> especially for a performance/watt standpoint, which for a laptop is somewhat important

I think it is more important to have a working OS with common functionalities working.

Sure I'd love my thinkpad to have 15hours of battery life. But then I am not living in a tent either so I'd rather be able to use the onboard webcam, plug an external monitor, sound working without having to plug an external card and stable wifi. And I'd throw a 500gr powerbank in the backpack the handful of times I really need longer battery life.

Have you watched the video? It doesn't matter that the hardware is good, if you can't use most of it under Linux. Thunderbolt 4 becomes USB 2, HDMI? - no, camera? - no, sound? - no, HDR display? - no, battery life? - likely sucks too. A decent AMD Ryzen 3/4 laptop with a good screen will be a much better choice for Linux.

To not end up with a PC laptop, the likes of which haven't been meaningfully redesigned save for spec bumps for 15 years.

Trackpad, speakers, case, thermals, cpu - the lowest end MBA blows the highest end "ultrabook" out of the water.

> thermals

Apple has been consistently terrible at cooling design, the only reason m1/m2 systems don't have thermal issues is because they sidestepped the problem entirely by building a very thermally efficient chip.

Making a difficult problem irrelevant is pretty solid engineering.

Not having the problem in the first place is the best way to solve it. We are discussing finished products. My M2 air lasts a million hours and doesn't get hot. My XPS lasts 4 or 5 and burns the top of my legs.

I'm not sure yours is the criticism you think it is.

Ultimately, heat is waste, and the less of it you generate, the better. When I said "thermals" I meant chip design, not cooling system design. This is obviously one of the huge benefits of their vertical integration.

A chip that doesn't get hot sounds like pretty efficient cooling design to me.

So they treated the symptoms by treating the cause? Sounds like a win to me lol.

I struggle to understand this Goalpost. Thermals and power go hard in hand. Battery life and noise follow suit. Overheated legs and wrists are not much fun either. In any case, most other laptops in a similar form factor have equal or worse cooling. Thermal throttling shows up on laptop reviews a lot.

Actually Apples cooking has been pretty rock solid. What let apple down was Intel.

Intels mobile CPUs have been, and still are absolute trash.

they took entire class of problem and made it disappear, that's great engineering.

So.. they don’t have thermal issues?

The MBA is the best in performance per watt but there are better ultrabooks if you ignore the energy consumption.

> the lowest end MBA blows the highest end "ultrabook" out of the water

That's untrue

And remember the screen cracks?

https://9to5mac.com/2021/07/30/m1-macbook-screen-cracks/

It doesn’t really make sense to ignore energy consumption in a supposedly portable device. That’s like saying that a ship is more efficient way of transport, if you ignore that it can’t go over land.

Portable doesn't necessarily mean it needs to last as long as it takes you to hike accross a continent.

I use a laptop because I can move it from one room to another without shutting it down. While it would be nice to not have to plug it more than once a day, I'm fine with a 4-5hours autonomy.

But having more battery life definitely do not beat having functionalities such as external monitor, working internal webcam and sound.

There's very little comparable in the non-Mac world when it comes to battery life, no performance penalty for not being tethered, and heat/fan noise, mainly.

I've looked. There's a couple that are kinda in the same realm if you squint but come with tradeoffs like having to keep the CPU throttled to get anywhere near the advertised battery life.

But that doesn't apply at all if you're a Linux user?

I’ve read that battery life for Linux on M-series is still a good deal better than on quite a few other laptops despite it being non-optimal.

There are also those using macOS on their MacBooks until Linux gets good enough to daily drive.

asahi's power management has improved by leaps and bounds. you'll never get the same kind of performance or battery life (and especially in combination) on any x86 laptop running windows or linux

I am a Linux user and not a MacBook owner, but I do really like (having used it myself in the past - 2013 Air, 2016 MBP - and seen others' recent stuff) Mac hardware. If my preferred Linux distro (Arch btw) just worked out of the box on Macs I would love one (though I do have a Framework now and the repairability etc. certainly would make me reluctant).

Also though, I have a Windows desktop pretty much just for Fusion 360. I really dislike Windows, macOS as a BSD derivative is obviously a bit more comfortable/familiar/usable, I would love to (legitimately) dual-boot macOS and Linux, the former to allow me to run software that's not available on the latter. WINE (even with Lutris etc. recent work) is too fragile and difficult to get working and keep working.

Hasn't "zero manufacturer support" been the normal state of Linux since forever? It's only recently that some level of official support has emerged in limited cases.

In laptops, Dell has been officially making Linux compatible models for years.

There are also smaller, specialist manufacturers that do Linux laptops. System76 is one that springs to mind, though other people can mentioned various others before.

Lenovo seems to have a pretty good selection of models offering Linux.

And most of them are similarly riddled with random bugs, like the CPU throttling to hell. E.g. the T480 has a more limiting throttling, because the motherboard can tell whether you hold it in your lap or not, but only on windows - on linux it defaults to the safe bet of being on your lap all the time. It can be circumvented by a python script that regularly overwrites this variable..

specific models? yes.

in general? no.

hell, there are more models of laptop made by the linux-only laptop manufacturers than officially supported by dell

Because absolutely nothing else is as good in all aspects. Not having a 100wh battery alone would disqualify the vast majority of other laptops.

But if you're a Linux user, wouldn't you want a laptop that can actually run Linux without tons of critical drawbacks?

Not to mention directly feeding a manufacturer with no support for Linux and several very problematic behaviors (iOS walled garden, no GPL3 in app store as well as no custom web engines + other bullshit limitations, NIH syndrome of galactic proportions) in place ?

Linux support by manufacturers, even when it exists doesn’t really exist so don’t overstate that.

How is ios related here? Should one settle for a worse laptop based on a completely different division of said company? OSX is reasonably open and you can mostly use it as a regular linux due to its UNIX-isms.

Because I primarily care about having the best computer. And then Linux is a nice to have.

The question started with: "As a linux user"...

Linux doesn't seem like a nice to have for Linux users.

I've used linux for a decade now and still use it on my desktop. But it's not a strict requirement for me. On my laptop I just need something that has a super good battery life and is performant. And the macbook is so far ahead of the rest that it wins for me.

I didn't buy the macbook expecting to install linux on it, but if I can later, that's just an extra win.

> I didn't buy the macbook expecting to install linux on it, but if I can later, that's just an extra win.

Except that was exactly the point of the discussion. People who buy an Apple laptop with the expectation of having a perfectly functionnal linux on it.

For me it's the same base reason. I primarily care about having the best computer, which means Linux is a must.

Because Framework does not work with resellers (so my company cannot buy it), Dell keeps doing stupid Linux-hostile things (like re-releasing accessory revisions that break Linux features), and Lenovo has no high-end laptops available (at least not on the business side). And because managers all love their Macs, they always find a way to get company policy to allow for them.

Which serious hardware company has any modicum of support for linux? It’s not like the thinkpad runs on 100% open hardware, most of that was reverse engineered the same way.

The intel drivers are mostly written by intel engineers, same for AMD drivers.

I just checked on my works laptop, the only non intel component appearing via lspci is a realtek express card reader whose driver is copyrighted by Realtek Semiconductor Corp: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/misc/c...

Have Apple engineers written a single line of code for linux drivers supporting apple silicium ?

This project seems to be progressing the audio, activity from last month.

https://github.com/chadmed/asahi-audio

This is reminiscent of the state of Linux 20 years ago in the PC world.

Honestly it's still the state of Linux today in the PC world for most people

Maybe I'm that lucky. Or maybe I do my homework before buying a computer for Linux.

I don't think a single laptop I owned (7+) ever booted Ubuntu without everything just working.

Sound, screen brightness, wifi, touchpad, sleep/suspend.

I did have problems with gentoo but those were evidently self-inflicted, and solvable by installing Ubuntu.

I have Asahi Fedora Remix, at M1 Air with USB-C adapter, that has connected:

- Power

- Ethernet

- USB-C adapter, that has wireless dongles for external mouse, keyboard and headset

With Chromium Snap and Chromecast, I cast fullscreen or browser tab to 43" LG LED TV. A little laggy, but better than no HDMI at all. Some wired remote desktop could be less laggy.

I like that M1 Air is silent and compiles fast.