>.. macOS only ever programs CS42L84 to operate at either 48 or 96 kHz, we could only add support for those two sample rates to the Linux driver ..
> However, CS42L42 supports all the other common sample rates, and while the register layout and programming sequence is different, the actual values programmed in for 48 and 96 kHz are the same across both chips. What would happen if we simply took the values for all other sample rates from the CS42L42 datasheet and added those to the CS42L84 driver? As it turns out, you get support for those sample rates!
> The patch to enable hardware support for 44.1, 88.2, 176.4 and 192 kHz sample rates on both the input and output of the headphone jack was submitted directly upstream, and has been merged for 7.1. We also backported this to Asahi kernel 6.19.9, allowing users to take advantage of this immediately.
Nice bit of chip sleuthing and reverse engineering from the Asahi team!
The following is actually the most surprising part to me.
> This is quite limiting, as it forces PipeWire to waste CPU cycles (and therefore battery life) on resampling audio streams that are not either 48 or 96 kHz.
So the Asahi team thinks that only supporting 48 or 96 kHz wastes battery life by forcing the software to resample audio streams. But why does Apple still do this? Presumably Apple has a very high commitment to save power and increase battery life.
Always possible that it's the standard commercial software company reason: They do know about it and have a P2 bug tracking it, but the team that maintains that code has 5000 other things to do, and it never gets fixed.
More likely it’s that 48 kHz is a more sensible default, since the majority of non-music digital audio is sampled at 48 kHz, and almost anyone who cares about the difference is going to be using an external DAC anyway.
This is presumably what Apple does. You kind of have to anyway or you have the stupid situation Linux used to have where only one app could play audio at a time.
> you have the stupid situation Linux used to have where only one app could play audio at a time
When was that? I think my first Linux distribution was Ubuntu 8.04 and fairly sure it shipped with PulseAudio which in mind always been able to play audio from multiple sources at the same time, maybe I misremember?
If you have two audio streams, you can't play them as is on the audio device, you have to mix them together. The same happens with analog speakers as you can't just add two signals together. I believe at one point with Alsa, when an application takes control of the audio device, no one else could play with it. Now Alsa comes with dmix (a digital mixer feature) enabled in its default configuration, so two applications may play how they want. And we have PulseAudio, Jack, and Pipewire on top of Alsa to add more features.
OpenBSD still present raw audio devices, but they have sndio which provides a more helpful interface for applications including resampling (not the best algorithms there, according to them).
I really hope this project continues to gain momentum. Apple Hardware + Linux is the least fscked OS running on the best hardware. MacOS continues to be a tire fire with endless bugs and churn between versions.
You should give Framework a try. It's been a flawless experience with Fedora. And with the upcoming Framework 13 Pro, battery life and trackpad are expected to be on par (or in the case of battery, even better than macos)
The only way to get the battery life Framework advertised is on Windows' 'Ultra Efficiency' mode which cuts CPU performance by 25-50%, lowers brightness by 30% and deprioritizes everything in the background to such an extreme that responsiveness of those is measured in seconds.
It is not comparable at all to M-series or Snapdragon laptops happily chugging along at full capability and getting (compared to AMD / Intel) stellar battery life.
The new model is Intel or amd unless I missed something. They said in the video the battery life was entirely from video playback, which can be run on efficiency mode
My apologies, I don't know where I got the ARM architecture part from. I really want one of those machines, but I guess if they can't approach MacBook battery life yet I'm stuck on MacOS for now.
I think they said 22 hours of video playback in the video. If it even gets half of that for normal usage I'd be sold, the only thing stopping me giving it a shot is they are currently more expensive than the MBP and I'm not sure if they are worth it until the first reviews come in
I've run all 3 major OSes before. MacOS by far has the least bugs and kinda just works.
My variosu Linux adventures have always resulted in doing random patches for audio or screen incompatibility.
My windows days were plagued with battery issues.
I feel like most Linux ricers wishs for a MacOS-like experience, except with more customisation. (Which is entirely possible now with the ricing on Mac)
> My variosu Linux adventures have always resulted in doing random patches for audio or screen incompatibility.
This is the kind of dated argument that really makes me dismiss most of the critics. I was running xubuntu as my main desktop since 2010 at least, switched to Debian + nix + XFCE in 2022 and switched to full-on nixOS in 2024. I never had issues with audio then and had to go out of my way to "break" audio on NixOS when I wanted to try pipewire instead of pulse.
> feel like most Linux ricers wises for a MacOS-like experience
I've put together a Hackintosh once, tried for a few weeks as the daily driver. Aside from being able to use tools that dealt with real-time audio processing, there was nothing else I wanted to copy or bring to my Linux system. It cemented my opinion that most software developers that keep touting the "superiority of MacOS" never gave a fair shot at Linux on decent hardware and were just rationalizing their prior choice.
Earlier this year I built a new desktop and installed my normal Linux distro and the screen wouldn’t work after login. I worked on it for a day, still couldn’t get any desktop except a terminal.Tried a different distro, it booted but no matter what resolution or refresh rate, the display showed severe artifacts when scrolling. Tried to fix it for a few days, gave up.
I am not a Linux novice, I have been using every major OS for decades at this point, but I’ll be damned if I didn’t install Windows, decrapify it, and everything just worked. You can say I should have done more research on hardware compatibility or whatever, but I didn’t have to for Windows.
And I like how you complain most devs never give Linux a fair shot on decent hardware right after describing that you MacOS experience is a hackintosh. That makes a lot of sense.
> And I like how you complain most devs never give Linux a fair shot on decent hardware right after describing that you MacOS experience is a hackintosh.
I'm not saying that I was expecting to run a Hackintosh and suddenly get the advantages of Apple hardware. I am doing a pure software-to-software comparison.
There was no application in the MacOS desktop that made me feel like I was missing out on something. Of all the tools that I am used to use - emacs + developer tools, email clients, messaging clients, media players, media managers, browsers, the occasional office productivity - none of the MacOS counterparts had any significant advantage over what I have in a Linux desktop.
> I am doing a pure software-to-software comparison.
I would argue this is impossible at this point. Most of the benefits of the entire Apple ecosystem are about integration - Macbook Pros are the fastest machines with the best battery life because of the great hardware but also the software integration.
> There was no application in the MacOS desktop that made me feel like I was missing out on something. Of all the tools that I am used to use - emacs + developer tools, email clients, messaging clients, media players, media managers, browsers, the occasional office productivity - none of the MacOS counterparts had any significant advantage over what I have in a Linux desktop.
This isn't really comparing OSes is it? You're comparing software that runs on the OS. Every tool I have on my linux machines I have an equivalent tool for on Mac, or I use the same tool, but the Macbook with MacOS is a workhorse that I can trust to "just work."
I don't think desktop Linux is bad, not by any means, and there are reasons I still go to it first on my personal machines until something forces me to make a different decision, but I also get tired of Linux users telling all of us that our experiences are old and all of these issues are fixed when they're just not, even if that isn't Linux' or the distro's fault.
If you are willing to give the advantage to MacOS due to the integration with the hardware, then you should only judge Linux when provided on hardware from Linux-centric vendors like system76, Tuxedo, Starlite and Framework.
I understand the point you are trying to make, but I disagree with it. MacOS doesn’t claim to work on other hardware, Linux does.
If System76 said PopOS only works on their hardware, it would be fair to only evaluate it on their hardware. When SteamOS only claimed to work on Steam Decks, the only good evaluation way to evaluate it was on Steam Decks.
> MacOS doesn’t claim to work on other hardware, Linux does.
It's the inverse. You claim that Apple "just works" for you and that Linux doesn't. I am saying then if you want to lend credibility to your argument, then you need to use hardware that has a certifying vendor behind it.
I can easily tell you a story of the same with the two OSs reversed. It's no longer 2016, pretty much every hardware worth their salt has good, or better Linux support, with the possible exception of some random RGB led not being controllable out of the box (though usually it's not out of the box either on windows). Like outside of desktop, Linux is the most prevalent operating system and it's not even close.
MacOS has solved laptop suspend since the 2000s. Windows and Linux still struggle with this, especially due to the switch from S3- to S0ix-style sleep.
Modern Apple laptops seem less special now but you also have to look at them through the lens of their introduction.
A similar thing is true for Sonos. They don't seem all that special now, but you have to realize they have been offering multi-room synced audio with a good UX since 2006. That's before the iPhone even was released.
Yeah, it's not that hard if the hardware is high quality and of small number of known types.
Windows and Linux is judged by whether it works on any hardware, including the so-cheap-it-should-not-have-been-produced-ever machines, that will obviously just plain suck. No amount of software can save shitty hardware.
Hard to agree with those critics when the OS is doing the right thing, but the hardware won't play ball. The reason there's so much code in the Linux kernel is for various shenanigans that hardware vendors came up with. Yesterday I was looking at how HDMI audio is being implemented. From the specs, it looks quite nice with support for PCM and rates supported sent via EDID, but there's like 5 implementations for that one, 3 of them handling hacks by the GPU vendors.
In my personal experience macOS is fine but updates are often buggy or regress performance. Linux has just been the more polished option. Plus it just has a nicer desktop and apps.
I stay 1 major version behind with MacOS. If you do that you should have a pretty stable experience. You still get all the security patches but skip most bugs/regressions.
I use macos because of the battery life and because I want a Linux like experience without wondering if some weird software a company update forces on us will work, like citrix desktop or their random vpn client. But for someone who spends most of their time in the terminal, and the rest of the time in a browser, macos has some really annoying quirks especially when it comes to window management
"entirely possible" is a bit of a stretch. You can install some hacky WM and sketchybar but system settings, workspace three finger scroll speed, the finder app, window chrome, login screen etc are not something that can easily be changed. And the default apps are really not that great for power users. Calendar, Mail and Finder are all slow, dumbed down and only very superficially customizable. I daily drive an M2 Pro MBP and I was running a Linux desktop up until 2 years ago and I felt like there were barely any limits to customizing the latter while I have to fight macOS at every step if I want to do something that apple does not want me to do.
Some people seem to get better battery life with Windows than with Linux.
Most users on any OSes are not ricers. Most of my customisation is functional - panels and widgets placed for practical reasons. A lot of people do not seem to customise at all, or barely.
Ricing is big, but I also like the hackability and development friendly environment of Linux that isn't there on Macbooks (been running MacOS as a secondary for ~5yrs now)
> My variosu Linux adventures have always resulted in doing random patches for audio or screen incompatibility.
Is that on Mac hardware? I run a 14 year old Mac Book Air, and it works flawlessly with the latest Nixos, and has done for the last 11 years.
If you have issues on random PCs, it's because there are an enormous variety of them out there, with all kinds of incompatibilities that have to be worked around. On Mac hardware, there tends to be a more restricted number of variants, and after a few years, Linux becomes rock solid on them.
So the OP is correct, Linux on Mac hardware is the best combo.
A 14 year old Macbook Air is an Intel Mac, AFAIK most hardware is pretty well supported.
M series Macs are still very much a work in progress. I'm typing this on one, in Linux, so plenty of things work, but not for example USB-C output to an external display, and a lot of the processor power level / suspend stuff is still not fully there so battery life is quite a bit worse, especially when suspended. I think the situation is rather worse on the latest generation hardware, too.
Liquid Ass enters the chat, Apple can’t even make rounded corners anymore.
I was burned by the 2016 MacBook Pro keyboard, and once Liquid Ass was announced I knew it was time to get out.
Sold my MacBook Pro M2 Pro, which has a stupid gigantic notch that blocks the menu bar items with no built-in mechanism for getting to them when they overflow.
Now I’m on a Framework 13” and I’ve had zero issues with Linux. Everything just works. KDE Plasma is way more customizable than macOS or Windows. I’m finally able to ditch slow Homebrew and use a real package manager. I can finally play light PC games on my laptop without dealing with streaming or Crossover.
My preorder is in for the Framework 13 Pro, which looks to get even closer to delivering a MacBook Pro for Linux. Meanwhile, Apple hasn’t changed their chassis design in 5 years, while Framework updates their hardware constantly while maintaining cross-compatibility. A company with less than 500 employees is catching up to a trillion dollar corporation.
I’ve already got my fully modular LPCAMM RAM delivered and ready with no Apple tax. I’ll get better battery life watching YouTube videos than a MacBook Pro and the graphics are just as powerful as the M5 base chip.
And if something breaks I won’t have to deal with the nightmare I went through with my 2016 MacBook Pro.
Generally yes, but the community around MLX has rallied pretty strong. Sure your disk io is awful, and your OS is buggy, but at least ML compiles and works on a modern OS.
While I absolutely love the technical write-up from the Asahi team, and being absolutely impressed by their accomplishment, to the risk of being an overly negative contrarian, I remain a bit skeptical.
I'm concerned that after all these years, it's still a separate project and not an effort sustained directly within the kernel mainline and mainstream distributions like Ubuntu, Debian or Fedora.
These kinds of reverse engineering projects are extremely challenging. With skills & field knowledge, it's "easy" to get to "80%" and have something useful for you and the most dedicated users. But reaching the "95%" required for a polished & general public ready experience needs nearly as much effort, often on tedious and time consuming tidbits.
What everyone is missing is any org who pays Ubuntu or RedHat for support is going to buy officially supported hardware from Lenovo, Dell, Framework or etc. Asahi is a cool project, but there's zero money in it.
I think there is also the added challenge that ARM macs are a moving target, and Apple has less than no desire to provide any kind of stability or support for Asahi Linux. Unlike the PC space where laptop manufacturers have to maintain broad compatibility over time, Apple will make future changes that are really awkward for Asahi and will not care one bit because they can do the compat work on their own software.
>I think there is also the added challenge that ARM macs are a moving target
Yes, but also no? Because I think a reasonable argument can be made that ARM Macs are like game consoles with a more rapid generation: yes there are changes between each generation, but then you've got millions of units which are good for a very long time that are all near identical. Apple definitely is not changing everything between gens at all, work they've done for M1 has been plenty useful since. And support stretches awhile. The final M3 generation chip only came out about a year ago (the M3 Ultra for the Mac Studio was March 2025).
So sure there's ongoing effort needed for newer systems, and that may require ongoing RE more then typical. I don't want to brush aside the effort there at all. But at the same time there doesn't seem to be the same long tail of hardware variations and dozens to hundreds of players doing their own little tweaks either. Aside from memory and storage, every single Mac of a given SoC is the same so each time one gets covered they all get covered and are a stable experience. It's definitely a different thing then developing for PCs, and I definitely wish there was and support serious legal backing for no rug pulls being allowed, ever. Hardware owners should always have access to the root of trust if they want it. But that aside, I don't think their efforts are wrong or somehow wasted just because each new generation might need some new work. That doesn't appear from the outside to be intractable, and fact is the pace of hardware change for computers has slowed and continues to slow. A system from many years ago can still be very good for most tasks... so long as the OS can still be updated and work. Apple themselves seem more then limiting factor there, whereas Linux shines in long term support.
From an end user perspective, I think the best thing the Asahi team could have done was solely focus on getting the M1 Air/Pro working 100% before moving onto other devices.
But that would probably result in burn out from the crazily talented dev team :P
Asahi focusing on M1 would also encourage secondary market sales of M1 laptops, which are already a primary competitor (see Apple marketing) to current Apple laptops. If Apple wanted to encourage Asahi Linux users to move from M1 or Qualcomm to M5/M6 Apple devices, they could improve device firmware compatibility with Linux, or contribute directly to mainline Linux.
Considering that M1 and M2 are almost the same architecturally isn't that exactly what they are doing? M3 are two new contributors who decided they wanted that.
> Unlike the PC space where laptop manufacturers have to maintain broad compatibility over time
LOL
If anything Apple is infamous for keeping around hardware blocks for as long as they can. IIRC the serial port driver for everything Apple ARM dates back to the very first generations of iPods.
Of course Apple will remain a moving target, but they are orders of magnitude more stable than everyone else in the non-x86 universe.
Pretty rude to call this ex Apple Nuvia. I don't think any of those lawsuits by Apple or ARM have been won. Qualcomm declares this to be a new chip. But yes it has talent from those places. Still, let's not try to tip the scales of perception quite so indelicately?
I am curious what the boot situation is. It seems like Qualcomm actually has pretty good support for their cores. But since these PC systems sort of lack a bios, each one needing a hand built DeviceTree: it makes supporting them kind of a nightmare. Even a raspberry pi has a much more advanced and accommodating boot environment than these frustrating Qualcomm laptops. Alas. I don't know but I expect Asahi has to do similar hand tailoring. I am curious to know what the boot chain looks like! How much the system willingly helps vs how much hard to be bespoke hand coded system config! (Wish it wasn't like this, it's so bad)
Just several months after leaving Qualcomm, distinguished CPU and system architects Gerard Williams, John Bruno, and Ram Srinivasan, who are celebrated for their high-performance processors developed at Apple, Nuvia, and, more recently, Qualcomm, established a new CPU startup — Nuvacore — that promises no less than to 'rewrite the rules of silicon.'
Without stirring the pot too much, I’m a bit out of the loop on what the above poster implied and you took slight to. Could you share a little more about this and why you feel what they said was rude?
There's nothing rude about it; the Nuvia CPU core is pretty much the entire selling point of the Snapdragon X Elite product family. Everything else on those chips is underwhelming. But the provenance of the CPU core is really irrelevant to the question of Linux support, which is gated by driver support for the rest of the SoC, which didn't come from Nuvia. So focusing on the Nuvia aspect is a bit of a red herring.
It offers an A/B test of "similar" SoC performance and battery life (which users now expect from laptops), without a vertically integrated operating system that was also created by the company who designed the SoC.
> I'm concerned that after all these years, it's still a separate project and not an effort sustained directly within the kernel mainline and mainstream distributions
What does this mean? Hardware support is rarely developed inside these organizations; what makes it seem like these groups would be a good home for this effort?
It makes sense to have a group of experts in a field (Apple hardware/firmware) contribute patches upstream, which is the exact system here. And Asahi have done an above and beyond job also maintaining their installation framework while carefully moving changes upstream as well.
Why would any group want to take on a project which could be instantly killed by an external for profit entity? For now Asahi is left alone by Apple but that could change in a single day and the entire project is dead. It doesn’t seem like a productive way to direct the limited energy that distribution foundations have on hand.
This actually is the case for a few other competing Apple Silicon support projects that came and went prior to Asahi. Assuming you have a way to load code into EL2[0], it's fairly easy to bring up the main CPU and USB, plug in a bunch of external peripherals before boot, and say you got Linux running on Apple chips. Only true in the most literal case.
In contrast, Asahi is specifically doing all the challenging RE work that typically gets passed over in favor of flashy headlines. If anyone can get to 95%, it's them.
[0] Prior to the M1 Mac, Apple did not allow anyone but themselves to load EL2 code. The ability to load other OSes on Apple Silicon Macs is, strangely enough, an allowed use-case. Prior to this we had to rely on once-in-a-decade bootrom security bugs.
The real answer is probably simpler than anyone here is making it. Apple hardware margins are healthy enough that selling macbooks to linux users is pure profit, so no services lock-in needed. However, the moment they officially acknowledge Linux support, then it becomes a support surface. Every kernel panic becomes a genius bar visit. Every driver bug becomes a tweet at @AppleSupport. It's the value of plausible deniability. The Asahi team being unofficial is actually the best possible outcome for Apple in that they get hardware sales to Linux enthusiasts without any support burden.
> However, the moment they officially acknowledge Linux support, then it becomes a support surface.
Apple documents lots of things the genius bar won't help with. For example, Apple provides instructions for compiling custom builds of the XNU kernel. Even so, if you replace the stock kernel and your Mac kernel panics, the genius bar isn't going to help you. (Maybe they'd help you wipe the computer and restore everything to stock, but I imagine they'd do that if a Linux user walked in too, today.)
I suspect Apple hasn't shared documentation because it would take time to clean up for external release (legal stuff, plus not accidentally leaking future products). What I think Apple should do is make an engineer available to talk on the phone for a couple of hours a month, which should amount to a rounding error in their budget.
> the moment they officially acknowledge Linux support, then it becomes a support surface
untrue. There are no obligations from other hardware vendors, yet you can sometimes get good drivers from them, or at least specs. I think Apple indeed want their hardware to fade out to enforce buying another. Imagine that 20% of your returning customers no longer return after 3-5 years of planned obsolence
This is the big one IMHO. Apple is all about control of the stack, top to bottom. Any sort of "help" with linux on macos would be threatening to that control. Apple "helped" even more than I would have expected by not locking alt OSes out of the bootloader. Probably for less than altruistic reasons, but they did do it.
I don't know if that's true. Linux users are curious and will try more stuff but people mistake that they file bug reports (and usually detailed ones...) with complaining more.
Apple's MO is that it's their baby. End of. They don't do open. Their compiler is closed source, and so on.
It feels very close to “right to repair”. The coffee grinder you bought came as a single package but it has burrs, gears, machine screws, a motor, etc. If one of those components fails, we should be able to replace it ourselves and as such they should be documented.
The laptop has various pieces of hardware in it and corresponding drivers in macOS to make them tick. Did we buy the hardware and the drivers as an inseparable package, or should we be provided with the manual to make one component work when the other breaks, be that either third party trackpads or third party (Linux) drivers.
Apple might argue that drivers, unlike gears or motors, will never wear down and fail. They won’t need repairing so you don’t get to know how they work. Does right to repair only apply to products that could ever need repairing? Does it also extend to knowing how your purchased product is built so that you could repair it?
Maybe we’ll see a test case some day when a cosmic ray blows out /System/Trackpad.kext and a litigant applies to a court for the documentation to repair their laptop — to write their own driver!
(Or vice versa: a manufacturer of coffee grinders arguing in court that they are exempt from right-to-repair because they repair their machines for free at their Genius Espresso Bar.)
This is an interesting thought exercise. I immediately thought of the counter argument that Apple's driver quality is worse, especially for laptops nearing end of life (for the sake of argument assume this were true).
Could I then submit a warranty claim and demand Apple replace my aging laptop with their latest model?
One of the reasons I can see is it’s much easier to say “we don’t play this game” than get a lot of negative press for selective openness and breaking compatibility of non-public interfaces. Maybe it’s even more important internally, as it enables new kind of internal discussions distracting from priority work.
I was trying to come up with a response but you're right. It would be easy for Apple and Apple would get so much goodwill from the community in return.
And let’s be honest, they still wouldn’t be satisfied. The goal post would move to something else. Why don’t my AirPods seamlessly handoff to my Linux MacBook?
Looking at: https://stats.asahilinux.org/ there is still a pretty large userbase who are so interested in it they go this route. I imagine that count would easily 10x if it would be officially supported. Those numbers are nothing to sneeze at.
I'm running asahi on my macbook. And never touch OSX. I wouldn't even had gotten it if asahi wasn't so well supported.
Being the least bad doesn't make something good. macOS is the least bad choice for the majority of people that just want a machine to mostly browse the Internet, look at their photos, do some light productivity work, and participate in their ecosystem. It also arguably hosts has the best software options for creative work (although that's reaping the fruits of seeds planted long ago - not sure there's much about macOS that makes it inherently better for those tasks these days). For development, its advantage is the hardware it's running on. To achieve any level of customization or to define my own workflow that isn't what Apple wants me to do or to work across multiple systems, I have to fight macOS rather than work with it. Linux on the other hand does what I tell it to do.
Linux as a desktop OS for the vast overwhelming majority of people is a far inferior option. It just is, and always has been. Even for developers, MacOS doesn't prevent you from getting your job done and getting paid, while using arguably the best laptop hardware. Shit just works and stays out of your way.
If all MacOS has going for it is better hardware, someone would have stepped up and shipped a better linux laptop ages ago. God knows I'm not going back to a flimsy creaking chassis, shit screen, and horrible battery life just so my Docker container doesn't have to run in a VM.
The vast majority of people that buy Macs for the ecosystem aren't going to switch to Linux. That market will remain untouched. Outside of a few gamers who might want to put up with the x86-to-ARM translation layer and (for most A to AAA games) Proton to run some non-Mac games. And even they'll probably still dual-boot.
There's a portion of another market: people who want to run Linux and want a powerful laptop who buy x86 Laptops right now. Apple could expend very little relative effort while offering no official support by helping Asahi get that to a first class platform. They won't capture them in the ecosystem (and they never would have) but will still benefit from hardware sales to them.
Obviously, if they sold their hardware at a loss and subsidized that with ecosystem capture that would be a non-starter. But from everything we know, the hardware itself is very profitable.
Yeah, and having the only supported OS be MacOS means they can entice people to upgrade when they want. No continuing on with 8+ year old hardware and a lightweight Linux distro even if it's fine for the intended use case.
They do also make a lot of money selling hardware, and as things stand today that business happens to make them look like the first tech giant to actually profit from the AI boom (because the hardware they've been developing internally for years happens to be among the best consumer-grade options for self-hosting LLMs). Making their hardware more attractive to tinkerers could be a winning move right now.
This, but also you would be allowing people to learn Linux. Developer with a Mac has to be one of the most common linux defectors. I suspect most people don't realize how doable and comfortable the switch can be.
It’s been my experience that developers running Mac already know how to use Linux and actively choose to use Mac. Unless the company is forcing it at least.
They pay for the hardware that they run Linux on. Apple's hardware division is very profitable without the "value" adds they run through their ecosystem, and those people never would have bought into the ecosystem whether they used MacOS or not.
I imagine the real reason is that if they change things they now have an obligation to promptly share technical docs and if they're slow people will whine and bitch online about them. Not worth it. They have zero to gain (and I say this as someone who would love to dual boot Linux on my M4).
Plenty are whining now and that doesn't seem to bother them. I mean, this is one of the largest companies in the world. This is the company that once told people they were holding the phone wrong. I can't see them being particularly more bothered by people complaining in a slightly different way.
Apple's whole thing is hardware + software working together. Endless other options available to Linux users. They'd also need to be prepared for people bringing laptops to stores with hardware problems that aren't running macOS. Again, more burden for Apple for no gain other than winning over a couple of dozen users.
Do you seriously think someone who installed Asahi is gonna walk into a genius bar and ask for help with it? And often enough that it becomes a burden??
And according to their stats page that sibling linked it’s more like a few tens of thousands of users.
We really need to retire this phrase, it’s become a humblebrag way of calling the other party delusional without even trying to understand.
The list here though is long: priorities, accuracy concerns, blurring the line on official support, IP restrictions with third parties (even Apple uses plenty of licensed cores), etc.
I don't see it that way. It's just the GP poster saying that they don't get it. Usually that means the GP poster isn't experienced enough to understand the rationality. So I generally assume the GP poster is simply naive.
Nice to see M3 support coming along as they work their way through the upstreaming backlog and improve tooling:
> finding their way into the Asahi kernel tree are patches to enable more hardware on M3 machines. This includes support for PCIe, MacBook keyboards and trackpads support, the SMC-based RTC and reboot controller, and the NVMe controller, courtesy once again of Michael Reeves and Alyssa Milburn. This brings Linux support for the M3 up to roughly the same level as the first Asahi Linux alpha for M1!
The mentioned light sensor started malfunctioning on my work's m3 after upgrading to tahoe. After a sleep it sometimes dimms the screen at max. Thankfully I have the monitor control app which brings it back for me. Such unneeded and faulty mechanism.
I wonder if there would be interest in an Asahi Remix spin focused on a more Mac-like out-of-the-box experience: cmd as the main modifier key, Mac-like keyboard shortcuts, theming, gestures, etc.
Of course, you can tweak any distro however you want, but I think a curated default experience is a different thing.
> while Ctrl is the modifier used at an application level.
DE features don't matter at all outside of cmd-tab and whatever the equivalent of spotlight is. The application level is the main modifier, and changing them all to cmd is essentially impossible at this point. A detail Haiku got just about perfect, I think.
Either way, ctrl as a gui modifier is a dealbreaker for me. It also breaks the use of readline keybindings for text entry.
These kind of project reports showing consistent breakthroughs and clearly a finger on the pulse of what users are encountering as pain points are a good indication that the Asahi team are real pros :)
Look forward to switching back to Asahi full time soon!!
Does somebody know the power values for idle and sleep for this release? When I tried Remix 43 on a m2 mb pro 1 month ago the idle power usage was above 5W (max 10h) and sleep roughly 3W (~20h).
M3 support nearly at alpha is fantastic news, and I'm really looking forward to M4 in the future. I am not looking forward to whatever Apple has planned this year for macOS, or next.
I'm glad they dropped the ban on HN readers[1]. That was my very first impression of Asahi Linux that I ever encountered and it's unfortunately what I think of every time I see it show up here.
Honestly, knowing what I know about marcan, the decision was probably the result of an overwhelming/strong emotional reaction.
Not to just shit all over him or anything, but it really sucks to see someone who is genuinely top-ten-on-earth when it comes to "real hacking" struggle so much with socialisation and mental health.
It is weird to blame the victim for reacting to being harassed by a mob. That is a normal thing to have a reaction to. Perhaps rather than blaming people's social skills and mental health, we should instead blame the culture that normalises harassing people on the internet, even to the point of suicide (as happened in byuu's case). You are basically advocating that it is better for individuals to change to accept a shitty society as a given rather than advocating for society to change to be less shitty.
I'm genuinely unfamiliar of the harassment campaign that HN launched against him.
(I am familiar with some comments debating the validity of Byuu/Near's gender identity, and marcan's extremely strong reaction to that, but no actual harassment campaigns)
This marcan person had problem with Go, he had problem with Apple fans, he had problems with linux committers, so much he left internet or something. To say everyone but marcan was wrong is just a kind of fanboyism and it hardly helps marcan.
This person liked to dish out as much as next person but display extreme reaction when served.
>It is weird to blame the victim for reacting to being harassed by a mob.
It's not victim blaming, marcan was clearly mentally unwell. He delusionally thought there was some harassment mob after him. After the fallout with Linux kernel devs, the lolipedo accusations, and him being outed as the vtuber Asahi Lina, he arguably did the correct thing: deleted every social media account and abandoned Asahi Linux. I hope he stepped away from screens and spent some time outdoors.
I am not sure how what happened can be considered "being outed", the vtuber's puppeteer was obvious from day one to anyone who was paying any attention at all, it is just that a lot of people decided to uphold the kayfabe. (And I don't blame them, at least before the lkml crashout it was a pretty fun character.)
This is not a dichotomy. It's not healthy to take random online comments to heart so much. It's also bad to make such ridiculous comments. Both can be true at the same time.
This diminishes what "random online comments" are. They aren't just text on a screen. They represent words that another human being has said about you. Often, words that will convince other human beings, who may take different actions or view you differently because of what they've been told, which will in turn spread virally and alter how thousands and thousands of humans see you and act towards you.
Humans are a social species. It is easy to say "just don't be social bro". When you are actually the victim of this behaviour, it is much less easy to shrug off. Having a bunch of people hate you and say horrible things about you hurts. That's not abnormal. That is perfectly normal. Is it good for your health? No, in the same way that somebody smoking next to me is not good for my health, but it's not my fault the person next to me is smoking. The blame rests with them. To some extent, yes, stepping away from the smoker is a short-term fix, although often an unpleasant one that impacts your quality of life in other ways (what if the restaraunt you like is full of smokers, what if the airport is full of smokers, etc). In the same way society eventually changed to discourage smoking around other people, we really, really need to change the culture around the internet, to recognise that the internet is actually a social environment, that there are real people on both sides of the screen. "Go touch grass" implies that the internet is not the real world, but it very much is, with real consequences, even if you can't see the other person.
Really hope that by the time all my M4 Macs are no longer updated by Apple I can just switch to Asahi and get a 1:1 compatible OS in terms of supporting all the hardware my Macs come with.
While I love Asahi as such and am really blown away by the effort, my setup requires an encrypted ZFS root file system, which is unreasonably hard to achieve with a Mac.
The fact, that there has to be a macOS partition for maintenance ruling out ZFSBootMenu somehow is very unfortunate - but I've accepted it.
Maybe the new Framework 13 Pro will be at least in the region of an alternative... :-/
I’m curious, broadly, what is involved with this. I just got encrypted (LUKS) BTRFS root going on my two Asahi machines and it wasn’t _terrible_… but also definitely not easy.
Lina got the happy ending. She moved on to apply her talent to bigger and better projects - the real tragedy is how many years of volunteer effort were wasted by Apple's opaque documentation.
I doubt it too, but I was hoping to hear from someone who'd tried it. I don't care about peripherals, even booting it without the storage with a serial getty would be useful for me.
Unfortunately iPhones have locked bootloaders that prohibit installing other operating systems. People have gotten Linux running on iPhones, but it requires jailbreaking and that has gotten much harder over time. And it's not really worth putting effort into developing an OS if nobody is going to be able to install it.
Nothing is stopping you from using LLMs when contributing to their project (I think). One reason might simply be that they would rather spend the (very sparse) donation money on anything else but tokens.
They do currently ban LLM-assisted submissions. To be honest, even if LLMs are technically capable of writing code that assists the project, this at least helps keeps the 'floodgate' closed for certain low-quality PRs that other open-source projects are getting.
I am both a monthly supporter of the Asahi project and a full-time macOS user. Why? I love to support hackers. But I am also a realist and have given up on the idea of a linux laptop that "just works" and have embraced teh first party experience of the wholly integrated software and hardware experience of the apple ecosystem.
am I just a smooth brained dumb dumb that has drunk the koolaid? perhaps. but I don't lose sleep on it and am not tinkering with hardware, or software anymore, I just get stuff done now.
>.. macOS only ever programs CS42L84 to operate at either 48 or 96 kHz, we could only add support for those two sample rates to the Linux driver ..
> However, CS42L42 supports all the other common sample rates, and while the register layout and programming sequence is different, the actual values programmed in for 48 and 96 kHz are the same across both chips. What would happen if we simply took the values for all other sample rates from the CS42L42 datasheet and added those to the CS42L84 driver? As it turns out, you get support for those sample rates!
> The patch to enable hardware support for 44.1, 88.2, 176.4 and 192 kHz sample rates on both the input and output of the headphone jack was submitted directly upstream, and has been merged for 7.1. We also backported this to Asahi kernel 6.19.9, allowing users to take advantage of this immediately.
Nice bit of chip sleuthing and reverse engineering from the Asahi team!
The following is actually the most surprising part to me.
> This is quite limiting, as it forces PipeWire to waste CPU cycles (and therefore battery life) on resampling audio streams that are not either 48 or 96 kHz.
So the Asahi team thinks that only supporting 48 or 96 kHz wastes battery life by forcing the software to resample audio streams. But why does Apple still do this? Presumably Apple has a very high commitment to save power and increase battery life.
Always possible that it's the standard commercial software company reason: They do know about it and have a P2 bug tracking it, but the team that maintains that code has 5000 other things to do, and it never gets fixed.
More likely it’s that 48 kHz is a more sensible default, since the majority of non-music digital audio is sampled at 48 kHz, and almost anyone who cares about the difference is going to be using an external DAC anyway.
whoa, bit perfect CD/flac playback in 44.1, that's a killer feature.
There are many audio resampling libraries available that can convert from 44.1 to 48 kHz with no perceptible quality loss. E.g. see
https://github.com/hasenbanck/resampler#quality-analysis
This is presumably what Apple does. You kind of have to anyway or you have the stupid situation Linux used to have where only one app could play audio at a time.
Hardware often reports supporting 44.1kHz but internally resamples it to 48kHz so you're better off properly resampling it yourself.
> you have the stupid situation Linux used to have where only one app could play audio at a time
When was that? I think my first Linux distribution was Ubuntu 8.04 and fairly sure it shipped with PulseAudio which in mind always been able to play audio from multiple sources at the same time, maybe I misremember?
Pure ALSA would behave like that because the currently playing process would take exclusive control of the hardware.
Upsite: Highest quality playback.
Downside: Only one process could play audio at a time.
Came later I believe. They had esd and other sound “servers” back then however. Might have had to install it yourself.
If you have two audio streams, you can't play them as is on the audio device, you have to mix them together. The same happens with analog speakers as you can't just add two signals together. I believe at one point with Alsa, when an application takes control of the audio device, no one else could play with it. Now Alsa comes with dmix (a digital mixer feature) enabled in its default configuration, so two applications may play how they want. And we have PulseAudio, Jack, and Pipewire on top of Alsa to add more features.
OpenBSD still present raw audio devices, but they have sndio which provides a more helpful interface for applications including resampling (not the best algorithms there, according to them).
I really hope this project continues to gain momentum. Apple Hardware + Linux is the least fscked OS running on the best hardware. MacOS continues to be a tire fire with endless bugs and churn between versions.
You should give Framework a try. It's been a flawless experience with Fedora. And with the upcoming Framework 13 Pro, battery life and trackpad are expected to be on par (or in the case of battery, even better than macos)
No, battery life isn't on par.
The only way to get the battery life Framework advertised is on Windows' 'Ultra Efficiency' mode which cuts CPU performance by 25-50%, lowers brightness by 30% and deprioritizes everything in the background to such an extreme that responsiveness of those is measured in seconds.
It is not comparable at all to M-series or Snapdragon laptops happily chugging along at full capability and getting (compared to AMD / Intel) stellar battery life.
They're talking about the new model announced, with a larger battery and ARM architecture. Not released yet, I don't think.
The new Framework Pros are still x86, but the newest Intel generation appears to provide a substantial boost to efficiency.
Also, jumping on the LPCAMM train early creates an eventual path for ARM boards without soldered RAM.
Correct, it's in pre order now. It is actually x86 though, not arm
The new model is Intel or amd unless I missed something. They said in the video the battery life was entirely from video playback, which can be run on efficiency mode
My apologies, I don't know where I got the ARM architecture part from. I really want one of those machines, but I guess if they can't approach MacBook battery life yet I'm stuck on MacOS for now.
I think they said 22 hours of video playback in the video. If it even gets half of that for normal usage I'd be sold, the only thing stopping me giving it a shot is they are currently more expensive than the MBP and I'm not sure if they are worth it until the first reviews come in
There is a framework mainboard being made by a 3rd party vendor
https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2026/arm-mainboard-for-fra...
I've run all 3 major OSes before. MacOS by far has the least bugs and kinda just works.
My variosu Linux adventures have always resulted in doing random patches for audio or screen incompatibility.
My windows days were plagued with battery issues.
I feel like most Linux ricers wishs for a MacOS-like experience, except with more customisation. (Which is entirely possible now with the ricing on Mac)
> My variosu Linux adventures have always resulted in doing random patches for audio or screen incompatibility.
This is the kind of dated argument that really makes me dismiss most of the critics. I was running xubuntu as my main desktop since 2010 at least, switched to Debian + nix + XFCE in 2022 and switched to full-on nixOS in 2024. I never had issues with audio then and had to go out of my way to "break" audio on NixOS when I wanted to try pipewire instead of pulse.
> feel like most Linux ricers wises for a MacOS-like experience
I've put together a Hackintosh once, tried for a few weeks as the daily driver. Aside from being able to use tools that dealt with real-time audio processing, there was nothing else I wanted to copy or bring to my Linux system. It cemented my opinion that most software developers that keep touting the "superiority of MacOS" never gave a fair shot at Linux on decent hardware and were just rationalizing their prior choice.
Earlier this year I built a new desktop and installed my normal Linux distro and the screen wouldn’t work after login. I worked on it for a day, still couldn’t get any desktop except a terminal.Tried a different distro, it booted but no matter what resolution or refresh rate, the display showed severe artifacts when scrolling. Tried to fix it for a few days, gave up.
I am not a Linux novice, I have been using every major OS for decades at this point, but I’ll be damned if I didn’t install Windows, decrapify it, and everything just worked. You can say I should have done more research on hardware compatibility or whatever, but I didn’t have to for Windows.
And I like how you complain most devs never give Linux a fair shot on decent hardware right after describing that you MacOS experience is a hackintosh. That makes a lot of sense.
> And I like how you complain most devs never give Linux a fair shot on decent hardware right after describing that you MacOS experience is a hackintosh.
I'm not saying that I was expecting to run a Hackintosh and suddenly get the advantages of Apple hardware. I am doing a pure software-to-software comparison.
There was no application in the MacOS desktop that made me feel like I was missing out on something. Of all the tools that I am used to use - emacs + developer tools, email clients, messaging clients, media players, media managers, browsers, the occasional office productivity - none of the MacOS counterparts had any significant advantage over what I have in a Linux desktop.
> I am doing a pure software-to-software comparison.
I would argue this is impossible at this point. Most of the benefits of the entire Apple ecosystem are about integration - Macbook Pros are the fastest machines with the best battery life because of the great hardware but also the software integration.
> There was no application in the MacOS desktop that made me feel like I was missing out on something. Of all the tools that I am used to use - emacs + developer tools, email clients, messaging clients, media players, media managers, browsers, the occasional office productivity - none of the MacOS counterparts had any significant advantage over what I have in a Linux desktop.
This isn't really comparing OSes is it? You're comparing software that runs on the OS. Every tool I have on my linux machines I have an equivalent tool for on Mac, or I use the same tool, but the Macbook with MacOS is a workhorse that I can trust to "just work."
I don't think desktop Linux is bad, not by any means, and there are reasons I still go to it first on my personal machines until something forces me to make a different decision, but I also get tired of Linux users telling all of us that our experiences are old and all of these issues are fixed when they're just not, even if that isn't Linux' or the distro's fault.
If you are willing to give the advantage to MacOS due to the integration with the hardware, then you should only judge Linux when provided on hardware from Linux-centric vendors like system76, Tuxedo, Starlite and Framework.
I understand the point you are trying to make, but I disagree with it. MacOS doesn’t claim to work on other hardware, Linux does.
If System76 said PopOS only works on their hardware, it would be fair to only evaluate it on their hardware. When SteamOS only claimed to work on Steam Decks, the only good evaluation way to evaluate it was on Steam Decks.
> MacOS doesn’t claim to work on other hardware, Linux does.
It's the inverse. You claim that Apple "just works" for you and that Linux doesn't. I am saying then if you want to lend credibility to your argument, then you need to use hardware that has a certifying vendor behind it.
I can easily tell you a story of the same with the two OSs reversed. It's no longer 2016, pretty much every hardware worth their salt has good, or better Linux support, with the possible exception of some random RGB led not being controllable out of the box (though usually it's not out of the box either on windows). Like outside of desktop, Linux is the most prevalent operating system and it's not even close.
MacOS has solved laptop suspend since the 2000s. Windows and Linux still struggle with this, especially due to the switch from S3- to S0ix-style sleep.
Modern Apple laptops seem less special now but you also have to look at them through the lens of their introduction.
A similar thing is true for Sonos. They don't seem all that special now, but you have to realize they have been offering multi-room synced audio with a good UX since 2006. That's before the iPhone even was released.
> MacOS has solved laptop suspend since the 2000s.
On Apple hardware. Call me when you put MacOS on any random laptop and get suspend to work.
Yeah, it's not that hard if the hardware is high quality and of small number of known types.
Windows and Linux is judged by whether it works on any hardware, including the so-cheap-it-should-not-have-been-produced-ever machines, that will obviously just plain suck. No amount of software can save shitty hardware.
Hard to agree with those critics when the OS is doing the right thing, but the hardware won't play ball. The reason there's so much code in the Linux kernel is for various shenanigans that hardware vendors came up with. Yesterday I was looking at how HDMI audio is being implemented. From the specs, it looks quite nice with support for PCM and rates supported sent via EDID, but there's like 5 implementations for that one, 3 of them handling hacks by the GPU vendors.
Windows had working suspend to disk with Windows XP then they messed it up trying to get a more tablet like experience.
:/
In my personal experience macOS is fine but updates are often buggy or regress performance. Linux has just been the more polished option. Plus it just has a nicer desktop and apps.
I stay 1 major version behind with MacOS. If you do that you should have a pretty stable experience. You still get all the security patches but skip most bugs/regressions.
Linux got this philosophy made distribution called Debian. What kind of argument is that for OS experience and stability?
I use macos because of the battery life and because I want a Linux like experience without wondering if some weird software a company update forces on us will work, like citrix desktop or their random vpn client. But for someone who spends most of their time in the terminal, and the rest of the time in a browser, macos has some really annoying quirks especially when it comes to window management
Can macOS snap windows to the side yet without external plugins?
"entirely possible" is a bit of a stretch. You can install some hacky WM and sketchybar but system settings, workspace three finger scroll speed, the finder app, window chrome, login screen etc are not something that can easily be changed. And the default apps are really not that great for power users. Calendar, Mail and Finder are all slow, dumbed down and only very superficially customizable. I daily drive an M2 Pro MBP and I was running a Linux desktop up until 2 years ago and I felt like there were barely any limits to customizing the latter while I have to fight macOS at every step if I want to do something that apple does not want me to do.
Not a problem I have had on Linux.
Some people seem to get better battery life with Windows than with Linux.
Most users on any OSes are not ricers. Most of my customisation is functional - panels and widgets placed for practical reasons. A lot of people do not seem to customise at all, or barely.
Ricing is big, but I also like the hackability and development friendly environment of Linux that isn't there on Macbooks (been running MacOS as a secondary for ~5yrs now)
MacOS is also optimised for M series chips in a way that realistically no linux distribution ever will be.
Definitely good to have the option, but you'll most likely never get quite the same performance or battery life on linux
> My variosu Linux adventures have always resulted in doing random patches for audio or screen incompatibility.
Is that on Mac hardware? I run a 14 year old Mac Book Air, and it works flawlessly with the latest Nixos, and has done for the last 11 years.
If you have issues on random PCs, it's because there are an enormous variety of them out there, with all kinds of incompatibilities that have to be worked around. On Mac hardware, there tends to be a more restricted number of variants, and after a few years, Linux becomes rock solid on them.
So the OP is correct, Linux on Mac hardware is the best combo.
A 14 year old Macbook Air is an Intel Mac, AFAIK most hardware is pretty well supported.
M series Macs are still very much a work in progress. I'm typing this on one, in Linux, so plenty of things work, but not for example USB-C output to an external display, and a lot of the processor power level / suspend stuff is still not fully there so battery life is quite a bit worse, especially when suspended. I think the situation is rather worse on the latest generation hardware, too.
Liquid Ass enters the chat, Apple can’t even make rounded corners anymore.
I was burned by the 2016 MacBook Pro keyboard, and once Liquid Ass was announced I knew it was time to get out.
Sold my MacBook Pro M2 Pro, which has a stupid gigantic notch that blocks the menu bar items with no built-in mechanism for getting to them when they overflow.
Now I’m on a Framework 13” and I’ve had zero issues with Linux. Everything just works. KDE Plasma is way more customizable than macOS or Windows. I’m finally able to ditch slow Homebrew and use a real package manager. I can finally play light PC games on my laptop without dealing with streaming or Crossover.
My preorder is in for the Framework 13 Pro, which looks to get even closer to delivering a MacBook Pro for Linux. Meanwhile, Apple hasn’t changed their chassis design in 5 years, while Framework updates their hardware constantly while maintaining cross-compatibility. A company with less than 500 employees is catching up to a trillion dollar corporation.
I’ve already got my fully modular LPCAMM RAM delivered and ready with no Apple tax. I’ll get better battery life watching YouTube videos than a MacBook Pro and the graphics are just as powerful as the M5 base chip.
And if something breaks I won’t have to deal with the nightmare I went through with my 2016 MacBook Pro.
Generally yes, but the community around MLX has rallied pretty strong. Sure your disk io is awful, and your OS is buggy, but at least ML compiles and works on a modern OS.
Works like rocm seem so close. But you need either the pre-compiled packages or 2+ year old Ubuntu to compile them. https://github.com/ROCm/TheRock/issues/3477
I'm still on Ubuntu 22 because everything works. Got enough packages that still request I don't use wayland that I don't want to risk an upgrade.
Sad because I really want the better One drive integration that Ubuntu 24+ comes with.
While I absolutely love the technical write-up from the Asahi team, and being absolutely impressed by their accomplishment, to the risk of being an overly negative contrarian, I remain a bit skeptical.
I'm concerned that after all these years, it's still a separate project and not an effort sustained directly within the kernel mainline and mainstream distributions like Ubuntu, Debian or Fedora.
These kinds of reverse engineering projects are extremely challenging. With skills & field knowledge, it's "easy" to get to "80%" and have something useful for you and the most dedicated users. But reaching the "95%" required for a polished & general public ready experience needs nearly as much effort, often on tedious and time consuming tidbits.
For what it’s worth, Asahi do upstream a lot of changes to do exactly what you’re saying.
That’s a big reason why progress slowed recently because they were focusing on reducing their diff count.
A lot of stuff has landed in the mainline kernel, but Asahi is how they keep experimenting on new functionality.
What everyone is missing is any org who pays Ubuntu or RedHat for support is going to buy officially supported hardware from Lenovo, Dell, Framework or etc. Asahi is a cool project, but there's zero money in it.
I think there is also the added challenge that ARM macs are a moving target, and Apple has less than no desire to provide any kind of stability or support for Asahi Linux. Unlike the PC space where laptop manufacturers have to maintain broad compatibility over time, Apple will make future changes that are really awkward for Asahi and will not care one bit because they can do the compat work on their own software.
>I think there is also the added challenge that ARM macs are a moving target
Yes, but also no? Because I think a reasonable argument can be made that ARM Macs are like game consoles with a more rapid generation: yes there are changes between each generation, but then you've got millions of units which are good for a very long time that are all near identical. Apple definitely is not changing everything between gens at all, work they've done for M1 has been plenty useful since. And support stretches awhile. The final M3 generation chip only came out about a year ago (the M3 Ultra for the Mac Studio was March 2025).
So sure there's ongoing effort needed for newer systems, and that may require ongoing RE more then typical. I don't want to brush aside the effort there at all. But at the same time there doesn't seem to be the same long tail of hardware variations and dozens to hundreds of players doing their own little tweaks either. Aside from memory and storage, every single Mac of a given SoC is the same so each time one gets covered they all get covered and are a stable experience. It's definitely a different thing then developing for PCs, and I definitely wish there was and support serious legal backing for no rug pulls being allowed, ever. Hardware owners should always have access to the root of trust if they want it. But that aside, I don't think their efforts are wrong or somehow wasted just because each new generation might need some new work. That doesn't appear from the outside to be intractable, and fact is the pace of hardware change for computers has slowed and continues to slow. A system from many years ago can still be very good for most tasks... so long as the OS can still be updated and work. Apple themselves seem more then limiting factor there, whereas Linux shines in long term support.
From an end user perspective, I think the best thing the Asahi team could have done was solely focus on getting the M1 Air/Pro working 100% before moving onto other devices.
But that would probably result in burn out from the crazily talented dev team :P
Asahi focusing on M1 would also encourage secondary market sales of M1 laptops, which are already a primary competitor (see Apple marketing) to current Apple laptops. If Apple wanted to encourage Asahi Linux users to move from M1 or Qualcomm to M5/M6 Apple devices, they could improve device firmware compatibility with Linux, or contribute directly to mainline Linux.
Considering that M1 and M2 are almost the same architecturally isn't that exactly what they are doing? M3 are two new contributors who decided they wanted that.
> Unlike the PC space where laptop manufacturers have to maintain broad compatibility over time
LOL
If anything Apple is infamous for keeping around hardware blocks for as long as they can. IIRC the serial port driver for everything Apple ARM dates back to the very first generations of iPods.
Of course Apple will remain a moving target, but they are orders of magnitude more stable than everyone else in the non-x86 universe.
How does Ubuntu Linux on recent Qualcomm (ex-Apple Nuvia) Arm laptops compare to Asahi Linux on Apple Silicon?
Pretty rude to call this ex Apple Nuvia. I don't think any of those lawsuits by Apple or ARM have been won. Qualcomm declares this to be a new chip. But yes it has talent from those places. Still, let's not try to tip the scales of perception quite so indelicately?
I am curious what the boot situation is. It seems like Qualcomm actually has pretty good support for their cores. But since these PC systems sort of lack a bios, each one needing a hand built DeviceTree: it makes supporting them kind of a nightmare. Even a raspberry pi has a much more advanced and accommodating boot environment than these frustrating Qualcomm laptops. Alas. I don't know but I expect Asahi has to do similar hand tailoring. I am curious to know what the boot chain looks like! How much the system willingly helps vs how much hard to be bespoke hand coded system config! (Wish it wasn't like this, it's so bad)
Circular talent economy, https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/legendary-qu...
Without stirring the pot too much, I’m a bit out of the loop on what the above poster implied and you took slight to. Could you share a little more about this and why you feel what they said was rude?
There's nothing rude about it; the Nuvia CPU core is pretty much the entire selling point of the Snapdragon X Elite product family. Everything else on those chips is underwhelming. But the provenance of the CPU core is really irrelevant to the question of Linux support, which is gated by driver support for the rest of the SoC, which didn't come from Nuvia. So focusing on the Nuvia aspect is a bit of a red herring.
> bit of a red herring
It offers an A/B test of "similar" SoC performance and battery life (which users now expect from laptops), without a vertically integrated operating system that was also created by the company who designed the SoC.
Apple and ARM have sued Qualcomm over the Nuvia talent.
> I'm concerned that after all these years, it's still a separate project and not an effort sustained directly within the kernel mainline and mainstream distributions
What does this mean? Hardware support is rarely developed inside these organizations; what makes it seem like these groups would be a good home for this effort?
It makes sense to have a group of experts in a field (Apple hardware/firmware) contribute patches upstream, which is the exact system here. And Asahi have done an above and beyond job also maintaining their installation framework while carefully moving changes upstream as well.
There was a nice task on 39c3 https://youtu.be/3OAiOfCcYFM
They do try to upstream and eventually just have Linux natively support Apple Silicon!
Why would any group want to take on a project which could be instantly killed by an external for profit entity? For now Asahi is left alone by Apple but that could change in a single day and the entire project is dead. It doesn’t seem like a productive way to direct the limited energy that distribution foundations have on hand.
Like they say, "when you're 90% done you just need to take care of the other 90%"
I'm with you. This entire game has already played out in the iOS jailbreak scene.
What does "mainlined" driver development even look like?
This actually is the case for a few other competing Apple Silicon support projects that came and went prior to Asahi. Assuming you have a way to load code into EL2[0], it's fairly easy to bring up the main CPU and USB, plug in a bunch of external peripherals before boot, and say you got Linux running on Apple chips. Only true in the most literal case.
In contrast, Asahi is specifically doing all the challenging RE work that typically gets passed over in favor of flashy headlines. If anyone can get to 95%, it's them.
[0] Prior to the M1 Mac, Apple did not allow anyone but themselves to load EL2 code. The ability to load other OSes on Apple Silicon Macs is, strangely enough, an allowed use-case. Prior to this we had to rely on once-in-a-decade bootrom security bugs.
When I think about it, I don't understand why Apple wouldn't want to help this effort and just provide all the documentation.
All the classic reasons ("competitive advantage", "secrets", etc) do not hold water in this day and age.
The real answer is probably simpler than anyone here is making it. Apple hardware margins are healthy enough that selling macbooks to linux users is pure profit, so no services lock-in needed. However, the moment they officially acknowledge Linux support, then it becomes a support surface. Every kernel panic becomes a genius bar visit. Every driver bug becomes a tweet at @AppleSupport. It's the value of plausible deniability. The Asahi team being unofficial is actually the best possible outcome for Apple in that they get hardware sales to Linux enthusiasts without any support burden.
> However, the moment they officially acknowledge Linux support, then it becomes a support surface.
Apple documents lots of things the genius bar won't help with. For example, Apple provides instructions for compiling custom builds of the XNU kernel. Even so, if you replace the stock kernel and your Mac kernel panics, the genius bar isn't going to help you. (Maybe they'd help you wipe the computer and restore everything to stock, but I imagine they'd do that if a Linux user walked in too, today.)
I suspect Apple hasn't shared documentation because it would take time to clean up for external release (legal stuff, plus not accidentally leaking future products). What I think Apple should do is make an engineer available to talk on the phone for a couple of hours a month, which should amount to a rounding error in their budget.
They don't have to support it, just document the system or release their own kernel code. They don't even have to mention Linux.
That’s called support. We count that as support.
They could anonymously drop off a package to the Asahi team.
> the moment they officially acknowledge Linux support, then it becomes a support surface
untrue. There are no obligations from other hardware vendors, yet you can sometimes get good drivers from them, or at least specs. I think Apple indeed want their hardware to fade out to enforce buying another. Imagine that 20% of your returning customers no longer return after 3-5 years of planned obsolence
> Apple hardware margins are healthy enough that selling macbooks to linux users is pure profit, so no services lock-in needed.
What do you mean by needed? A lock-in is more profitable so is needed to maximise profits.
Little to no monetary benefit, hardware changes now need to be documented for Linux, loudest and most critical users but smallest volume.
And risk of loss of control on the software ecosystem.
This is the big one IMHO. Apple is all about control of the stack, top to bottom. Any sort of "help" with linux on macos would be threatening to that control. Apple "helped" even more than I would have expected by not locking alt OSes out of the bootloader. Probably for less than altruistic reasons, but they did do it.
I don't know if that's true. Linux users are curious and will try more stuff but people mistake that they file bug reports (and usually detailed ones...) with complaining more.
Apple's MO is that it's their baby. End of. They don't do open. Their compiler is closed source, and so on.
It feels very close to “right to repair”. The coffee grinder you bought came as a single package but it has burrs, gears, machine screws, a motor, etc. If one of those components fails, we should be able to replace it ourselves and as such they should be documented.
The laptop has various pieces of hardware in it and corresponding drivers in macOS to make them tick. Did we buy the hardware and the drivers as an inseparable package, or should we be provided with the manual to make one component work when the other breaks, be that either third party trackpads or third party (Linux) drivers.
Apple might argue that drivers, unlike gears or motors, will never wear down and fail. They won’t need repairing so you don’t get to know how they work. Does right to repair only apply to products that could ever need repairing? Does it also extend to knowing how your purchased product is built so that you could repair it?
Maybe we’ll see a test case some day when a cosmic ray blows out /System/Trackpad.kext and a litigant applies to a court for the documentation to repair their laptop — to write their own driver!
(Or vice versa: a manufacturer of coffee grinders arguing in court that they are exempt from right-to-repair because they repair their machines for free at their Genius Espresso Bar.)
Hmmm, both my grinder and espresso machine are quite reparable with parts you can order from the manufacturer. Very much unlike my iphone…
This is an interesting thought exercise. I immediately thought of the counter argument that Apple's driver quality is worse, especially for laptops nearing end of life (for the sake of argument assume this were true).
Could I then submit a warranty claim and demand Apple replace my aging laptop with their latest model?
One of the reasons I can see is it’s much easier to say “we don’t play this game” than get a lot of negative press for selective openness and breaking compatibility of non-public interfaces. Maybe it’s even more important internally, as it enables new kind of internal discussions distracting from priority work.
They are operating under a patchwork of NDAs. It would take some effort to determine what they can disclose.
I was trying to come up with a response but you're right. It would be easy for Apple and Apple would get so much goodwill from the community in return.
They get more public goodwill from a single ad. The chronically online Linux-using engineer community is too small to matter.
And let’s be honest, they still wouldn’t be satisfied. The goal post would move to something else. Why don’t my AirPods seamlessly handoff to my Linux MacBook?
Developers build many of the applications that make the platform desirable. Steve Ballmer at least seem to get that part. ;)
The developers for their platforms. Which, crucially, Linux developers are not.
Looking at: https://stats.asahilinux.org/ there is still a pretty large userbase who are so interested in it they go this route. I imagine that count would easily 10x if it would be officially supported. Those numbers are nothing to sneeze at.
I'm running asahi on my macbook. And never touch OSX. I wouldn't even had gotten it if asahi wasn't so well supported.
> Focus is about saying no to 100 good ideas so you can pursue one great idea.
Important context to understand why.
If they think macOS is one great idea, that's a terrible misjudgment.
And yet it’s incredibly popular and successful. Windows is also ass, and the year of the Linux desktop is perpetually a few years away.
Being the least bad doesn't make something good. macOS is the least bad choice for the majority of people that just want a machine to mostly browse the Internet, look at their photos, do some light productivity work, and participate in their ecosystem. It also arguably hosts has the best software options for creative work (although that's reaping the fruits of seeds planted long ago - not sure there's much about macOS that makes it inherently better for those tasks these days). For development, its advantage is the hardware it's running on. To achieve any level of customization or to define my own workflow that isn't what Apple wants me to do or to work across multiple systems, I have to fight macOS rather than work with it. Linux on the other hand does what I tell it to do.
Linux as a desktop OS for the vast overwhelming majority of people is a far inferior option. It just is, and always has been. Even for developers, MacOS doesn't prevent you from getting your job done and getting paid, while using arguably the best laptop hardware. Shit just works and stays out of your way.
If all MacOS has going for it is better hardware, someone would have stepped up and shipped a better linux laptop ages ago. God knows I'm not going back to a flimsy creaking chassis, shit screen, and horrible battery life just so my Docker container doesn't have to run in a VM.
The cynical take is that they make a shit ton of money from services and Linux running on a MacBook won’t help them do that.
The vast majority of people that buy Macs for the ecosystem aren't going to switch to Linux. That market will remain untouched. Outside of a few gamers who might want to put up with the x86-to-ARM translation layer and (for most A to AAA games) Proton to run some non-Mac games. And even they'll probably still dual-boot.
There's a portion of another market: people who want to run Linux and want a powerful laptop who buy x86 Laptops right now. Apple could expend very little relative effort while offering no official support by helping Asahi get that to a first class platform. They won't capture them in the ecosystem (and they never would have) but will still benefit from hardware sales to them.
Obviously, if they sold their hardware at a loss and subsidized that with ecosystem capture that would be a non-starter. But from everything we know, the hardware itself is very profitable.
Yeah, and having the only supported OS be MacOS means they can entice people to upgrade when they want. No continuing on with 8+ year old hardware and a lightweight Linux distro even if it's fine for the intended use case.
They do also make a lot of money selling hardware, and as things stand today that business happens to make them look like the first tech giant to actually profit from the AI boom (because the hardware they've been developing internally for years happens to be among the best consumer-grade options for self-hosting LLMs). Making their hardware more attractive to tinkerers could be a winning move right now.
This, but also you would be allowing people to learn Linux. Developer with a Mac has to be one of the most common linux defectors. I suspect most people don't realize how doable and comfortable the switch can be.
It’s been my experience that developers running Mac already know how to use Linux and actively choose to use Mac. Unless the company is forcing it at least.
Linux users don't pay for anything anyway
They pay for the hardware that they run Linux on. Apple's hardware division is very profitable without the "value" adds they run through their ecosystem, and those people never would have bought into the ecosystem whether they used MacOS or not.
I imagine the real reason is that if they change things they now have an obligation to promptly share technical docs and if they're slow people will whine and bitch online about them. Not worth it. They have zero to gain (and I say this as someone who would love to dual boot Linux on my M4).
Plenty are whining now and that doesn't seem to bother them. I mean, this is one of the largest companies in the world. This is the company that once told people they were holding the phone wrong. I can't see them being particularly more bothered by people complaining in a slightly different way.
so they don't care about users, they care about themself?
I think a more accurate statement is that they don’t want to take on the outsized burden relative to the number of users it would actually affect.
I’d love to dual boot Linux too but I’m under no delusions about being a very small segment of the Mac population.
Apple's whole thing is hardware + software working together. Endless other options available to Linux users. They'd also need to be prepared for people bringing laptops to stores with hardware problems that aren't running macOS. Again, more burden for Apple for no gain other than winning over a couple of dozen users.
Do you seriously think someone who installed Asahi is gonna walk into a genius bar and ask for help with it? And often enough that it becomes a burden??
And according to their stats page that sibling linked it’s more like a few tens of thousands of users.
> I don't understand
We really need to retire this phrase, it’s become a humblebrag way of calling the other party delusional without even trying to understand.
The list here though is long: priorities, accuracy concerns, blurring the line on official support, IP restrictions with third parties (even Apple uses plenty of licensed cores), etc.
I don't see it that way. It's just the GP poster saying that they don't get it. Usually that means the GP poster isn't experienced enough to understand the rationality. So I generally assume the GP poster is simply naive.
Nice to see M3 support coming along as they work their way through the upstreaming backlog and improve tooling:
> finding their way into the Asahi kernel tree are patches to enable more hardware on M3 machines. This includes support for PCIe, MacBook keyboards and trackpads support, the SMC-based RTC and reboot controller, and the NVMe controller, courtesy once again of Michael Reeves and Alyssa Milburn. This brings Linux support for the M3 up to roughly the same level as the first Asahi Linux alpha for M1!
The mentioned light sensor started malfunctioning on my work's m3 after upgrading to tahoe. After a sleep it sometimes dimms the screen at max. Thankfully I have the monitor control app which brings it back for me. Such unneeded and faulty mechanism.
I wonder if the hardware or the software will be the first to make a dream dev machine happen - a MacBook Pro + Linux experience
either Asahi gets there from the software side or Framework gets there from the hardware side
"Amaze, amaze, amaze!"
I wonder if there would be interest in an Asahi Remix spin focused on a more Mac-like out-of-the-box experience: cmd as the main modifier key, Mac-like keyboard shortcuts, theming, gestures, etc.
Of course, you can tweak any distro however you want, but I think a curated default experience is a different thing.
Cmd as a “main” modifier?
Ok typical X/Wayland setups, Cmd is already the main modifier for DE features, while Ctrl is the modifier used at an application level.
There would be a lot of weird overlap with changing that.
> while Ctrl is the modifier used at an application level.
DE features don't matter at all outside of cmd-tab and whatever the equivalent of spotlight is. The application level is the main modifier, and changing them all to cmd is essentially impossible at this point. A detail Haiku got just about perfect, I think.
Either way, ctrl as a gui modifier is a dealbreaker for me. It also breaks the use of readline keybindings for text entry.
I've managed to get close enough w/ kde. I just asked claude code to implement it for me, and it web searched and built config files.
Cmd as main modifier is lost battle. I've tried it multiple times. In the end just accepted ctrl life and sold my last macbook.
These kind of project reports showing consistent breakthroughs and clearly a finger on the pulse of what users are encountering as pain points are a good indication that the Asahi team are real pros :)
Look forward to switching back to Asahi full time soon!!
Does somebody know the power values for idle and sleep for this release? When I tried Remix 43 on a m2 mb pro 1 month ago the idle power usage was above 5W (max 10h) and sleep roughly 3W (~20h).
M3 support nearly at alpha is fantastic news, and I'm really looking forward to M4 in the future. I am not looking forward to whatever Apple has planned this year for macOS, or next.
I'm glad they dropped the ban on HN readers[1]. That was my very first impression of Asahi Linux that I ever encountered and it's unfortunately what I think of every time I see it show up here.
[1] https://github.com/AsahiLinux/AsahiLinux.github.io/commit/e0...
Because they got a lot of trolls and Apple fans. The decision was not made lightly.
Honestly, knowing what I know about marcan, the decision was probably the result of an overwhelming/strong emotional reaction.
Not to just shit all over him or anything, but it really sucks to see someone who is genuinely top-ten-on-earth when it comes to "real hacking" struggle so much with socialisation and mental health.
It is weird to blame the victim for reacting to being harassed by a mob. That is a normal thing to have a reaction to. Perhaps rather than blaming people's social skills and mental health, we should instead blame the culture that normalises harassing people on the internet, even to the point of suicide (as happened in byuu's case). You are basically advocating that it is better for individuals to change to accept a shitty society as a given rather than advocating for society to change to be less shitty.
I'm genuinely unfamiliar of the harassment campaign that HN launched against him.
(I am familiar with some comments debating the validity of Byuu/Near's gender identity, and marcan's extremely strong reaction to that, but no actual harassment campaigns)
This marcan person had problem with Go, he had problem with Apple fans, he had problems with linux committers, so much he left internet or something. To say everyone but marcan was wrong is just a kind of fanboyism and it hardly helps marcan.
This person liked to dish out as much as next person but display extreme reaction when served.
Being harassed by neckbeards would drive anyone insane
>It is weird to blame the victim for reacting to being harassed by a mob.
It's not victim blaming, marcan was clearly mentally unwell. He delusionally thought there was some harassment mob after him. After the fallout with Linux kernel devs, the lolipedo accusations, and him being outed as the vtuber Asahi Lina, he arguably did the correct thing: deleted every social media account and abandoned Asahi Linux. I hope he stepped away from screens and spent some time outdoors.
I am not sure how what happened can be considered "being outed", the vtuber's puppeteer was obvious from day one to anyone who was paying any attention at all, it is just that a lot of people decided to uphold the kayfabe. (And I don't blame them, at least before the lkml crashout it was a pretty fun character.)
This is not a dichotomy. It's not healthy to take random online comments to heart so much. It's also bad to make such ridiculous comments. Both can be true at the same time.
This diminishes what "random online comments" are. They aren't just text on a screen. They represent words that another human being has said about you. Often, words that will convince other human beings, who may take different actions or view you differently because of what they've been told, which will in turn spread virally and alter how thousands and thousands of humans see you and act towards you.
Humans are a social species. It is easy to say "just don't be social bro". When you are actually the victim of this behaviour, it is much less easy to shrug off. Having a bunch of people hate you and say horrible things about you hurts. That's not abnormal. That is perfectly normal. Is it good for your health? No, in the same way that somebody smoking next to me is not good for my health, but it's not my fault the person next to me is smoking. The blame rests with them. To some extent, yes, stepping away from the smoker is a short-term fix, although often an unpleasant one that impacts your quality of life in other ways (what if the restaraunt you like is full of smokers, what if the airport is full of smokers, etc). In the same way society eventually changed to discourage smoking around other people, we really, really need to change the culture around the internet, to recognise that the internet is actually a social environment, that there are real people on both sides of the screen. "Go touch grass" implies that the internet is not the real world, but it very much is, with real consequences, even if you can't see the other person.
I'm not saying anything even close to what you are suggesting at all.
How is that a ban?
Really hope that by the time all my M4 Macs are no longer updated by Apple I can just switch to Asahi and get a 1:1 compatible OS in terms of supporting all the hardware my Macs come with.
While I love Asahi as such and am really blown away by the effort, my setup requires an encrypted ZFS root file system, which is unreasonably hard to achieve with a Mac.
The fact, that there has to be a macOS partition for maintenance ruling out ZFSBootMenu somehow is very unfortunate - but I've accepted it.
Maybe the new Framework 13 Pro will be at least in the region of an alternative... :-/
I’m curious, broadly, what is involved with this. I just got encrypted (LUKS) BTRFS root going on my two Asahi machines and it wasn’t _terrible_… but also definitely not easy.
It's always sad to think what more can be achieved / how faster we might've arrived at M3 support if Asahi Lina is still active.
Lina got the happy ending. She moved on to apply her talent to bigger and better projects - the real tragedy is how many years of volunteer effort were wasted by Apple's opaque documentation.
Is anybody running Linux headlessly on the m4 mac minis successfully? I'm seeing them flying around used now at tempting prices...
Asahi is still in the early days of m3 support. It looks like there is zero m4 support, so I doubt you can even boot on one yet: https://asahilinux.org/docs/platform/feature-support/m4/#m4-...
I doubt it too, but I was hoping to hear from someone who'd tried it. I don't care about peripherals, even booting it without the storage with a serial getty would be useful for me.
Fascinating project like always. Thank you Asahi team!
Does anyone knows if it runs on M4 Mac machines?
It runs only on M1 and M2. M3 is being worked on.
https://asahilinux.org/docs/platform/feature-support/m4/
Thanks! That is a good page for me to monitor!
I run Asahi (the previous release) on an M2 Air and it works great except for high power drain when sleeping.
I still want to run it on an M3 MBP so it's nice to hear progress on that is happening.
Do you use a docking station and an external display?
Not OP but external display only works via HDMI directly atm (m2 mb pro).
I don't. I never got into external displays because I travel a lot and write code in strange places.
Is there an equivalent of this for iphones so we can give them a second life?
Unfortunately iPhones have locked bootloaders that prohibit installing other operating systems. People have gotten Linux running on iPhones, but it requires jailbreaking and that has gotten much harder over time. And it's not really worth putting effort into developing an OS if nobody is going to be able to install it.
You can run Android on an iPhone 7 as a demo, but not for any practical benefit: https://projectsandcastle.org/
Running what exactly? Older iOS versions? Android?
Linux.
Genuine question: can't LLMs be used to accelerate this project?
They've really strict policy on LLMs. They pretty much don't allow using them, because the slop so much in this kind of region.
Nothing is stopping you from using LLMs when contributing to their project (I think). One reason might simply be that they would rather spend the (very sparse) donation money on anything else but tokens.
https://asahilinux.org/docs/project/policies/slop/
They do currently ban LLM-assisted submissions. To be honest, even if LLMs are technically capable of writing code that assists the project, this at least helps keeps the 'floodgate' closed for certain low-quality PRs that other open-source projects are getting.
I am both a monthly supporter of the Asahi project and a full-time macOS user. Why? I love to support hackers. But I am also a realist and have given up on the idea of a linux laptop that "just works" and have embraced teh first party experience of the wholly integrated software and hardware experience of the apple ecosystem.
am I just a smooth brained dumb dumb that has drunk the koolaid? perhaps. but I don't lose sleep on it and am not tinkering with hardware, or software anymore, I just get stuff done now.
> But I am also a realist and have given up on the idea of a linux laptop that "just works"
I mean, if you only use laptops that are explicitly unsupported by the Linux kernel then I could see what gave you that impression.
I had a P14 Thinkpad for work and had all sorts of issues with Wayland and streaming and what not. There's no issues on the Mac side things just work.
Does it have a dGPU? My simple Intel Thinkpad hasn't had any noticeable Wayland-related issues in the past 3-4 years.