Everyone has a MacBook Neo take, so here's mine.

Apple has, in my opinion, been a net negative for computing, and to a stunning degree. They've normalized DRM for software so completely that it will possibly take decades to get back the rights that we lost. They've used that power to make life worse for queer folks and to cozy up to the Trump administration.

But. There's something fascinating about the Neo.

@glyph made the point that the Neo is an implicit promise from Apple that macOS will run just fine on 8 GB of memory for the next 8 years.

But I think it goes farther than that: Apple made a reference device for application developers. They've never been shy about enforcing requirements on developers, and this is an interesting positive side to that: developers now have a huge incentive to make applications that fit within modest memory limits.

this is the company that sabotaged older phones with newer software releases. I have no reason to believe they won't spend a few years (re-)penetrating education and low-end markets, and then bring the ratchet back out. all your stuff is in icloud. pay up.

CC: @[email protected]
@khm @xgranade I take it you're referring to batterygate? I think it's probably good that apple had to pay out a settlement there because I do think that they ought to be forced into a degree of transparency about what software updates are doing, but the actual meat of the lawsuit is about a tradeoff which, while it SHOULD have been explained to users, is also a setting which 99% of users really ought to have turned on
@khm @xgranade what the software update did was to change the behavior of the device from "when the battery is degraded to the point where it is no longer providing the necessary level of power to keep the phone running properly, instead of randomly shutting off at low-but-unpredictable charge % and losing the users' data, cap the CPU performance so it won't do that". The change would let most users keep their device *longer* and give Apple *less* money.
yes I also read their bullshit justification. weird how they're the only company who has to throttle devices to stop them from fucking themselves up, but I guess that's what it takes to convince people you're the best

between "we'll dry-gulch you behind the scenes" and "all third-party development stops when our xcode cert stack shits the bed" there's basically no combination of words that will convince me apple is anything but user-hostile

CC: @[email protected]
@khm @xgranade not something I have any interest in convincing you of. the only reason I talk about this stuff is to try to help the free desktop community properly understand what you're up against. if the model of the world is just "apple is acausally evil and makes inferior products; people buy their devices only because they're stupid" then there's no hope of ever competing with them realistically
"competing" is the wrong model for free desktop / foss / open computing. the resources necessary to achieve technical competition do not exist, there is no physical logistics entity, and the marketing is toilet-grade diaper dumps.

free software is a political movement, not a market participant, and the way to achive success is to focus on making it politically impossible (via legislation or public opinion or both) for companies to rely on hostile hardware-based control mechanisms, so that people can run whatever software they want.

"apple is causally evil and makes inferior products; people buy their devices only because they're apathetic" is absolutely correct and the solution is to compel apple to stop making garbage. apple is hardly unique in this. in fact, they are not unique at all; they're just another garbage factory in a market that is rapidly ensuring that all remaining SKUs originate in the landfill. demanding better is the only path forward.

CC: @[email protected]

@khm @glyph @xgranade

Apple is not *entirely* garbage, in their defense. The Cocoa API and Objective C are actually very superbly designed in my humble opinion, and it makes me sad that a true free software clone of the Mac OS X operating stack hasn't happened yet.

@burnoutqueen @khm @glyph @xgranade from my few times trying to mangle gnustep i can say if it is superbly designed I certainly must be too stupid to understand why
because objC seems incomprehensible to me

@wyatt @khm @glyph @xgranade

Don't throw your shots at GNUstep

@burnoutqueen @khm @glyph @xgranade it's cool but that doesn't make objc not incomprehensible gibberish

@wyatt @khm @glyph @xgranade

ObjC is a clean and elegant object oriented superset of C. Unlike C++

@glyph @wyatt @khm @xgranade

Whoa is it really that bad for me to say?

@wyatt @khm @glyph @xgranade

I won't unfollow people for liking a programming language. It's silly

@burnoutqueen @khm @glyph @xgranade i'm exaggerating
but objc is not good if my attempts to figure out what the fuck it was doing are anything to go by
@burnoutqueen @glyph @khm @xgranade if it is a superset of C it is, much like C++, such a superset as to render it unrecognizable as C

@wyatt @khm @burnoutqueen @xgranade you really don't need to keep repeating your aesthetic preferences here. I'm not an ObjC stan or anything, I have plenty of criticisms for it, but "it's gibberish" is a skill issue. Millions of people have learned it just fine. It is annoying to me personally for people to refuse to learn about things because of a superficial reaction they had once.

I'd rather not block over something so minor but this is a lot of replies to say nothing.

@wyatt

this is false. I know because I have written gnustep applications and I have literally intertwined standard c code and the smalltalk style object syntax in the same file.

@wyatt @khm @glyph @xgranade

I mainly like how objc allows you to use the c code you write directly in your programs without the need for interfacing code or anything.

I always thought that c++ streams were silly, for example.