This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Sure MacOS is not important other than the fact that it is iOS.
Fun fact neither MacOS or iOS are actually OSes. Even though Apple claims so, it does so in order not to confuse users with technical details.
The real OS is called Darwin built on top of a kernel (like Linux) called XNU
Dawrin is 100% open source and provides all the libraries need to so the usual OS stuff (driver support, filesystem, network etc) . Darwin is designed to run on Intel/AMD and mobile platforms. So it forms the foundation of both MacOS and iOS. MacOS is nothing more than collection of user focuses libraries , its usually all the fancy visual stuff like GUI etc.
iOS in turn is build on top of MacOS , iOS add a few additional libraries to support the “special” features of the mobile devices like iPhone and iPad.
So there is Dawrin as the core, around it is MacOS and around MacOS is iOS. iOS role is pretty minor for Apple mainly because even though iPhones make by far the largest part of Apple revenue , technology wise they offer very little over the mac platform which still drives hardware forward for Apple.
As such even though visually iOS has played a big role in influencing MacOS , iOS is nothing more than minor project compared to the massive amount of technologies Apple developes on MacOS and the OS is by far its driving technology wise for third party tools and software that depens on its extra juice.
Apple has been also suprised by the grow of popularity of MacOS and the mac platform in general. Even Steve jobs himself projected that the company could hoped to achieve no more than the 3.5% popularity MacOS enjoyed after IPhone massively successful release but after his death he was proven very wrong by MacOS climbing to 9% on the desktop market, while Linux is still stuck on 1% (although more than 70% of servers use Linux) and Windows dropping to 90% after thenVista and Windows Mobile fiasco.
The mac platform has been stronger than ever.
While on the matters of Metal, according to Apple it has been embraced by over 90% of 3d software developers (including games, 3d apps, multi media applicattions) and Apple is also a boarding member in the Khronos group that pushes Vulkan forwared. Metal also has been instrumental to the demise of OpenGL way before Apple stopped supporting it, Khronos the group behind both OpenGL and Vulkan they have shifted their entire focus to Vulkan.
This is a useless way to look at it. MacOS and iOS are two very different software platforms from a developer’s and a user’s perspective, even if they share some of the same technology under the hood. It’s not just “a few additional libraries”, it’s entirely different frameworks, entirely different applications, entirely different hardware.
I’m also not so much talking about the unclear future regarding Metal, I’m talking about the past years. Back when OpenGL and OpenCL was the only way to do 3D graphics and GPGPU on MacOS, support was garbage. The only way to get high-performance hardware was to spend a fortune on a soon outdated trashcan Mac Pro. So what’s the explanation for that, other than the creative professional market not being important for Apple?
In terms of raw market share, maybe Apple gained a few points on the average user, but creative professionals have been abandoning the platform - at least in my estimation.
they are not hidden, on mouse over the addresses you see at the bottom of the browser, or at least somewhere.
mostly they are “comments”. the links are something more, that do not want to make too much noise, if you want to deepen click on the link, otherwise ignore them and move on.
nobody forces you to pay attention to them.
if I post the links directly, the system would create a preview of the links or videos and since I’m not entirely on topic I do not think this is the case, I prefer to stay “comments”.
in short, do not tell me how I should post comments if you do not feel well. ignore and move on, or flag as of-topic and let the system hide the commends, hide do not offend me, I’m used to it.
Some interest is brewing regarding Metal and OGL alternatives:
Perhaps @lubos and co might have insights to share too?
Is this substantiated or an assertion? I’m a creative professional who has abandoned Windows after many years, and I’m very content using macOS. I’m not a ‘my OS is better than yours’ type of guy, I just personally prefer macOS over Windows after having worked extensively with both. My positive impression of macOS is probably mainly due to the fact that macOS is optimized for hardware from the same publisher. I guess in terms of functionality macOS and Windows don’t differ that much.
Anyway, I love Blender, and really hope the developers won’t put the macOS version on the backburner because Apple tries to promote Metal and doesn’t support NVidia GPUs (apart from eGPU devices).
It’s an observation, your mileage may vary.
Okay, but does that publisher (Apple) make all the software that you use? Graphics performance on Mac OS is generally worse than how the same hardware would perform on Windows or Linux, sometimes significantly so.
Depends on how you look at it, a lot of software doesn’t run on Mac OS. Plus, on Windows you can realistically afford a system with two high-end GPUs without taking up an extra mortgage. That’s a functional difference in my view.
That’s the wrong way to look at it. From a developer’s perspective, Apple is saying “here’s a ton of extra work for you to ship on our platform”. That’s the opposite of promotion. With OpenGL or Vulkan, at least in theory, developers don’t have to do anything special to support Apple.
My belief is that, all other things being equal, any platform that is developer hostile has to make up for it with a commensurate user share, otherwise supporting that platform comes at cost that is unfair to all other users. In practice, developer resources are spent as they are available, so if there’s a maintainer to fix Apple issues, it’ll happen. You’d think Apple could spend a few dollars on making sure their desktop platform isn’t a long-running joke, as opposed to buying back their own stock.
Hi @BeerBaron, I’m not going to defend macOS, because OS wars are never-ending and needlessly suck energy, like hardware wars, renderer wars and so on.
If Windows is the OS of your choice, then by all means enjoy it as much as I enjoy macOS. I just wanted to state that like you I’m very content with my choice, and would be disappointed if macOS Blender users would be discriminated. But I’m confident that OS-specific issues will be solved in consultation with the developers, like they have always been solved so far. In that regard I’m looking forward to interesting improvements after reading @LoboTommy’s posted links regarding GPU assessment.
I don’t “enjoy” operating systems, I have to work with them to get things done. It’s not even a choice.
Again, your choice is fine but I don’t like the way you phrase it. “Discrimination” is a very loaded term. Any software project has a limited amount of resources. Blender has to discriminate, for example against people that don’t meet the minimum system requirements. That’s cutting out potentially millions of people in developing nations! Mac users on the other hand are generally affluent. They can install Windows or Linux on their Macs. They can even get a cheap extra computer.
Not going the extra mile specifically for Mac users to me is more like not rolling out the red carpet for a relatively small group of users. On the other hand, if there are Mac developers willing to take care of the situation, that would be just fine. That’s the way it should go. Either way, that’s my personal opinion. I don’t have a say in the matter anyway.