Anne O. Nymous (not.delete@this.real.address) on January 15, 2021 11:19 am wrote:
> dmcq (dmcq.delete@this.fano.co.uk) on January 15, 2021 7:27 am wrote:
> > Jukka Larja (roskakori2006.delete@this.gmail.com) on January 15, 2021 5:57 am wrote:
> > > dmcq (dmcq.delete@this.fano.co.uk) on January 14, 2021 11:13 am wrote:
> > > > Jörn Engel (joern.delete@this.purestorage.com) on January 14, 2021 10:42 am wrote:
> > > > > dmcq (dmcq.delete@this.fano.co.uk) on January 14, 2021 7:26 am wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm basically in agreement with Maynard about this. I've never had anywhere near as many customers as
> > > > > > Apple :-) but even so a major consideration for me has always been the support costs.
> > > > >
> > > > > You are considering a different question. Your question is "Why would Apple
> > > > > want to...". My question is "Why would I (or some other user) want to...".
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course Apple doesn't care whether I, Linus or the other twelve people buy an extra machine
> > > > > to run Linux on it. Doesn't invalidate our reasons to prefer bare metal over hypervisors.
> > > >
> > > > Eveyone who writes software has support costs unless it is just a private hobby tinkering
> > > > around with their own machine.This thread is about gaining perhaps 3% performance if things
> > > > work out okay and incurring the trouble of writing ones own drivers which might go out
> > > > of date in the next iteration. And for what from the point of view of a user?
> > >
> > > You presume that MacOS is better OS than Linux (for whatever value of "better").
> > >
> > > -JLarja
> >
> > I presume only that a good hypervisor can be built which splits off what is needed to
> > be done by the operating system and the firmware that is more dependent on the specific
> > version of the hardware. And that a lot of people are interested in security.
> >
>
> How does adding more between the bare metal and the OS add to security? Sure a hypothetical flawless hypervisor
> might do the trick, but how is that any more secure than an equally hypothetical flawless OS? This is not
> an argument why apple should or should not consider this just a question about your argument ;)
>
>

If anyone can stick in a new operating system that has full access to everything there is no security.