macOS' APFS File-System Performing Much Better Than The Dated HFS+

[wizard69]

Trouble-free? I wouldn't call it trouble-free at all. High Sierra seems very buggy, according to a lot of people:
http://www.osnews.com/comments/30020 (read the comments)
And despite the overall impression the article gives, deep down ArsTechnica isn't so fond of High Sierra either 'cause they mention the words "bugs" and "issues" more than a dozen times: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017...chnica-review/

I don't read Ars much anymore as they burnt a lot of credibility with me when the got on the global warming bandwagon and squashed any real debate of the science. In any event I've bene running High Sierra from the first beta onwards, as with all betas there have been bugs which are mostly resolved. Here is the thing though, it only crashed once in the entire time I was running betas. At work I have Windows machines that crash hard every week that are supposedly running a stable OS.

Now that we are out of beta High Sierra is doing pretty good if you ask me. It is a certainly that a dot relate or two will be made to clear up any problems one might see. personally I've only seen a supple and none of those stopped the machine from working. On the flip side Mac OS is now noticeably faster with many little improvements in the apps and OS. It is good enough to call trouble free compared to what I've seen in other operating systems. In a personal context those other operating systems are Linux based machines which never do a double free transition to the next bistro update.

I also briefly tried a MacBook 12" early last year but it slowed down after installing a few simple applications from the app store and upon searching the internet, I wasn't the only one with the problem. Sometimes the lock screen didn't pop up and Launchpad didn't always open when I requested it to open. I quickly sold it to someone else and got me a shiny new laptop for Linux (I was already an avid Linux user for years before I thought I'd give macOS a try!).

So "trouble-free" is far from the truth. Maybe for some, but not for all.

I really don't have any idea what your problem would have been nor how you where using that machine but I have to wonder why somebody that is technically littering would have purchased the 12" Mac Book. The reality is that the little Mac Book has a processor that can be beaten by a cellphone processor. I have to wonder what the replacement laptop was because I'm wiling to bet it had a vastly better processor. In the end it is an Apples to oranges comparison.

[wizard69]

May I? Due to somewhat meticulous exploitation of what someone aptly called "the cult of the novice": http://www.loper-os.org/?p=121
In other words its business model has little to do with tech.

This is absolute nonsense. I don't know of any company that is putting more tech in the hands of its users than Apple. Look closely at Apples latest SoC (A11) and try to tell me they aren't a tech company. The problem with many of these articles is that they are not really aware of what tech is. Nobody these days wants their tech to have a command line interface. Rather they want fast hardware that is easy to use because their life is not wrapped up in operating a computer. This even applies more so to the fact that computer technology today is leveraged extensively outside the world of commuter science itself. A person doing genetics research doesn't want his research hampered by outmoded technology. The same thing applies to many professional users, they see the computer as a tool to get work done, not as a tool to be worked on.

This write-up by the same author specifically on Apple answers your question in more detail: On the Still-Undefeated Tyranny of Apple.

The funny thing here is that this battle for the top is really up for grabs as the real frontier of computing is AI and advanced interfaces. If the Linux world really wanted to take over the world they would be putting every resource they had into extending Linux two support AI based interfaces including credible voice interfaces. Yet we live in a world where most of the Linux community is concerned about how tricky they can make their next command line statement. It is huge problem for the longevity of Linux.

I say this because I was just yesterday watching a few episodes of The Expanse and realizing that they had a rather credibly portrayal of what computer systems and interfacing them will be like in the near future. I have no idea if Apple gets it or not, what I do know is that the Linux community in way behind. Linux is a world that looks too much to the past to figure out what is right for the future, that is great for a server focused OS but is not something that will be extremely useful for the mainstream user half a decade from now.

[duby229]

This is absolute nonsense. I don't know of any company that is putting more tech in the hands of its users than Apple. Look closely at Apples latest SoC (A11) and try to tell me they aren't a tech company. The problem with many of these articles is that they are not really aware of what tech is. Nobody these days wants their tech to have a command line interface. Rather they want fast hardware that is easy to use because their life is not wrapped up in operating a computer. This even applies more so to the fact that computer technology today is leveraged extensively outside the world of commuter science itself. A person doing genetics research doesn't want his research hampered by outmoded technology. The same thing applies to many professional users, they see the computer as a tool to get work done, not as a tool to be worked on.


The funny thing here is that this battle for the top is really up for grabs as the real frontier of computing is AI and advanced interfaces. If the Linux world really wanted to take over the world they would be putting every resource they had into extending Linux two support AI based interfaces including credible voice interfaces. Yet we live in a world where most of the Linux community is concerned about how tricky they can make their next command line statement. It is huge problem for the longevity of Linux.

I say this because I was just yesterday watching a few episodes of The Expanse and realizing that they had a rather credibly portrayal of what computer systems and interfacing them will be like in the near future. I have no idea if Apple gets it or not, what I do know is that the Linux community in way behind. Linux is a world that looks too much to the past to figure out what is right for the future, that is great for a server focused OS but is not something that will be extremely useful for the mainstream user half a decade from now.

The way I understand your argument here is that, people don't want to know how to use their computers. So the best solution is to take away tools and abilities that allows people to actually use their computers? And the best operating system in the future won't have the tools or ability to be used at all? Doesn't make sense.

[wizard69]

I still don't get why it get's all the Linux nerds so wound up. Even if your view of things where people who don't know much about technology buy the expensive, shiny, easy to use product instead of the solid, somewhat more complicated, and more mundane one... So what? I think, it is just some weird kind of hurt pride where the imagined superiority isn't recognized by "the masses".

The problem is Linux isn't superior it is just different. I don't think these people grasp that being different isn't a bad thing. In any event much of what I've seen here is simply ignorance with respect to Mac OS. It isn't perfect but I think the big selling point is that is largely trouble free and doesn't require a lot of technical investment for many users. What many in the Linux community mis is that UNIX is right under the hood easily accessible and equally powerful as Linux. It is more like a close relative than a long forgotten branch of the family tree.

Besides the shiny is an play used to take focus of the fact that much of what Apple provides to its customers is actually very technically advanced. There simply isn't a company out there that has as much home grown technology in their cell phones for example.

Do you behave like that when your neighbor buys a shiny but expensive premium brand car?

Sadly some people do.

Other cars might have more horsepower and bigger trunks for the same price but you like how the premium one handles and that they come with a nice build in stereo. Imagine that!

And before anyone asks: I don't think this is actually the case. I simply don't get this weird hateful outrage. Nobody is saying that you shouldn't keep tinkering using unofficial repositories to get your video acceleration to work and what not. It is just hard for me to understand that you judge that it is a worthy business to offer some polish and out of the box experience at a higher price. Nobody is forcing you to give up your homegrown case-modded rigs.

The interesting thing here is that Apple had the hardware in some of its devices to support the new video technology they are introducing this year. Hardware of course doesn't work without proper software and here Apple took the time to get it right. The tremors the need for user to tinker with video acceleration in exchanged for a year+ plus wait for software support. It is a different market and as such not really something to get all wound up about. Why people get wound up is beyond me.

[Luke_Wolf]

ehm.. Linux fanboys? /smirk.

I can't remember seeing any Apple fanboy in Phoronix, who'd show up like a clock work on every non-Mac thread and tell everyone how much Linux/BSD/Solaris/Windows/Minix/Dos sucks.. You do it on a regular basis on every non-Linux topic along with some other Phoronix users. Think again.

Oh I could name a few... Marc Driftmeyer and Wizard69 in particular come to mind.

[wizard69]

The way I understand your argument here is that, people don't want to know how to use their computers.

Not exactly! What I'm saying is the learning to use their computers at the low level required on todays systems isn't in their best interest as it takes away from development in their field of interest.

Consider the history of personal computers a bit, even a bit before Microsoft and IBM got together. That was a world of 8 bit systems with operating systems like CPM and Apple DOS, neither case requiring significant time and resources of the user to just operate the machine. In the end you didn't have a board variety of use cases with apps focused on games, word processing and eventually spread sheets. The learning curve was considerable and frankly not worth it to many. As systems continued to evolve the OS's became more powerful with MSDOS with Windows 3.1 glued on top and Mac OS (the original version) both of these extremely limited in what they could do for the user due to the lack of hardware resources. Someplace in this time frame linux debuted and frankly had the same limitations on what it could do. A couple of decades later we have a Windows that has evolved significantly while still being clunky, a 64 bit Mac OS, a variety of cell phone OS's with Apple slowly going 64 bit only there and an evolved Linux that sits much better on modern hardware. Each evolution here has put a far easier to use layer over the underlying operating system. In doing so adoption of these systems has expanded dramatically because it doesn't require a huge user investment in time and training to get somewhere with the platforms.

It isn't a question of not want ting to know how to use their computers, rather it is is a different expectation of what is need to be known to operate their computers. Somebody grabbing his iPhone form his pocket is operating his computer just the same as some gray beard sitting in front of a command line interface. The work or as is often the case the recreation accomplished is often different, but in each case the user is operating his system.

In some cases the operation of the computer has to be nearly transparent due to the fact hat the users just don't have time. Often they literally don't have the time to sit down in front of a computer, the medical industry especially hospitals is a classic example here where there is much hope for tablets. Yet is a nurse or doctor is using a tablet to enhance or automate some off their tasks they are very much using a computer. More so they are leveraging a computer in a application that wasn't even possible with previous platforms.

So the best solution is to take away tools and abilities that allows people to actually use their computers?

Nope and I must say with certain that it is ignorance like this that is really hurting the Linux world and maybe more so free software in general. We aren't talking about taking away tools here we are talking about being able to give tools to more users than ever before. That so many in the Linux world don't get this is appalling. Like it or not Apples simple debut of the iPad greatly expanded the industries and crafts where a computer is even useful. The classic example is the utility of the iPad in a crowded cockpit but similar examples can be had in other industries included hospitals mentioned above. These are places where a Linux based machine, GUI based or not, just isn't physically usable. The point is advanced interfaces opens up the feasibility of getting people to use a computer in many more professional areas. It isn't any different than what has happened with GUI interfaces on the desktop, if the interface makes adoption possible then it is a good thing.

In a nut shell you are looking at this as taking away tools but I look at it as making tools available that where never available to whole classes of professionals before. Frankly you are not the only one to share this misguided attitude in the Linux world. The idea that using a computer requires jumping into the command line must die, it needs to be replaced with the idea that it is an option and often not an ideal one.

And the best operating system in the future won't have the tools or ability to be used at all? Doesn't make sense.

First off I never said that. Second why is it that every time the Linux world is hit with a new concept or idea they automatically assume that it is an attack on their beloved command line? "And the best operating system in the future won't have the tools or ability to be used at all", you just don't grasp what is being said nor do you have any vision of what the future could offer. Do you honestly believe that tomorrows computers will be less powerful? That flies in the face of history and certainly dismisses what is being done research wise around the world. Instead of few tools you will literally have thousands of tools available at your finder tips but more likely those tools will be exposed though a voice interface with powerful AI concepts to help you leverage al those tools. In effect your ability to use the computer expands dramatically.

Think of it this way, how powerful was a computer in the days before Google? Finding information, references and business was a true pain in the ass. While Google the company might suck we have now many terabytes of data and web site at our instant disposal. That is a powerful form of computer use that is so common today that people hardly make note of it. Now imagine an AI operating on your local system that can do much the same but is highly focused on your specific interests and local resources. Your tools become more powerful simply due to the idea that they can do more for you. If you understand that Google and similar web services are tools, then making those tools more powerful makes your machine more useful right?

In a nut shell you are living in the past where the concept of a tool is many decades old. That is alright to an extent because this tools will never go completely away. The problem is you must grasp that what constitutes a tool will only get more powerful as tools incorporate more AI and better leverage the resources in a modern computer. An apology is CAD systems, at one time you had to construct 2D objects one line at a time then came 3D and after that solid modeling. Each evolution in CAD systems offered more powerful tools that allowed the user to develop his parts far faster at a much higher level than ever before, nobody in the design world worried for one moment that the ability to draw one line at a time was undermined. Instead they are thankful that they can do most of their work at a much higher level than ever before. As computers become even more powerful I really don't see anybody in the CAD world dismissing more powerful CAD systems because they don't need to use the command line anymore to draw one line at a time. At times I really believe that working with the Linux community is a lot like working with the Luddites during the dawn of the Industrial Age, people just seem to be caught up in the notion that the command line is all their is and all that should be.

[wizard69]

Oh I could name a few... Marc Driftmeyer and Wizard69 in particular come to mind.

I wouldn't call myself a fanboy, rather there is lot son crap that gets posted here that people try to pass off as the truth. Trying to balance that with a more balanced perspective isn't being a fanboy in my estimation. The fact is right now I have as many Linux systems as I have Mac OS systems, they both have their good points but I really think that many Linux fanboys are so stuck on the command line that they can't even grasp where ether industry is going, nor that they realize that the Mac serves a different market. In part the means that the interfaces we have on our computing devices will get more powerful and at a higher level of abstraction as time progresses. This means that the GUI interface becomes secondary to voice interfacing much like the GUI has made the command line a secondary interface for many users.

Now that might be 5-10 years out, but I fully expect it to happen. I'm not even sure who will have the ultimate solution, all I know is that the Linux world seems to be asleep at the wheel here.

[AndyChow]

The way I understand your argument here is that, people don't want to know how to use their computers. So the best solution is to take away tools and abilities that allows people to actually use their computers? And the best operating system in the future won't have the tools or ability to be used at all? Doesn't make sense.

Have you read some of rms's work? Yes, it is a real danger, and we must remain vigilant. But most "average users", they simply use computers as a purely "black box" solution. And I think rms made exceptions for such devices, if my memory serves me, such as a camera which was only used to take pictures and has a few buttons on it, and cannot do any sort of computing.

He would never agree on what I'm about to say, but most people use a computer like that. They click on icons and want to avoid as much as possible any sort of actual interaction with the computer. So for those people, removing all tools and ability to use the hardware is actually something they prefer.

My aunt, which has an iMac with probably 2 TB of storage, calls me every so often to inquire if she might soon run out of space, since she has about 12 word documents that are "very large", by which she means they have maybe 100 pages each, and I have to tell her she could have thousands of such documents and she wouldn't even be close to taking up all the space, and she then repeats "yeah, ok, I understand. But, ..., these are very large documents", then I thank the Gods she is able to have a solution like a Mac. If there weren't icons at the bottom listing her software, she would never be able to find it. In fact, if her word documents aren't on the desktop, she can't find them. For example, if she slides them in a folder, she thinks she deleted them. Could you imagine her having to use an interface such as Gnome? Lol, impossible. Even Windows 10 would completely baffle her, since I suspect she would not be able to find any of her software, like email, browser, and word.

For us, we need to be able to see what is going on. Audit, edit, change, compile. Dare I say debug ? We need this freedom, and should never take it for granted. But don't be mad at people that can't handle that type of freedom.

P.S. Yes I've told my aunt her word files are slow because word is slow with 100+ pages, yes I've told her to split the documents into smaller ones when she's editing them, and no she won't, because it confuses her if documents are "blahblah-part1.doc, blahblah-part2.doc". She opens one of them and thinks she deleted the other parts. And she's actually an incredibly smart person, but not tech smart. She typed her entire PhD on a typewriter. She's just old school.

[AndyChow]

I wouldn't call myself a fanboy, rather there is lot son crap that gets posted here that people try to pass off as the truth. Trying to balance that with a more balanced perspective isn't being a fanboy in my estimation. The fact is right now I have as many Linux systems as I have Mac OS systems, they both have their good points but I really think that many Linux fanboys are so stuck on the command line that they can't even grasp where ether industry is going, nor that they realize that the Mac serves a different market. In part the means that the interfaces we have on our computing devices will get more powerful and at a higher level of abstraction as time progresses. This means that the GUI interface becomes secondary to voice interfacing much like the GUI has made the command line a secondary interface for many users.

Now that might be 5-10 years out, but I fully expect it to happen. I'm not even sure who will have the ultimate solution, all I know is that the Linux world seems to be asleep at the wheel here.

I wouldn't count on that interface projection of yours. I've analysed many systems, and for most usercase, the keyboard is the way forward. Many new interfaces are web, and click-centered. This is because it's easy to teach. Not much training needed. But it's highly inefficient and slow.

Trained people can type much faster than they can talk. And clicking is so wasteful.

I analysed this one case, the data-entry people called a certain task something like "the add-toe entry". I was there to map the processes and improve them (I'm avoiding lingo here). I was curious, and asked why they called it the "add-toe" process. A seasoned data-entry person told me "Well, on the old system, we used to do ctrl-a, enter the data, ctrl-d, enter the other data, ctrl-t, enter that data, then ctrl-o to process the new entry".

Turns out, their old 80's system took them on average one minute, maybe a minute and a half, to add a new entry. The new point-and-click system took at least 5-10 minutes per entry. But it looked nice and had nice graphics. This, they call progress?

The interface of the future is the keyboard. Find me someone that can do any type of real-world intellectual work faster by voice or any other interface than the keyboard.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Development Tools, Frameworks, APIs on OS X/macOS dwarf anything available on Windows or Linux. The platform is rock solid. The user base is > 1 Billion with iOS. You don't like it? Your choice. I'll take it ten times out of ten over any other platform. Linux is a distant second.