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

[nils_]

I think Apple used to fake fsync() on HFS+, is that still the case?

[aht0]

No offense to your aunt, but she doesn't need a computer, she needs a typewriter. I mean there is just no point in migrating people like that to new technology. I'm sure I'm gonna fall into that same boat someday myself, so it's not a criticism, I'm just being sincere. When the day comes that I have to talk to a computer to use it as was predicted, I will definitely be in that boat.

Despite the best wishful thinking the fact is that computers are not black boxes. They are interactive shells and those interactions require training. If people are unwilling like me, or incapable like your aunt, of being trained then they -need- to stick with what they already know. It's too late for your aunt now, she's grown expectations about her computer that she doesn't understand and that she will never get from a typewriter. That's exactly why she never should have been transitioned off it.

My mother is pretty much the same. I had to glue "Turn ON button here" to computer case, next to power button and dumb the UI down as much as possible, making only shutdown and 3-4 programs (web browser, digital ID, email, picture viewer and Word/Excel available to her. She goes into internet to check her mail, bills, sign documents (we can do it digitally using ID card), look up daily weather forecast and communicate with husband who is long distance lorry driver. Basic office on top of it when and if.. I walked her through all the steps needed for performing any of the tasks few times and that's all.

Her machine runs seriously stripped-clean Mageia btw, because it has good support for ID card software. Fuck ubuntu. For such type of user Mac would actually be perfect. Tool for getting the job done. Had to mess around with Mageia couple of hours before I reached the point where everything would be sufficiently dumbed down.

For myself, I do keep some machine with Windows available at home. NEVER know when I have to do something urgently and I cannot take risk of fucking around "fixing" free software that decided to fall apart or stop functioning precisely at the wrong time. Computer is in certain situations only tool for getting the job done and you don't want to be fixing that tool while you should be doing something else entirely.

[RussianNeuroMancer]

The key is Apple with the MBPs brings enterprise quality to mainstream, where with Dell and others, you have to get the Enterprise line, which I believe they only sell to Businesses.

Nope, you can buy any laptop by HP, Dell or Lenovo as regular consumer.

I'd be interested in a conclusive review of battery performance for a bunch of distros at stock configuration (and maybe custom setups. But really: I need the device to just work as it is not a toy or hobby).

You are free to use whatever fits you, just leave behind this idea about Linux power inefficiency, it's really outdated.

Could you imagine her having to use an interface such as Gnome? Lol, impossible.

My grandmother borrowed BayTrail-based tablet (DEXP Ursus 10XW, real ten hours battery life for 100 USD) from my aunt to watch online video and read news. This tablet is running Ubuntu Gnome 17.04 with Opera web-browser, few shortcuts like YouTube, Google and couple of news web-sites was preinstalled in Opera's new tab screen for my aunt. My aunt just demonstrated how to call onscreen keyboard (Onboard) with swipe gesture, and how to hide it (press close button) how to switch keyboard layouts, she did this one time. And then... guess what? Yeah, grandmother figure out the rest herself, without help, she used computer first time in her life. I was surprised too. I am KDE fan and long time user, but Gnome Shell is really cool for touch devices and for old people too.

[Guest]

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.

You just proven how blind you are.

[Guest]

Look in the mirror buddy as when it comes to fanaticism you are at the top of the heap. You have many posts here highly critical of Mac OS and Apple users yet not supported by a rational review of the facts. It would be better if people realized that operating systems fill niches and that the niches occupied by Linux and Mac OS don''t often cross.

Ever heard about a Stockholm syndrome? Few years ago there were some research about iphone users. They usually suffer from it, thus they are fanboys. I'm not a fanboy, because you never proven me wrong.

[Guest]

You are a toxic person. Enjoy all of those professional productivity apps you have on Linux... oh wait.

Apple fanboy have spoken. Enjoy all of the performance and high quality graphic support you have on mac.. oh wait. Don't forget about terrible kernel and very bad support. There's new mac with new supper, shiny, cool feature? Forget about upgrade. Buy it!

[aht0]

Ever heard about a Stockholm syndrome? Few years ago there were some research about iphone users. They usually suffer from it, thus they are fanboys. I'm not a fanboy, because you never proven me wrong.

If you are not suffering under Stockholm syndrome yourself, why'd you attack anyone and everyone not declaring instant attraction to Linux? The way about you go and keep insulting people because one hipster OS is straight-up perverse.

Before you try to insult me again, I do use Linux, I also use BSD's, Solaris flavors, Windows and even fucking DOS at times - each, when it's use is warranted, or when I feel like it. I do not have perverse single-minded religious or sexual fanaticism towards just one particular operating system. After all, each is just tools to be used. This, I am writing from Windows.

For a person not interested in computers at all, your single-mindedness would feel like a cause for a straight-jacket in hospital for mentally ill.

[name99]

It's kind of mindboggling that they're only now replacing HFS+, a more advanced version of the file system they introduced with the failed Apple III, with something better.

Still, better late than never even thou I would have preferred that Apple had gone ahead and actually switched to ZFS like they originally planned a decade ago. However that was killed due a bout of good old fashion NIH syndrome spurred on first by a lawsuit over ZFS between Sun and NetApp, then the uncertainty caused by Oracle buying up Sun and finally a clash between Larry Ellison and Steve Jobs at the last moment (who rejected working with who depends on who you ask). Apple got so close to adding support that they even handed out discs with a working implementation to developers at the 2007 WWDC.

WTF? Uhh, given that you seem unable to tell the difference between a file system introduced for the Apple III as part of Apple SOS (in 1980) and HFS+ (introduced in 1998) you might want to reconsider just how reliable are all the other statements you have thrown in there...


As for REAL HFS+, while no-one is going to claim that it was perfect, you have to remember that JHFS+ of 2016 is very different from HFS+ of 1998. There are aspects of disk layout that could not be changed for compatibility reasons, but beyond that constraint a huge amount could be (and was) added to the file system over time. This included things like the addition of journaling (for robustness), extended attributes (for security, file compression, and high speed search), FSEvents (for high speed search, backup, and general apps being able to track what other apps are doing), on-going algorithm refinement (things like layout on disk to improve performance, and new data structures used in memory), and on-going matching to new hardware capabilities (eg support of Fusion drives).

To claim that it was/is a disaster is childish. Do it if you insist, but then don't be surprised that the adults in the room have noted your behavior and marked you down and someone not worth talking to.

[name99]

I think Apple used to fake fsync() on HFS+, is that still the case?

As usual this was never the case, the actual situation was VERY different. But you don't want to hear about that, do you?

For those who ARE interested in reading about the issue:

https://postgrespro.com/list/thread-id/1658794

which explains that the REAL issue is ATA drives that don't follow the spec, and how Apple tried to deal with it

and

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20050222053741.GL86914%40decibel.org

who explains how ALL OSs have to suffer from this (because the damn bugs are in the drives themselves!)

[L_A_G]

WTF? Uhh, given that you seem unable to tell the difference between a file system introduced for the Apple III as part of Apple SOS (in 1980) and HFS+ (introduced in 1998) you might want to reconsider just how reliable are all the other statements you have thrown in there...

I distinctly remember reading that the file system introduced with the Apple III was called "HFS" and introduced to the Macintosh range in 1985 with the first Macintosh-compatible HDD from Apple. Even if the Mac HFS and Apple HFS, both of which originally came out in the first half of the 1980s, are separate their naming is close enough to make your insults unfounded. Other than that I also never claimed that there hadn't been any change and specifically talked about the evolution of the HFS file system.

To claim that it was/is a disaster is childish. Do it if you insist, but then don't be surprised that the adults in the room have noted your behavior and marked you down and someone not worth talking to.

If you've looked at any of the storage benchmarks on here then you'll know that HFS+ had a tendency to show a consistently sub-par performance year in and year out. If failing to perform year in and year out isn't a failure then you seem to have a pretty high bar for what a failure is for a file system.