> best of a bad bunch of compromises

That's exactly why I don't particularly care for it, but still use it.

My first choice would be Linux + a tiling WM. I used DWM for years before Apple Silicon, and have been on mac ever since the M1. These new machines are so nice that I can't go back to anything else now, whether I hate the software or not.

But macOS is just baffling. There's POSIX underneath, and it's mostly reliable, and it has a lot of little nice touches - being able to search the menu with Cmd+Shift+/, emacs keybindings in nearly every text field, etc. But then there's stuff that makes no sense. Why do I need a third party app for any sort of sane window management? (and even then, I haven't fully replicated my preferred way of working, only gotten close enough with Aerospace, and more recently Raycast). A third party app to set a keyboard shortcut to launch an application. I can't disable the animations for switching virtual desktops, and when you switch there's a lag before it's responsive again for keyboard input (I just want this to be instant).

So much of how macOS expects you to interact with it seems to be mouse/touchpad driven, and that's just not how I prefer to use my computer. At least with Raycast I now have shortcuts to launch and switch to apps (but not specific app windows because of the app/window separation in macOS). Yet even still, I can't set a keyboard shortcut to move a window to a different space. I have to click and hold the title bar and then press my shortcut for moving to that space to move the window - Apple decided that action MUST involve the mouse.

I also can't set window rules. I can't tell my terminal to always open on workspace 2, or mail.app to always open on workspace 4 at a specific size, etc. Making an app full screen also creates a new ephemeral space that can't be switched to with the usual Ctrl+NUM keyboard shortcut. I can't set a window to be always on top.

I'm more or less waiting for Asahi Linux to get support for DisplayPort ALT mode & M4 support, although I'm not holding my breath.

I do appreciate having access to the big commercial apps though on macOS, but ultimately I want my M4 macbook pro w/ Linux & hyprland.

As a consumer, I lament most of all about Pixel devices (or any other Android device really) that I have to wipe the OS and install a different one to get features that matter to me, particularly around privacy.

Thats why I don't use Pixel devices, or any Android devices really. I know its a precarious situation with Apple since they could reverse their stance at any point and sometimes they get it wrong, but they have yet to completely fail me when it comes to privacy.

In any event, it'd be nice if there was a 3rd mainstream vendor in the mobile race[0][1]

[0]: Both design wise and conceptually, I miss WebOS when it was strictly under Palm. It could have really been something. Why they didn't embrace multitouch screens I haven't a clue, it was the one thing that baffled me.

[1]: The one project I really wanted Mozilla to take a long term view on - Firefox OS - was another great innovation of our time that didn't get the love or support it deserved. It was a blast using web technology to build apps that ran fluidly on modern hardware. Unfortunately, it was all too often relegated to cheap manufacturer hardware that couldn't support it ideally, but even with this being true, they pulled off alot of technical excellence with that project.

I've been running GrapheneOS for a few months now, keeping my old Samsung on WiFi as a backup.

It is such a breath of fresh air. It is so quiet and functional. It feels like it prioritizes me, the user. I am so grateful to have this OS.

Of course it has flaws, but they're lesser flaws. Like the crop tool is sometimes unusable in the gallery app. I can live with that. I couldn't live with the AI onslaught and spyware infiltration.

After looking at it, there are many things that I do not like about Graphene, and many ways that it tries hard not to be likable.

Beyond the monochrome icon pack that cannot be changed in the included launcher (which is so aesthetically challenged with an appearance that only a mother could love), the browser that cannot grasp dark mode, and the lack of the accustomed pattern unlock, I find the lack of one singular thing intolerable:

I want root. At a minimum, adb rooted debugging.

I realize that I could unlock the bootloader and Magisk this thing, but with the number of correct decisions that have been made by the authors of this operating system (and they are legion), they do not recognize one fundamental need of administrators:

I want control of my systems.

That is really a shame.

Isn't battery life worse on it?

I did consider it at some point but not having google wallet(apparently nfc payments are only available via banks' apps there) was too big of a downside for me.

E2EE (advanced data protection) without having to use something like Proton, so can stay in the very convenient "ecosystem." With it turned on, keys are on your device, Apple doesn't have them and can't use them and it covers all the main stuff - photos, messages, notes, etc.

It's still a compromise, sure, but it's a better compromise than what Google offers.

Plus small things. Apple's tracking protection for example is opt in instead of opt out on Android. Google's core business is ads, they won't push features that can negatively impact that. Apple also has an ad division but it's not their main focus, hardware is. They can implement better privacy without impacting their bottom line. Apple's refusal to unlock phones at the request of the FBI, etc.

It's not that Apple is the be all end all for privacy, but they are far ahead of Google and are by far the most convenient option if you are within the walled garden.

> Could anyone here waxing lyrically about Apple so called privacy stand explain to me what that actually is apart from a marketing point Apple keeps repeating?

The end-to-end encryption guarantees on this page seem pretty real to me and have little to do with marketing: https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

> Because from where I stand they do load everything into their cloud. They insist on having you pay for iCloud through obnoxious means. They have you go through their store for everything. They even have an ad platform.

It's very easy to completely disable iCloud. I've never used it and don't intend to, despite running a mac as my primary computer for ~12 years now.

Apple is much more strict on app tracking (and apps in general).

> Apple's design has been top-notch

But only from the iPhone X to 14, after which the Dynamic Island took over.

(I'll see myself out)

> Chrome OS isn't a real OS to me so I couldn't imagine using that as my daily driver as I would macOS

Not sure I understand this? One assumes that "daily driver" involves Linux VM use in this context[1], and ChromeOS's Linux VM integration is just wildly ahead of WSL (which really isn't bad) or the mess on OS X (awful). Installed Crostini apps appear as native apps in the UI. Transparent cross-filesystem access works flawlessly. Wayland and X11 apps appear with native decorations. Clipboard/WM/IPC integration does exactly what you expect. USB devices prompt you if you want to connect to the VM on insert (and remember the setting) etc...

And yes, I'm biased because I work there. But really it's a great development environment.

[1] I mean, if you're doing iOS development or need an M4 Max for performance reasons, or need some legacy Mac tooling like Adobe stuff, you're probably not looking at alternative platforms at all. Someone making the choice you posit is like 99% likely to be a web or embedded person working at a Linux shell as their native environment.

> Apple's design has been top-notch

The only designs I'm fond of are the macs. The iPhone looks pretty meh these days. The software side is slowly getting worse, it was great and they've lost the plot making changes for changes sake

All of my banking apps that are required for 2FA would probably not work.

Hasn't porting of newer models completely stalled since the departure of the 2 motivated and skilled individuals that made it originally possible?

Apple is the only one that offers actual E2EE with advanced data protection for all iCloud services. Without it, yes, Apple can see your data. With it on, they can't. The key is stored on device, encrypted with your device pin/passcode and covers iCloud backup, including messages, drive, photos, notes, reminders, bookmarks, shortcuts, voice memos, wallet, passwords, health data, journal, home, maps, etc. The only thing not covered under ADP is iCloud mail, contacts, and calendars because it uses CalDAV and CardDAV.

> once that I forgot my password to the MacBook, all one needed to do to access my data was to enter recovery mode and reset the password. Sure it logged me off from browser sessions, but all my files where there available to anybody

Sounds like you didn't have FileVault (FDE) turned on. If you did, that wouldn't work you'd have needed your recovery key.

> it's known they scan all your content and pics on iCloud

They can't if you have ADP.

> Some tracking less by advertisers? That's privacy?

Yes, it is privacy. Let's not understate the massive surveillance that ad networks do, Google included.

Google is an advertising company, they have zero incentive to offer the same level of privacy that Apple does and probably never will, it would be directly detrimental to their core business.

> 3) once that I forgot my password to the MacBook, all one needed to do to access my data was to enter recovery mode and reset the password. Sure it logged me off from browser sessions, but all my files where there available to anybody

Do you not know how computers work? That how it works on every computer without encryption.

You wouldn't have been able to access to the data passwordless if you had enabled Filevault encryption

Apple's privacy policy is like everything else Apple: it best compares to things outside of it's walled garden. But inside the walls Apple operates just like every other company. It gathers information on all it's users for it's own advertising business. They can claim they don't have third parties involved and that makes them more private, but they do all the same things to their users but just do it themselves. They're as much an advertising company as Google or Facebook (and would love to be as big as those advertisers), but their ads are all within the Apple walls, so they can claim they are much more private. When they really aren't.