> but what does macOS offer a power user that Linux doesn't

A laptop with an excellent screen, speakers, touchpad, desktop-class performance,, great battery life, and runs cool and silent, and a *nix like OS that can run the proprietary/commercial apps I need.

I work on macOS the same way I'd work on Linux; From the terminal with a package manager, docker, etc. Only now I get access to a few commercial apps that aren't on Linux, on hardware that's genuinely a joy to use.

There's no other laptop on the market that touches the apple silicon macbook pros. None. Every close alternative sacrifices something I care about. I tolerate macOS for the hardware, and I'll remain on macs until such hardware exists in Linux land.

▲

hombre_fatal 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Same. If the only computing happened on desktop PCs and laptops didn't exist, I'd use Linux.

But as it stands, going from a Macbook to Linux on a laptop is a downgrade. And you have to pay more for the pleasure of a worse experience.

And macOS is "Linux" since it's BSD-based and has a native Unix shell. If macOS were as different from "Linux" as Windows was, then I probably wouldn't put up with it either.

▲

sneak 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I’d use macOS. Application sandboxing, per directory access controls, signed read only root, xprotect and gatekeeper - security out of the box on common linux OSes is a joke compared to modern macOS.

	▲	hombre_fatal 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Good points, especially about sandboxing.