> It is baffling to me that Apple, ostensibly a hardware company (that happens to be pursuing services revenue the way a crackhead pursues crack), ridiculously flush with cash, doesn’t throw 2 or 3 of their thousands of FTEs on this.

Why should they when they have macOS already?

> Linux people LOVE laptops, and Apple makes the best laptops by a parsec. It seems like 10x ROI would be a conservative estimate.

How many people who buy Apple silicon laptops do it to run Linux on it? less than 10,000 or 20,000 people?

You should not expect Apple to care about what Linux users want. The closest you are getting from them is being able to boot a custom OS or kernel.

Everything else from the drivers to the secure enclave they do not care.

▲

drdexebtjl 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No one buys Apple Silicon laptops to run Linux because they can barely run Linux.

But if they could, Apple would sweep the market for Linux laptops. Macbook hardware completely outclasses even the high end options.

▲

thewebguyd 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't think they would. What market would that exactly be targeting? Devs, who are overwhelmingly just provided macbooks via their employer? They'll still run macOS because IT requires them to.

Linux Gamers? The arm story for proton still needs work (hopefully the steam frame will help). Nvidia+Microsoft are working on it with that new surface ultra, but verdicts out on whether that will boot Linux or not as its specifically a Microsoft partnership.

General non-dev, non-gaming, non-creative users? I don't think they'd buy a mac specifically for Linux either. That market is much better served by Framework, System76, Tuxedo, Lenovo (thinkpads), etc.

And Apple certainly isn't going to win over any FOSS purists either.

I think the intersection of "I want macbook pro hardware" and "I must run Linux natively on it for my workflow" is a lot smaller than you think.

▲

rvz 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> No one buys Apple Silicon laptops to run Linux because they can barely run Linux.

Almost no-one bought Intel Macs for dual-booting Linux either (Unless you are Linus Torvalds and a tiny amount of people who use Linux on Intel Macs).

> But if they could, Apple would sweep the market for Linux laptops.

Not true. They cannot even run Windows on them.

The entire point of Intel Macs was for running Windows on a Mac which that cohort is just as tiny as the Linux on Intel Mac customers.

Dual booting is generally reserved for those who are highly technical, so I would not expect Apple to care about either customer anyway. So that was tested already and Apple still did not care.

So of course they also do not care about Linux users who have Apple Silicon Macs either.

	▲	drdexebtjl 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Windows on the Mac requires cooperation from Microsoft and Apple, and benefits Apple’s competition. It was always a strategy to get Windows users to switch sides, not to sell hardware. Linux on the Mac requires only Apple’s initiative, and does not benefit their competitors. > Not true. They cannot even run Windows on them. Why does the Linux laptop market care about running Windows? > Dual booting I’m not talking about dual booting at all. Before Apple Silicon, if you wanted to buy a laptop to run Linux, the Intel Macbooks have always been a top-tier recommendation. The market isn’t large, but it’s a soft power they’re giving up. Walk into a big tech’s office and you’ll no longer see only Macbooks, and it’s not because they have to run Windows.

▲

GTP 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Why should they when they have macOS already?

Because Apple cuts support for old MacBooks eventually, even if the hardware still works perfectly. See also my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48745199