Cannot really natively install Linux or Windows with M series chip, MacBook or iMac is truly dead once no more update?

[seek3r]

It does seem increasingly more likely that Apple will only support direct booting of macOS on Apple Silicon Macs and that any effort to natively boot any other OS will have to come from the kind of reverse engineering that the Asahi Linux project is working on.

There's literally a GUI toggle that Apple provides to disable boot security and allow you to boot anything you want... AS has had the ability to run third party OSes without, say, iPhone style jailbreaking since the beginning. They arent actively *helping* get Linux running, but they arent actively stopping it either the way they do on, say, an iPhone, and they're unlikely to start.

I'd also bet we'll get bootcamp for Windows 11 on ARM as soon as Microsoft's ARM exclusivity deal with Qualcomm expires, though when that happens is being kept pretty hush hush by both companies. AFAICT the blocker on that isnt Apple, it's MS/QC

 

[seek3r]

Asahi Linux is not closed to be a fully functional distro yet.

Have you used it recently? It's getting close, rapidly. It's surprisingly solid.

 

[Yebubbleman]

There's literally a GUI toggle that Apple provides to disable boot security and allow you to boot anything you want... AS has had the ability to run third party OSes without, say, iPhone style jailbreaking since the beginning.

Not entirely accurate. Apple gives you two options, the less secure of which still requires an OS that was at one point signed by Apple in order to run. Yes, they do not prohibit booting off of external drives by default on Apple Silicon Macs the way that they did with Intel Macs that have the T2, but that's only part of it. Part of reverse engineering the Apple bootloader and firmware likely adds in critical pieces to address the fact that, as far as Apple Silicon Mac compatible operating systems go, Apple is only signing their own operating systems.

They arent actively *helping* get Linux running, but they arent actively stopping it either the way they do on, say, an iPhone, and they're unlikely to start.

I'm not sure that one's inability to run Linux or Android on an iPhone is due to proactivity on Apple's part anywhere near as much as it is the fact that there's even less to work with than there is on the Mac. Also, generally, less RAM than you'd comfortably want for either Linux or Android in 2023.

I'd also bet we'll get bootcamp for Windows 11 on ARM as soon as Microsoft's ARM exclusivity deal with Qualcomm expires, though when that happens is being kept pretty hush hush by both companies. AFAICT the blocker on that isnt Apple, it's MS/QC

I used to think this. I no longer do. Yes, it's true that writing a new bootloader that is compatible with iBoot isn't insurmountable, even if it's substantially more than was required to run x86 and x86-64 versions of Windows on Intel Macs. Same for drivers; not insurmountable.

However, Apple Silicon SoCs are performance optimized for macOS. Apple literally designs these SoCs around macOS and around where they think its users need more performance, let alone performance per watt. You're not going to get this kind of performance efficiency with Windows for ARM64 running on Apple Silicon. You WILL, however, get it with Windows for ARM64 running on a VM running on a type 2 hypervisor running in macOS, but that's because you're running a Mac app designed for macOS which, again, IS optimized for Apple Silicon.

Not saying it can't happen. Just that the roadblocks to it happening are (a) more than they were for Intel and (b) much more than would meet the eyes with the viewpoint/theory that you currently have (and that I once had as well).

 

[seek3r]

I'm not sure that one's inability to run Linux or Android on an iPhone is due to proactivity on Apple's part anywhere near as much as it is the fact that there's even less to work with than there is on the Mac. Also, generally, less RAM than you'd comfortably want for either Linux or Android in 2023.

On this point... I had Android running on my gen 1 iPod Touch years ago, and there was recently a demo of getting a linux kernel running it on a (2nd gen I think?) iPad Air. There's been work on this over the years, but it's pretty difficult to keep consistently working because Apple specifically works to block such things and it requires using active exploits much like jailbreaking.

As far as RAM goes even the 10th gen base ipad has 4gb, as does the mini, which is easily enough to run Linux for basic needs in 2023, and the iPad Pros use the same chips as macs these days and come with 8 or 16GB. The Air is the same, though only 8GB. That's exactly the same as a base M1 Mac Mini or MacBook Air.

 

[trollkatt]

I would like to point out that the Asahi team is making enormous progress. And that at this point the Apple Silicon macs have better support in Asahi Linux than many (much older, more generic) laptops. I think there's more than enough proof to be an optimist

 

[jido]

Not entirely accurate. Apple gives you two options, the less secure of which still requires an OS that was at one point signed by Apple in order to run.

Yeah, the permissive option needs a signature but how is that an impediment? Only the boot loader needs to be signed not the OS itself.

Startup Disk security policy control for a Mac with Apple silicon

To set security policy on a Mac with Apple silicon, Startup Disk has replaced Startup Security Utility.

support.apple.com

 

[Yebubbleman]

Yeah, the permissive option needs a signature but how is that an impediment? Only the boot loader needs to be signed not the OS itself.

Startup Disk security policy control for a Mac with Apple silicon

To set security policy on a Mac with Apple silicon, Startup Disk has replaced Startup Security Utility.

support.apple.com

Apple still needs to be the one to sign it, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[trollkatt]

Apple still needs to be the one to sign it, if I'm not mistaken.

It hasn't been an issue for Asahi Linux and you can install several distros, you're not limited to Arch. It's really not an issue.

 

[trollkatt]

Here's all the details.

Why does Asahi Linux require disabling security features to be installed?

When I install a second instance of MacOS (say I am experimenting with a beta or something), I just create a new APFS partition and install MacOS in that partition. The MacBook bootloader seems to ...

apple.stackexchange.com

 

[trollkatt]

Asahi Linux is not closed to be a fully functional distro yet.

Have you actually tried it?

The feature support list is rather complete:

Feature Support

Hardware and software docs / wiki. Contribute to AsahiLinux/docs development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

 

[Yebubbleman]

It hasn't been an issue for Asahi Linux and you can install several distros, you're not limited to Arch. It's really not an issue.

Here's all the details.

Why does Asahi Linux require disabling security features to be installed?

When I install a second instance of MacOS (say I am experimenting with a beta or something), I just create a new APFS partition and install MacOS in that partition. The MacBook bootloader seems to ...

apple.stackexchange.com

That's not trivial! And it technically still requires the Apple stub which means you are still needing SOME form of macOS to be installed in order to install anything else. In the context of what I was originally replying to (i.e. getting Windows 11 for ARM64 to natively boot on an Apple Silicon Mac), that still wouldn't be small potatoes for either Microsoft nor Apple as it isn't for Asahi.

 

[seek3r]

That's not trivial! And it technically still requires the Apple stub which means you are still needing SOME form of macOS to be installed in order to install anything else. In the context of what I was originally replying to (i.e. getting Windows 11 for ARM64 to natively boot on an Apple Silicon Mac), that still wouldn't be small potatoes for either Microsoft nor Apple as it isn't for Asahi.

I’m not sure you understood the link… MacOS is required to install, not boot after. You dont need to boot into MacOS to boot into Asahi. Asahi isnt being virtualized, it’s natively booting

Think of it as running the bootcamp installer under MacOS on an Intel machine

 

[trollkatt]

That's not trivial! And it technically still requires the Apple stub which means you are still needing SOME form of macOS to be installed in order to install anything else. In the context of what I was originally replying to (i.e. getting Windows 11 for ARM64 to natively boot on an Apple Silicon Mac), that still wouldn't be small potatoes for either Microsoft nor Apple as it isn't for Asahi.

I don't see why Microsoft could not produce a script that sets things up the way the Asahi team has done. It's easily the most painless Linux install I've experienced in a long time.

 

[drugdoubles]

I don't see why Microsoft could not produce a script that sets things up the way the Asahi team has done. It's easily the most painless Linux install I've experienced in a long time.

May be not legal to charge money for a paid OS to install in a mac since mac has a lot of protective terms. Free Linux is different.

 

[trollkatt]

May be not legal to charge money for a paid OS to install in a mac since mac has a lot of protective terms. Free Linux is different.

???? the only issue that Apple has is with running their Software on non-mac Hardware. And they don't even particularly enforce it against hackintosh communities. To my knowledge there is nothing from Apple preventing you or anyone else from installing whatever they want in mac Hardware and charging for it. If this were the case, they could take the Asahi team to court since they are actively receiving money in order to develop the drivers, installers, etc. Sure, you can obtain the Software for free, but at least part of the Asahi team is getting paid to develop this. You could argue that they're profiting from this. (Which is good! I want to have quality drivers and installers and I know how hard it is to develop good Software!)

And anyway that is not a technical impediment, which was, from what I understood, the original "issue".

It also wouldn't make sense for have Apple to do a complete 180 degree flip between the Intel era, where they went to the lengths of coding Bootcamp to even encourage you to install Windows and run it natively, to having legal impediments for other companies to produce OSes. If they did, they wouldn't have gone through all the expense of designing a boot system that was sufficiently flexible yet fully secure, for these possibilities to exist. They would have just gone the iOS route and locked up the hardware completely. Now, one thing is true: they're no longer going through the work of producing drivers, but that is not the same as having legal impediments for others to make them.

 

[drugdoubles]

???? the only issue that Apple has is with running their Software on non-mac Hardware. And they don't even particularly enforce it against hackintosh communities. To my knowledge there is nothing from Apple preventing you or anyone else from installing whatever they want in mac Hardware and charging for it. If this were the case, they could take the Asahi team to court since they are actively receiving money in order to develop the drivers, installers, etc. Sure, you can obtain the Software for free, but at least part of the Asahi team is getting paid to develop this. You could argue that they're profiting from this. (Which is good! I want to have quality drivers and installers and I know how hard it is to develop good Software!)

And anyway that is not a technical impediment, which was, from what I understood, the original "issue".

It also wouldn't make sense for have Apple to do a complete 180 degree flip between the Intel era, where they went to the lengths of coding Bootcamp to even encourage you to install Windows and run it natively, to having legal impediments for other companies to produce OSes. If they did, they wouldn't have gone through all the expense of designing a boot system that was sufficiently flexible yet fully secure, for these possibilities to exist. They would have just gone the iOS route and locked up the hardware completely. Now, one thing is true: they're no longer going through the work of producing drivers, but that is not the same as having legal impediments for others to make them.

Even mac is within warranty, if you bring one to there with a non macOS in it only and seek for hardware warranty like the cpu fan is broken, I don’t think they would fix it. Microsoft would not want to be in a story like this and it can be a lawsuit if Microsoft says they official supports mac hardware but that actually break the mac hardware warranty.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I’m not sure you understood the link… MacOS is required to install, not boot after. You dont need to boot into MacOS to boot into Asahi. Asahi isnt being virtualized, it’s natively booting

I understood the link perfectly. However, I'm not fully sure you understand how macOS installs, runs, and how the volumes are laid out on an Apple Silicon Mac compared to an Intel Mac, PowerPC Mac, or, for that matter, any other conventional PC whether ARM64 or x86-64 based. iBoot lives on disk. You can't boot without it. It is part and parcel included with macOS itself.

Think of it as running the bootcamp installer under MacOS on an Intel machine

Except, that's not even how the "bootcamp installer" even works on an Intel machine! Boot Camp, splits the drive, and provides drivers. That's literally it. On later Mac models, it also creates the volume for Windows and modifies the Windows installer to inject the drivers. It doesn't change or even configure the UEFI differently. It doesn't need to! macOS on Intel and Windows are both built to boot from UEFI. iBoot, unlike UEFI is completely proprietary. While the setup process may seem similar to what I've described, the boot process will not be and that's not nothing.

I don't see why Microsoft could not produce a script that sets things up the way the Asahi team has done. It's easily the most painless Linux install I've experienced in a long time.

Because (a) that's not what Apple wants, and (b) Microsoft wouldn't go about reverse engineering Apple's booting to allow direct booting. They'd ultimately work with Apple, but Apple is preferring to have people virtualize Windows for ARM64 rather than do a Boot Camp type of solution. Frankly, understanding just how much of Apple Silicon's performance is specifically tuned for macOS, I see the reasoning behind this. Asahi won't be radically more powerful of an ARM64 based Linux than any other ARM64 based Linux running on non-Apple ARM64 hardware for this reason.

 

[Arctic Moose]

I don't see why Microsoft could not produce a script that sets things up the way the Asahi team has done.

I believe Microsoft and Qualcomm have an exclusivity deal regarding Windows on ARM. Microsoft may be prohibited from doing this, even if they technically are able, and perhaps even would like to.

 

[seek3r]

I understood the link perfectly. However, I'm not fully sure you understand how macOS installs, runs, and how the volumes are laid out on an Apple Silicon Mac compared to an Intel Mac, PowerPC Mac, or, for that matter, any other conventional PC whether ARM64 or x86-64 based. iBoot lives on disk. You can't boot without it. It is part and parcel included with macOS itself.

I get that, I dont really see it as a material problem. On one of my old world G3s I use OS9 as a glorified boot loader to boot linux ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BootX_(Linux) ), doesnt mean the machine isnt running linux once booted

Except, that's not even how the "bootcamp installer" even works on an Intel machine! Boot Camp, splits the drive, and provides drivers. That's literally it. On later Mac models, it also creates the volume for Windows and modifies the Windows installer to inject the drivers. It doesn't change or even configure the UEFI differently. It doesn't need to! macOS on Intel and Windows are both built to boot from UEFI. iBoot, unlike UEFI is completely proprietary. While the setup process may seem similar to what I've described, the boot process will not be and that's not nothing.

I meant for practical user experience, not what’s under the hood. For the average user the process is analogous

Because (a) that's not what Apple wants, and (b) Microsoft wouldn't go about reverse engineering Apple's booting to allow direct booting. They'd ultimately work with Apple, but Apple is preferring to have people virtualize Windows for ARM64 rather than do a Boot Camp type of solution. Frankly, understanding just how much of Apple Silicon's performance is specifically tuned for macOS, I see the reasoning behind this. Asahi won't be radically more powerful of an ARM64 based Linux than any other ARM64 based Linux running on non-Apple ARM64 hardware for this reason.

Again, the problem on this one is Microsoft’s ARM exclusivity with Qualcomm

 

[Yebubbleman]

I get that, I dont really see it as a material problem. On one of my old world G3s I use OS9 as a glorified boot loader to boot linux ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BootX_(Linux) ), doesnt mean the machine isnt running linux once booted

From a nuts and bolts perspective, it's not a material problem. However, it's also not the kind of solution Microsoft nor Apple would want to be in place, making it unrealistic for anything outside of independent tinkering.

I meant for practical user experience, not what’s under the hood. For the average user the process is analogous

Practical user experience doesn't mean anything if what's under the hood doesn't practically correlate!

Again, the problem on this one is Microsoft’s ARM exclusivity with Qualcomm

I know I write WAY too much, but you did not read a single word I wrote. You are wrong. Microsoft's ARM exclusivity with Qualcomm doesn't have anything to do with this. Microsoft broke this exclusivity to allow Parallels' Apple Silicon version of Parallels Desktop to be a supported environment on which to install Windows 11 for ARM64. This exclusivity is moot as a result. Incidentally, there's so much more to making a native booting Windows 11 for ARM64 installation to work on those chips and half as well as they do in a Parallels VM than merely modifying the boot loader and making drivers. This isn't 2006 and these are not Intel Macs.

 

[retta283]

I know I write WAY too much, but you did not read a single word I wrote. You are wrong. Microsoft's ARM exclusivity with Qualcomm doesn't have anything to do with this. Microsoft broke this exclusivity to allow Parallels' Apple Silicon version of Parallels Desktop to be a supported environment on which to install Windows 11 for ARM64. This exclusivity is moot as a result. Incidentally, there's so much more to making a native booting Windows 11 for ARM64 installation to work on those chips and half as well as they do in a Parallels VM than merely modifying the boot loader and making drivers. This isn't 2006 and these are not Intel Macs.

Source? How do you know that the secret agreement has been breached? Does anyone even know if the deal is still on? I doubt Microsoft would blow up a deal with Qualcomm while they were still in it, that's absolutely absurd. They either got an exception or the deal was already over.

 

[Arctic Moose]

They either got an exception or the deal was already over.

Or virtualization was excluded, there are lots of possibilities.

 

[bogdanw]

"Coming soon: Fedora for Apple Silicon Macs!"
"Today at Flock, we announced that Fedora Linux will soon be available on Apple Silicon Macs. Developed in close collaboration with the Fedora Asahi SIG and the Asahi Linux project, the Fedora Asahi Remix will provide a polished experience for Workstation and Server usecases on Apple Silicon systems. The Asahi Linux project has also announced that the new Asahi Linux flagship distribution will be Fedora Asahi Remix."
https://fedoramagazine.org/coming-soon-fedora-for-apple-silicon-macs/
Fedora Asahi Remix
https://fedora-asahi-remix.org/
Asahi Linux - Our new flagship distro: Fedora Asahi Remix
https://asahilinux.org/2023/08/fedora-asahi-remix/

 

[galad]

The premise of this topic is wrong, Asahi Linux is already running and usable. There are some limitations, but if all you need is to browse the web it already works.

 

[gank41]

"Coming soon: Fedora for Apple Silicon Macs!"
"Today at Flock, we announced that Fedora Linux will soon be available on Apple Silicon Macs. Developed in close collaboration with the Fedora Asahi SIG and the Asahi Linux project, the Fedora Asahi Remix will provide a polished experience for Workstation and Server usecases on Apple Silicon systems. The Asahi Linux project has also announced that the new Asahi Linux flagship distribution will be Fedora Asahi Remix."
https://fedoramagazine.org/coming-soon-fedora-for-apple-silicon-macs/
Fedora Asahi Remix
https://fedora-asahi-remix.org/
Asahi Linux - Our new flagship distro: Fedora Asahi Remix
https://asahilinux.org/2023/08/fedora-asahi-remix/

From what Hector Martin's been saying on Mastodon, there'll be more/better support for Fedora going forward, although updates for both Fedora & Asahi are upstream. If Hector is saying to use Fedora, use Fedora, is how I see it.

Just the other day I found this video that helped me remove a few "orphaned" containers and space from two prior linux installs (Asahi & then Fedora). His tips here saved me roughly 60GB, although I admit I just initially started deleting things haphazardly.

At some point today I'm planning on reinstalling Fedora again. Works quite well! I'm going to try getting Citrix working. But LibreOffice, Chrome, Firefox, VLC, all work fine. I haven't done much of a "deep dive" into it, but I have managed to work and do my job all day while using Fedora.