tiz.meneghe wrote:For these application I switched to kubuntu.
MAC is supportive only.
you are magical!thanks
Yes, for MAC we need a C++ Qt developer familiar with this operating system. We don't have a MAC, I'm running it in virtual environment just to build and package it, my attempts to passtrough GPU for graphics acceleration failed and wasted some free time... It's already a big job for the packaging...
My old RX550 isn't a Baffin.. And I love Debian Linux ... for work and use all day.https://www.reddit.com/r/VFIO/comments/ … re_0x67ff/
https://www.reddit.com/r/VFIO/comments/ … x_550_gpu/
I slightly improved my AMD Threadripper OSX/KVM and gained a lot of fluidity without going through the GPU passthrough...
Compiling QET on Monterey take ~34 s with CLANG 14 vs 32 s with GCC on my Linux host, is fine, but emulating an APPLE Silicon in QEMU is a hassle... and you have Rosetta2 which should work fine, without too much slowdown, if you have any feedback?
I'll leave that aside for a moment.
https://www.phoronix.com/review/apple-mac-m1
Rosetta 2
benchmarks is that some x86_64 binaries work even faster than natively on
previous Intel Macs.
https://worthdoingbadly.com/xnuqemu3/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25064593
on Nov 12, 2020 | prev | next [–]
> Besides, Hackintoshes are often built when Apple’s own hardware isn’t fast enough; in this case, Apple’s ARM processors are already some of the fastest in the industry.
They are also used when one wants more cores than are possible on Apple hardware. If you want a build engine for a medium to large sized compiled language project, Apple has no options that make economic sense, since a Ryzen Threadripper will beat everything else hands down. The same is true of every other embarrassingly parallel, linearly-scaling compute problem.In such cases, the "speed" of Apple's own silicon doesn't help at all.

on Nov 12, 2020 | parent | next [–]Hackintoshes from my experience are usually built as a low cost hobbyist alternative. Most people earning a living from a Mac will sacrifice speed to have stability and support.
Plenty of people who want MacOS but cannot afford the official Mac will use it instead.
on Nov 12, 2020 | root | parent | next [–]I need to build my software for macOS. On my Ryzen Threadripper running Linux, I can run a faster, more powerful KVM/QEMU version of Mojave than I can buy from Apple, while still having cores and RAM left for Linux.
I could afford to buy hardware from Apple, but why would I when the cost/performance ratio for an embarrasingly parallel compute task like compiling is so much worse?
on Nov 12, 2020 | root | parent | next [–]Like the previous person said, mainly stability and support. There's no doubt that macOS can run much faster in non-Apple hardware given certain parameters, but if you want support and solid stability you would probably go with Mac hardware.
Creating a Mac Universal binary for Intel and ARM M1/M2 with Qt
https://successfulsoftware.net/2022/09/ … 2-with-qt/
https://worthdoingbadly.com/sim-macos-arm-sdk/
https://blogs.blackberry.com/en/2021/05 … -emulation











