ravynos VS Docker-OSX

Hi A long time ago i saw an opreating system called ravyn os(it's name was airyx before) and i was impressed by how beautiful they made thier gui to look too similar to apple one's and when i get a bit deeper in thier the code i discovered that thier gui was made by using apple cocoa 😅https://github.com/ravynsoft/ravynos So here's my question could i make a gui library using opengl and make it look like apple cocoa 🤔 or it's not the thing that is made by API like opengl and is made by a ready gui library 🤔

Hi Since a bit longer i found an open source opreating system called ravyn os (it's name was airyx before but it changed now) and i was impressed by how the made thier gui which was too similar to apple cocoa gui but when i get a bit deeper in the gui code i found that they did it by using apple cocoa library 😅 https://github.com/ravynsoft/ravynos So here's my question how could i make an application using a library or even an opreating system that pop up a window with a good looking such as apple or even to design my own style for the window and should i use any API such as vulkan or opengl to make such a thing or this is unnecessary?

Here is the ravyn os https://github.com/ravynsoft/ravynos

My feelings about Mac OS X are similar to the author's. I switched from a Windows XP/FreeBSD dual boot configuration to Mac OS X Tiger back in 2006 when I bought my first modern Mac, a Core Duo MacBook. I've remained a Mac OS X user from Tiger all the way to Mojave. Mac OS X in the 2000s to me was heads-and-shoulders better than the competition. It had a well-designed user interface, and most applications conformed to the Apple Human Interface Guidelines. It also provided me a Unix shell whenever I needed it. In my opinion Mac OS X peaked at Snow Leopard; in fact, I'd be comfortable using Snow Leopard (or even Tiger) as my daily driver today if it supported current hardware and if there were a modern web browser for it. It was a nice marriage of NeXT technology and an updated version of the venerable Macintosh user interface. It felt much more pleasant than Windows of the era (though I admit I liked Windows 7), and the desktop environments for Linux and the BSDs simply didn't compare.

Then came the Tim Cook era, and with it came the gradual locking down of the Mac, both in terms of hardware (for example, the soldering of formerly upgradable components such as RAM and storage) and software (for example, notarization). The user interface also gradually started adopting more iOS influences, which I think take away from the desktop experience. Due to my disappointment with Apple's direction (especially since roughly 2016), I opted not to upgrade my aging 2013 MacBook Air and 2013 Mac Pro with new Macs, instead switching to a Microsoft Surface Pro (running Windows 10) and a custom Ryzen 3900X build (which runs both Windows 10 and FreeBSD). I miss macOS, but I enjoy the openness of PCs, and I enjoy the flexibility of Windows and FreeBSD.

I am keeping an eye on two very interesting projects that attempt to replicate the spirit of early Mac OS X: helloSystem (https://hellosystem.github.io/docs/) and airyxOS (https://airyx.org/). Both projects are based on a FreeBSD foundation, but the major difference between the projects is airyxOS is a much more ambitious attempt to reimplement macOS's infrastructure (even going as far as to aim for supporting "trivial" Cocoa applications), while helloSystem has different (Qt) underpinnings, with an emphasis on replicating the Mac OS X look-and-feel and promoting adherence to the Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines. If these projects become successful, this will provide people who desire the early Mac OS X experience modern systems that will maintain that experience.

As another commenter mentioned, AiryxOS is working on an API-compatible open-source implementation of many macOS Frameworks, however it is incomplete.

Our focus right now is on running FreeBSD and Linux applications. But the https://airyx.org/ project is aiming for source-level compatibility and eventually possibly even binary-level compatibility. If they succeed, maybe the improvements will flow back into FreeBSD and helloSystem one day.

> … Probably best to not try to make BSD into modern Linux which is basically FreeWindows. …

airyxOS, based on FreeBSD, aims to provide "… the finesse of macOS with the freedom of FreeBSD. …".

<https://airyx.org/>

I wish well to projects such as this, however I rarely engage – testing and feedback – because the focus on Apple keyboards is too much for me.

(I taught myself to use the keyboard in a very different way when I switched away from Apple after twenty-something years. I don't intend to un-learn that switch.)

0.5. Wait for airyxOS to be fully complete and run it. It is a freeBSD based system that aims to be compatible with MacOS.

Running macOS legally requires real mac servers and a bespoke storage solution: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/analysis/not-just-stac...

A self-hosted macOS runner will be more economical in the long-run, if you have a spot you can hook it up at, or if you're fine doing things less than legally, you can use https://github.com/sickcodes/Docker-OSX.

Repositório Docker-OSX - Guidelines, troubleshooting, comandos

> What's the licensing situation on this?

1. This project didn't take explicit permission from Apple to redistribute binaries

2. There are multiple jurisdictions where you don't need to explicitly have such permission, it is implied by law

3. Usage of this software implies you already have macOS system. I'm not a lawyer, but it looks to be covered by section 3 of macOS EULA.

4. There are existing precedents of redistribution of macOS binaries for multiple years aready:

- https://github.com/cirruslabs/macos-image-templates/pkgs/con...

- https://hub.docker.com/r/sickcodes/docker-osx

- https://app.vagrantup.com/jhcook/boxes/macos-sierra

And so on.

Google is “friendlier”, because they run some automated scans on the apk and you’re good. Apple has humans run your app to confirm it does what you claim, as well as a battery of automated scans and since they are using the app I’d imagine they look at network traffic as much as possible. I know iOS isn’t shielded from malicious apps, but there’s malware and viruses all over the play store. That’s because it’s free and “friendlier”.

> At Apple things have gotten way worse. Trying to automate release building is practically impossible and will require hours or CI pipeline debugging with error messages that don't mean what they say.

This isn’t Apple’s fault… every build system sucks up a decent amount of time during initial setup. You can cut down massive amounts of time between iterations by adding some common optimizations:

1. Cache artifacts when that step or job succeeds, so if a subsequent step/job fails, you can adjust it and start up where you left off, using the caches artifact to restore the workspace state. This complicates debugging efforts and I personally don’t do any optimization until the pipeline is reliably green each time. I just deal with slow builds and switch to other stuff or work ahead while they run.

2. Fail fast. The CI run should bail out if any critical steps don’t pass, so anything further down doesn’t run for no reason, burning compute time and delaying queued jobs waiting for a runner. While developing the pipeline, watch the logs and when you see something you don’t like, slap the cancel button, or collect a couple things you need to change and iterate with passes with 2-3 changes.

3. Use adequately spec’s hardware. Xcode is resource heavy and compiles need plenty of memory and cpu cores. Play around with what is a good compromise between power and cost. See if your project builds faster with more cpu cores, or faster cpu cores, etc.

> At least Googles process is quite simple and can be dockerized.

One man’s simple is another man’s “practically impossible”. Simple comes from familiarity and confidence. Anyway, you can totally run your builds in docker if you want to, and many do, but I’d personally not introduce more complexity until you have your pipelines running the slow way with the least amount of mental modeling to do. Once you know it all works, then have a go at running the build you know is good, inside a docker container (which in this case is just packing up kvm/qemu/libvirt to facilitate the running of a vm back on the host, but it means you can run mac containers on Linux runners, which will be much cheaper than Mac runners since those are usually Mac hardware)

https://github.com/sickcodes/Docker-OSX

> Also why do I have to pay Apple $125 a year when it costs $100 in the US? The exchange rate from CHF to USD should be in my favor.

Couple theories. 1. They have additional processing or tax expenses when dealing with your currency which they aren’t going to eat the cost of. 2. The higher price could be to deter abuse if for some reason there is an abnormal amount originating from accounts who pay with that currency.

You can use qemu/libvirt/kvm on any Linux host to run macOS pretty easily these days[1]. I run Ventura on unraid with nvidea gpu passthrough and it’s been fairly painless.

You can also run macOS in docker, but it’s ultimately running through qemu/kvm as well[2]

1. https://github.com/kholia/OSX-KVM

2. https://github.com/sickcodes/Docker-OSX

It would be a better idea to setup bluebubbles if you really want imessages while you wait, if you have an old laptop that you can use as a macos server. https://github.com/sickcodes/Docker-OSX is a brilliant solution for macos vm as a docker container. mac hardware not required