• enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    I have a mac I use for some specific tasks. I’ll agree the Apple is, ehh, Apple.

    But mounting network fileshares is dead simple. My SMB share pops right up, authentication works fine, the user interface for it is fine. If I wanted to use it remotely, I’d just export it over my tailnet.

    ’sshfs’ is good for short stints of brief use, but ultimately it breaks on a protocol level as soon as your socket dies, on any OS.

    • SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Both the default network mounting options in Gnome and KDE won’t let applications access the network drive. You have to mount using SMB4k or cifutils if you want application access. I’ve not used MacOS in over a decade but that functionality works seamlessly in windows for SMB shares. It’s honestly a minor reason (among others) I went back to windows.

  • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    <rant>

    Love how this meme once again shows a Linux terminal command (that only works on specific distros) instead of what most users would want (which would work on almost any user-friendly distro), the button in the File Manager to add the network share to your left sidebar.

    Somehow people still believe CLI commands are superior, meanwhile people who just want to get Linux-unrelated shit done (that isn’t IT-related either) don’t understand what exactly happens here and won’t be able to permanently add the share to their file browser this way. Y’know, the way most people would use it in their daily workflow.

    Where Apple fails in proper software integration, Linux fails in feature communication. Instead of properly integrating features (Apple) or providing/focusing on doing things intuitively and accessibly (Linux), both want the user to start thinking their way. And I fucking hate it, it prevents Linux from becoming more popular.

    </rant>

    • banghida@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      You can click your way to the same feature in Nautilus. No need to even see a terminal.

  • green@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Wouldn’t you just use AFS, CEPH, NFS, or 9p?

    I really don’t want to be that guy, but isn’t SSHFS (FUSE) actually a terrible option when compared to an actual file-system? MacOS isn’t really missing out on much there.

    The most painful part of MacOS (which makes it downright unbearable for me) is that system configuration files are XML. It’s an absolute nightmare.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      SSHFS is secure and works well over the internet. If you only want to access it over the LAN, then NFS is a much better option.