• muusemuuse@lemm.eeEnglish
    111·
    5 days ago

    I use both of these systems daily. They have some issues but are just fine for me. Honestly, they are just opposite extremes and I repeat that. They each chose a side.

    Whereas windows makes me scream. It’s absolute horseshit that pretends to claim some middle ground that makes no one happy.

  • miellaby@jlai.lu
    24·
    6 days ago

    The post refers SSHFS which is based upon FUSE, a very neat technology in the Linux kernel which allows a non-kernel develloper - says a python developer-to turn anything into a hierarchy of files and folders, that you can access and modify with your regular local applications. When I says anything, I’m dead serious, FUSE may turn the whole internet into a fake browsable tree of local files on your system. On windows, you have to write a fake disk driver to mimic a fraction of the feature. I don’t know ios but I guess Apple wouldn’t never allow such a wizardry by design.

  • green@feddit.nlEnglish
    373·
    7 days 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.

    • Synestine@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      25·
      7 days ago

      SSHFS uses SFTP which is built into SSH, so no server to install. Its not as fast as NFS, but requires no setup. For something small like a home lab, that is a big advantage.

      • utjebe@reddthat.comEnglish
        9·
        7 days ago

        This. Surely not the fastest way to get content from/to a remote computer, but it just works as soon as you enable sshd.

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      191·
      7 days ago

      SSHFS is very mature. I use it for administering several home servers.

      It works so well that they added a mode where some users can have SFTP only access (without SSH shell) so you can set up shared directories. It was easier to set up (for me) than CIFS or NFS.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      201·
      7 days 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.

      • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
        1·
        7 days ago

        For some (most?) of us, we don’t have ssh access open to the world, so everything is over a VPN. So I can just use NFS over WireGuard which afaik is fairly secure, if you trust your endpoints, and works great over the Internet.

        • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          3·
          7 days ago

          I’ve never had good luck with NFS on a high latency connection. SSHFS still works fine even if the server is on the other side of the planet.

          • dan@upvote.au
            1·
            6 days ago

            NFS should work well enough on high latency connections - it was designed back when it was fairly uncommon to connect to a server over dial-up.

            It’s definitely possible that SFTP is more optimized than NFS though.

  • letsgo@lemm.eeEnglish
    271·
    7 days ago

    Also Windows: “Ask your network administrator for access.”
    Me: “Well I’m my own network administrator so what questions do you want me to ask myself”?
    Windows: “Enter network username and password.”
    Me: There is no network username or password. Sod it, I’ll bung them on an external disk.

    • AllOutOfBubbleGum@lemmy.worldEnglish
      15·
      7 days ago

      That’s a security quirk. Microsoft reeeeeally doesn’t want you to do anonymous SMB anymore, and with every version of Windows, Microsoft has made is more complicated to get it working like that. It’s probably still possible, but easier just to make a quick local user account and assign it read/write permissions to the share. Samba on Linux can still do it without as much fuss, but I’ve long since just accepted the extra step.

        • AllOutOfBubbleGum@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          7 days ago

          I would say not much. If it’s your own personal LAN, and only your devices are on it, and you’re not hosting super sensitive data, then I wouldn’t personally be worried. Just depends on your risk acceptance.

          Edit: But if you are hosting sensitive data on an untrusted network, then definitely require a user with a strong password. Also, SMB3 and higher supports encryption (both in Windows and Samba for Linux). Encryption isn’t enabled by default, though. So keep that in mind. Easy to setup on both Windows and Linux.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.worldEnglish
    151·
    7 days ago

    Isn’t MacOS based on a Unix kernel? Or did they evolve away from the core principle of treating everything as a file?

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      242·
      7 days ago

      You’re correct. Also you can sync files across all devices, built in. The meme is a bit fart sniffy.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          1·
          5 days ago

          Put things in the iCloud folder. You can optionally sync to any other device that is signed in to the same account.

      • MehBlah@lemmy.worldEnglish
        31·
        7 days ago

        I knew that one was bullshit or probably just simple ignorance. I use ssh and scripting to control my macs. Its easier than using ios depressing GUI tools.

    • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
      61·
      6 days ago

      Macos kernel is a mix of freebsd and mach. It’s half UNIX from BSD side.

      It’s currently growing up like a teen wanting to be business major cause they resent their artist dad for being an artist or a math teacher instead of working in finance.

      “Oh what does my dad do for living? He is like that redhat linux, in a way.”

    • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      19·
      7 days ago

      Samba (and NFS) require you to set shares up on the server’s side. With sshfs, you don’t need anything but a ssh login to your server. Black magic

    • renzev@lemmy.worldOP
      1·
      5 days ago

      Because it’s unbelievably broken. Every time I try to set it up it’s always a huge pain, and in the end it’s extremely flakey at best. I’ve only ever seen the SMB protocol work as expected with its native windows implementation, third-party implementations like sambda are awful

    • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nzEnglish
      32·
      6 days ago

      Also samba can’t distinguish between /foo/ and /Foo/ which is a pretty small issue… except when it isn’t.

    • cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
      13·
      7 days ago

      Mac OS version of Fuse is a commercial software. That said there are other alternatives.

      I use Samba over my LAN and ZeroTier to create a sort of VPN Samba on MacOS is a bit slow (heads up) I have not yet figured that issue out but this setup worked for me for a number of years. (and manages to handle my time machine backups over LAN)

      Any more since most of my remote access needs fall under development I user Visual Studio Code and their Remote connections system (which is pretty fucking good and “only” requires an SSH connection… and a decent amount of RAM on the remote host)

      There are a lot of things to beat up an MacOS over… but honestly getting more technical windows users to from Windows to Mac WILL help Linux adoption. Getting into the underpants of MacOS is very similar to linux (you just don’t HAVE to have fun unless you want to)

      • serenissi@lemmy.world
        3·
        7 days ago

        Wait what? The default kernel doesn’t have a fuse fs, inbuilt or as kext? Didn’t know that. I thought all modern un*ces come with fuse.

        Edit: It seems apple is introducing something called LiveFS similar to (but incompatible) fuse. Couldn’t find much docs and I’m not gonna read xnu sources rn.

        underpants of MacOS is very similar to linux

        no it’s not. xnu is very different from linux, with even design philosophy far apart. The userland (and bsd interface aka positive syscall world) is similar to *bsd’s, not typical linux userland. Only real similarity is launchd because systemd drew inspiration from it.

        • cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
          21·
          6 days ago

          The FuseFS thing; yeah It was crazy to me because I must abandon the metaphor by saying…

          MacOS IS Unix AND Linux is really just trying its damndest to BE Unix

          Both MacOS and Unix are POSIX… while Windows requires either WSL OR if you are old school cygwin to achieve POSIX compatibility

          So to a degree they are the similar…

          but like finding a dick on the internet you are always reminded by MacOS that Unix != Linux :) (I love Linux all the same)

          • serenissi@lemmy.world
            3·
            6 days ago

            I do not get what you’re trying to say here, sorry.

            On the note on similarity I mean macos userland is closer to bsd than linux. Also for normal usage freebsd is much different in nature than usual linux (free)desktop though they share same desktop shells which isn’t the case for macos either. And while most people aren’t writing with posix api everyday, many (most?) paradigms translate to win32 so that the crt from mingw works well. It matters only if you’re working with msvc toolchain, and then you’ve to adapt to windows-isms.

            Personal anecdote: yes I find macos more familiar than windows even though I use windows vm often and macos rarely. At least the command names are same/similar… So your point stands, my point is more on the Aktually side.

  • enumerator4829@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1363·
    7 days 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
      5·
      7 days 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.

    • toynbee@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      7 days ago

      Unless supporting a Windows client is an absolute must, I’ve found NFS shares to be far preferable. I’ve experienced quicker speeds, fewer disconnections, and less corruption. The only downside I’ve encountered is the client hanging if the server goes down, but there are solutions to that.

      I will admit I’ve never done anything beyond simple network shares with NFS, so it’s possible that there are use cases (besides involving Windows, by which I also mean Active Directory) is better.

      • enumerator4829@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        I run both NFS and SMB shares. My SMB shares for Windows (very specific application) and MacOS, and NFS for my Linux hosts.

        I’m kinda on the fence between them. Both work fine, but the devil is in the details.

    • dlhextall@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      7 days ago

      Yeah, my personal experience is my Synology drive is easily available through Finder ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

  • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    11328·
    7 days 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>

    • Souroak@lemmy.sdf.org
      253·
      7 days ago

      My biggest problem with Linux is that there are 8 ways to solve any problem. Some of these are distro specific, and all of them are THE definitive way to do it depending on who you ask. This comes up for me most when I want to make a change to something or do it again on a new machine.

      For adding another network drive, for example I think oh it’s called samba right and open the terminal and type in samba help. The response is: command not found do you want to install “samba-dc”? Okay so not samba. Oh that’s right I edited a file. Now was it smb.conf? No wait maybe it was fstab.

      It is getting easier as I get more familiar, but I have to wrap my head around every new thing that I want to do. It’s no wonder people don’t have the patience.

      • AugustWest@lemm.eeEnglish
        6·
        7 days ago

        I know this is just an example, but it is kind of funny.

        User somehow sets up SMB shares on their network. Then is confused by the client?

        • Souroak@lemmy.sdf.org
          3·
          7 days ago

          But that’s what I mean, right? I found a guide on how to edit a config file, then after I’ve forgotten how it went, I try to run the client that does exactly the thing I want. I don’t have it installed, so I must not need to, but good luck finding the original guide. Idk, I just spend so much time feeling confused trying to get my dumb little project homeserver to do what I want.

          • AugustWest@lemm.eeEnglish
            1·
            7 days ago

            I am not sure what to say, but maybe use something that already has done the work for you? I set up Open Media Vault 20 years ago and it has SMB shares built in. Ran it for 15 years with little to no intervention on my part.

            Also, highly recommend keeping documents of how you set things up, including a link, if not a copy of the guide and the how and why you did what you did when making your own server. We do it on enterprise systems, I do it on home systems (if building from scratch).

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.worldEnglish
        56·
        7 days ago

        That’s what you get for dabbling with computers. Of course there’s many ways to do one thing. There’s many ways to do one thing with Lego, for fucks sake. Do you really expect computers to be simpler?

    • Eager Eagle@lemmy.worldEnglish
      111·
      7 days ago

      Well, GUIs are even more distro-specific, so it’s either generalisability or user-friendliness. It doesn’t mean that guis don’t have the option.

    • tauren@lemm.eeEnglish
      31·
      5 days ago

      How is sshfs source target distro-specific? That would work anywhere. What would confuse the user is GUI, because we have about 5 major DEs and 10 major file managers that usually don’t even work with sshfs without extra plugins.

      • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        13·
        5 days ago

        We also have ~5 major package managers (which all work differently) with usually 20 different package names depending on the repo, and you chose to ignore that part.

        • tauren@lemm.eeEnglish
          31·
          5 days ago

          I ignore that part because it doesn’t pose a problem for the user. If you’re on a distro X, you know what command to type to install a package using its package manager. For the same reason, OP didn’t care to explain how to power on your computer. Or do you expect a meme to be a comprehensive guide on how to install sshfs on all major distros? Really? Maybe the real problem is that some people don’t understand what a meme is.

          • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
            11·
            5 days ago

            You clearly didn’t understand the point of my original rant. Also no, people don’t necessarily know how to use the package manager via CLI. Tools like Discover and Gnome Software exist for a reason, and people who feel more comfortable using them (instead of a CLI, which is a literal black box to common people) get harshly ignored by people who argue exactly like you. This is about accessibility, and these exact discussions are the reason I’m pissed.

            • tauren@lemm.eeEnglish
              21·
              5 days ago

              Oh, I understand. I just don’t expect a meme to solve the accessibility issues. People do use the CLI, they find it convenient, and there is no reason why they can’t make a meme with terminal commands. What I don’t understand is why you act like Linux or OP owe you something. We already have macOS, which offers a fantastic user experience, and we have Windows, which provides some middle ground. Let Linux be Linux. You can also create ‘memes with more accessibility’ if that’s what you think the issue is.

              • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
                11·
                5 days ago

                Dude, I just ranted. I don’t expect this meme to do anything, neither does anyone owe me something. It just showed this general vibe in the community about what they think is “simple” I had the desire to call out here because I think it can be harmful to common users. So I engaged in discourse about this aspect. If you see it differently that’s fine, we probably won’t be friends. Outside of jokes (which I thought I made clear by specifically marking it as a rant) I will keep working on changing desktop’ Linux public image away from only-for-CLI-nerds towards a potentially user-friendly option for everyone (potentially = the distros made to be like that) even if you don’t like that.

                Whatever you think you understand, it certainly isn’t my point. “Let Linux be Linux” makes me question whether you even understand how divers “Linux” is.

                • tauren@lemm.eeEnglish
                  2·
                  5 days ago

                  I’m not going to stop you. I just doubt that ranting under memes is going to leave a dent on the universe.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
      114·
      7 days ago

      Somehow people still believe CLI commands are superior

      Something that only a pure enduser would say.

    • AugustWest@lemm.eeEnglish
      5·
      7 days ago

      this meme once again shows a Linux terminal command (that only works on specific distros)

      sshfs only works on certain distros? Oh you mean the apt install part.

      the button in the File Manager to add the network share to your left sidebar.

      I just browse to the network location I want and right click on the view in the file manager and select “add to places”. It will be there on the sidebar until I remove it. Yes it is there after a reboot.

      • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nzEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        But sshfs also works across the internet…quick and dirty file access from anywhere in the world. If you can SSH to a machine, you can get a mountable file system.

        • AugustWest@lemm.eeEnglish
          3·
          6 days ago

          sshfs also works across the internet…quick and dirty file access from anywhere in the world.

          I almost said that. It was my first thought. But then the people discussing it seemed kind of focused on local networks so…

    • banghida@lemm.ee
      452·
      7 days ago

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

      • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        203·
        7 days ago

        Yeah. You also can edit mounts via GUI tools instead of manipulating fstab. You can configure shares without opening smb.conf. You can do all these things, now if we would just communicate how user-friendly a Linux distro can be that would be nice. Right now it’s still a wild goose chase to find instructions how to do things graphically and therefore accessibly and more safely, as every search first and foremost results in tons of (often time different) CLI commands. And there are too many in the community who counter with disabling or elitist bullshit, as if someone who isn’t into RTFM for every click somehow can’t be allowed to flip a switch. It’s exhausting to fight against these sentiments, especially now where apparently a lot of people suddenly realize that Microsoft and Apple might not be the best idea to trust. People who just want use and trust their computer.

        • y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          5·
          7 days ago

          I’m with you on this. I think a youtube / peertube channel providing GUI only tutorials could do quite well and would help to further the linux cause

          I’m too lazy do it, but someone should

          • ddh@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            3·
            7 days ago

            Yeah, for Windows vs Linux on servers the battle is already won. For desktops it’s more Windows vs GNOME, Windows vs KDE, Windows vs XFCE, etc.