In this episode of Zed Decoded, Thorsten talks to Mikayla, who's been leading the effort to Zed working on Linux, about the Zed's Linux version and how it's taking shape
Is there any particular problem with MoltenVK? As I see it, it’s by far the best solution for cross platform software on macOS in need of graphical hardware acceleration.
There’s nothing wrong with the software itself. It works great for what it does. On the other hand, it’s a compatibility layer, which always increases friction between things a little. I think the best use for this is running legacy software.
There aren’t many alternatives. Maybe in the future, we’ll see graphics API abstraction libraries like wgpu get used more. This gives developers a single API which can use DirectX on Windows, Vulkan on Linux, or Metal on macOS. This could allow support for entirely new graphics APIs without developers using it having to do anything.
Of course, that’s my opinion. People can build their software how they like.
Yeah, even Asahi has better OpenGL support than real macOS. They make damn sure you have to use Metal to get the most out of it, just like eventually you get caught up in DirectX on Windows whether you want it or not. You can use Vulkan and OpenGL, but the OS really wants to work with Metal/DirectX buffers in the end.
I appreciate that the devs care enough to make it really good from the start, because that sets the benchmark. Now the Linux version has to have a similar enough polish to it.
In comparison, Atom and VSCode both worked fine on Linux just about day one thanks to Electron, but it was also widely disliked for the poor performance. It’s a part of what Zed competes on, performance compared to VSCode.
That in itself is a suspicious choice tbh
What’s suspicious about it…?
deleted by creator
Until you actually try to use Vulkan on macOS. Since there’s no native support, you end up needing MoltenVK.
Is there any particular problem with MoltenVK? As I see it, it’s by far the best solution for cross platform software on macOS in need of graphical hardware acceleration.
There’s nothing wrong with the software itself. It works great for what it does. On the other hand, it’s a compatibility layer, which always increases friction between things a little. I think the best use for this is running legacy software.
There aren’t many alternatives. Maybe in the future, we’ll see graphics API abstraction libraries like wgpu get used more. This gives developers a single API which can use DirectX on Windows, Vulkan on Linux, or Metal on macOS. This could allow support for entirely new graphics APIs without developers using it having to do anything.
Of course, that’s my opinion. People can build their software how they like.
deleted by creator
But… they have devs. A lot of software is written for OSX. Zed being one of them. You may not like it, but it works for Apple.
Not the best point to make while you are questioning why they are building Zed. Bot maybe?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
No idea, especially since MacOS has limited OpenGL support and no Vulkan support, Metal is basically the only graphics API on Mac
Yeah, even Asahi has better OpenGL support than real macOS. They make damn sure you have to use Metal to get the most out of it, just like eventually you get caught up in DirectX on Windows whether you want it or not. You can use Vulkan and OpenGL, but the OS really wants to work with Metal/DirectX buffers in the end.
I appreciate that the devs care enough to make it really good from the start, because that sets the benchmark. Now the Linux version has to have a similar enough polish to it.
In comparison, Atom and VSCode both worked fine on Linux just about day one thanks to Electron, but it was also widely disliked for the poor performance. It’s a part of what Zed competes on, performance compared to VSCode.