Mac OS has made zsh the default shell. This is actually a better language for scripting and you could with your IT and team to have it installed for every provisioned server allowing for easy sharing of scripts.
Adding zsh to everything is not going to be practical for most medium-sized and up organizations imo. There's a lot more than just the servers running the application. You have the CI server, agents, container images, supporting infra for logging, etc. Last company I worked at had over a thousand VMs.
This creates more of a "we can have the same things" message over a message that they are hopelessly different.
But you can't have the same things, as you point out it doesn't work out that way in practice. If you're entertaining installing additional software to normalize things, why not just use a VM from Windows/MacOs?
But that is a different challenge from comparing the two operating systems.
That will only shift the effort into IT maintaining all these packages. The differences will still be there, its just a different department that is responsible for it.
IT tends to have OS snapshots and a selection of standard software and configuration every machine goes through. Yes this shifts the responsibility, to where it belongs.
If you're just running Linux VMs to have standards, why are you bothering with Mac or Windows?
I wasn't trying to claim you could have all the same things, the example was to put a spin of similarity on a difference. When you start talking about practical maintenance of thousands of systems, you've moved the discussion away from similarity and differences to a different problem space.
I am quite happy to discuss those challenges and what might be done about them, I didn't think that was what the article was about.
Adding zsh to everything is not going to be practical for most medium-sized and up organizations imo. There's a lot more than just the servers running the application. You have the CI server, agents, container images, supporting infra for logging, etc. Last company I worked at had over a thousand VMs.
But you can't have the same things, as you point out it doesn't work out that way in practice. If you're entertaining installing additional software to normalize things, why not just use a VM from Windows/MacOs?
That will only shift the effort into IT maintaining all these packages. The differences will still be there, its just a different department that is responsible for it.
IT tends to have OS snapshots and a selection of standard software and configuration every machine goes through. Yes this shifts the responsibility, to where it belongs.
If you're just running Linux VMs to have standards, why are you bothering with Mac or Windows?
I wasn't trying to claim you could have all the same things, the example was to put a spin of similarity on a difference. When you start talking about practical maintenance of thousands of systems, you've moved the discussion away from similarity and differences to a different problem space.
I am quite happy to discuss those challenges and what might be done about them, I didn't think that was what the article was about.
Because we have developers running Windows and Mac on their laptops.
I'm not sure I get your point but you could also say Windows and Linux have a lot of similarities, or MacOS and Windows.
Its not, the article is about differences between Mac and Linux.