Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

macOS 10.15 Vista

tyler.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 322 posts

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#71

Post by Wowfunhappy »

dpkonofa wrote: post #61
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect applications to have access to my desktop. I do not need to be asked. It would be like asking permission to access my clipboard, or use my speakers, or read my keyboard. If you bombard users with dialogues for every little thing, all you will do is train them to habitually click yes . Now you have lowered security, because users will ignore the more serious warnings too. And you've wasted everyone's time in…

You expect applications to have access to your desktop? You should only ever expect the user to have access to the desktop and, even then, the only apps that would ever prompt for access to the desktop are those that aren't updated for High Sierra and above. On the latest versions of macOS, the Desktop folder is shared by iCloud. This is definitely not an instance where security has been lowered nor is this the stand…

> You expect applications to have access to your desktop?

Yes! That's what applications do, they read and write files. Most other software is, more likely than not, either a game or a web page.

Does every app need to access my desktop specifically? No. But if we're trying to protect "normal users", I don't think most of them have the wherewithal to think through "what exact locations does and doesn't app X need to access?"

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#72

Post by fbelzile »

etchalon wrote: post #3

I understand this is chaos, but it's chaos because it has to be. There's no way to move users from an world of opaque "if it's an application, it can do anything it wants" to a world of "applications should ask me when they want to do something" transparency. The idea that Apple doesn't care about the Mac because it's trying to explicitly improve our privacy and security is … weird.

The "privacy" dialog popups are just marketing. Sure, there may have been an issue with a few bad apps, but Apple found a way to continuously remind you that they are the only ones that 'care about your privacy'TM. Meanwhile, they still happily take Google's money to make it the default search engine in Safari.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#73

Post by CDSlice »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #71
dpkonofa wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You expect applications to have access to your desktop? You should only ever expect the user to have access to the desktop and, even then, the only apps that would ever prompt for access to the desktop are those that aren't updated for High Sierra and above. On the latest versions of macOS, the Desktop folder is shared by iCloud. This is definitely not an instance where security has been lowered nor is this the stand…

> You expect applications to have access to your desktop? Yes! That's what applications do , they read and write files. Most other software is, more likely than not, either a game or a web page. Does every app need to access my desktop specifically? No. But if we're trying to protect "normal users", I don't think most of them have the wherewithal to think through "what exact locations does and doesn't app X need to a…

But they should only read and write files that you give it permission to. E.g, Word should only be reading and writing whatever files you open to edit, it shouldn't be able to access all the files in your Applications folder. If it needs temp files it can write those to it's designated section of the file system.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#74

Post by pram »

widowlark wrote: post #42

It's crazy to me that when Microsoft does this kind of thing (via Vista), it's considered terrible but when Apple does it, the thread fills with people saying it's the best way forward.

HN didn't even exist when Vista was released.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#75

Post by microcolonel »

etchalon wrote: post #3

I understand this is chaos, but it's chaos because it has to be. There's no way to move users from an world of opaque "if it's an application, it can do anything it wants" to a world of "applications should ask me when they want to do something" transparency. The idea that Apple doesn't care about the Mac because it's trying to explicitly improve our privacy and security is … weird.

I don't know about this somehow being proof that "Apple doesn't care about the Mac" or something, but I remember distinctly when Apple themselves, and the fanboys, were ragging on Microsoft for UAC (which really only asks you to confirm occasional administrative operations).

As for the general quality of Catalina, there seems to be a deluge of amateur-hour flaws that affect real workflows for real users.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#76

Post by GeekyBear »

etchalon wrote: post #3

I understand this is chaos, but it's chaos because it has to be. There's no way to move users from an world of opaque "if it's an application, it can do anything it wants" to a world of "applications should ask me when they want to do something" transparency. The idea that Apple doesn't care about the Mac because it's trying to explicitly improve our privacy and security is … weird.

Not being asked to grant all permissions that an application wants up front (before you even get a chance to use the app) has a positive impact on the user experience.

If the application asks for permission to access my contacts only after I select an option to share information with others, for instance, I can feel more confident about granting that permission.

Asking for all permissions up front is the permissions model that Google just abandoned.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#77

Post by agret »

rinchik wrote: post #7
etchalon wrote: post #3

I understand this is chaos, but it's chaos because it has to be. There's no way to move users from an world of opaque "if it's an application, it can do anything it wants" to a world of "applications should ask me when they want to do something" transparency. The idea that Apple doesn't care about the Mac because it's trying to explicitly improve our privacy and security is … weird.

Second this. It's a major security update that allows you to re-evaluate and more precisely manage access rights that your existing apps have. Not sure what "super user" author is really sad about. No one is keeping him from using windows.

It really says a lot that he has no provision for comments on his posts.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#78

Post by mynameisvlad »

dpkonofa wrote: post #63
Gaelan wrote: post #27

You know, this is a pretty apt analogy. Vista (apparently) was considered terrible primarily because it ripped off the band-aid and made a bunch of inconvenient but important-for-security-in-the-long-term changes. [0] [0]: https://twitter.com/swiftonsecurity/status/85185740489147187...

>You know, this is a pretty apt analogy. Disagree wholeheartedly. It definitely has "hints" of Vista band-aid rips in the same way that shit like La Croix has "hints" of flavor but Vista was one of the worst OS releases I ever had the pleasure of being part of, only behind Windows ME. It took Vista a really long time to be a stable, fully-usable OS and, while I'm glad for the steps they took with it, their execution…

> On top of that, this is completely due to the user.

What? All the user did was install Catalina and leave it alone for a few hours. How is this all "due to the user"?

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#79

Post by wayneftw »

CDSlice wrote: post #73
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You expect applications to have access to your desktop? Yes! That's what applications do , they read and write files. Most other software is, more likely than not, either a game or a web page. Does every app need to access my desktop specifically? No. But if we're trying to protect "normal users", I don't think most of them have the wherewithal to think through "what exact locations does and doesn't app X need to a…

But they should only read and write files that you give it permission to. E.g, Word should only be reading and writing whatever files you open to edit, it shouldn't be able to access all the files in your Applications folder. If it needs temp files it can write those to it's designated section of the file system.

It should read and write whatever files it needs to without bothering me for every little thing. For instance, supposing they want to show you a welcome screen with all of your documents from your Documents folder (or anywhere else) - I don't want some asinine popup asking me for permission. Word is a well-known application. I installed it. I trust it and the corporation that wrote it. That's enough for me.

The alleged problem is not even solved by a permission dialog. I should answer OK to the fact that it needs to access all of my Documents, forever, and that's supposed to be more secure? Why not just ask me for permission to my whole drive so it can scan for documents everywhere? Apps will just start asking for more and more permissions like they do on iOS, which is annoying.

macOS is slowly but surely being turned into iOS. It's software for the lowest common denominator - the average idiot - which I'm not, at least when it comes to technology.

Thankfully, my workstations are all Linux but I still have to deal with both macOS and Windows on a daily basis. But at least on Windows, the permissions annoyances can be avoided by simply not using UWP apps from their app store. I hope there's a way to turn this off on macOS but knowing Apple I doubt there will be because clearly they're on a mission to wipe macOS off the table. Perhaps that would be a good thing though. More people will move to Linux.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#80

Post by iamleppert »

This isn’t a “step forward in user privacy” or whatever the others here are saying. It’s a mess and very poorly executed UX.

Users will tend to feel overwhelmed and just click through modals when they are presented in this way. Displaying stacks of modals is an anti-pattern.

The right thing to do would have been to create a migration UX that allows quick review and audit of application permissions, presented in a table, sorted by applications that are requesting the most permissions. With a clear explanation of what’s happening and why a review is now needed. That would be a step forward in user privacy and informed consent.

Anyone defending such an abomination of UX should have their software designing license revoked.

Post reply on HN