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

191–200 of 322 posts

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#191

Post by eikenberry »

mantoto wrote: post #182
ohazi wrote: post #123

Maybe we should be angry? Apple has been neglecting OS X since Snow Leopard, thinking that iOS is the only thing worth investing in. Microsoft apparently agrees -- they chopped up the Windows team last year, pushing out the Windows chief and dumping the remaining re-orged husk under Azure. Just for security reasons alone, it should be terrifying that there isn't a standalone Windows group anymore. Windows hasn't been…

I like my windows 10. I also like my arch Linux as well. Even my MacOS rund stable enough that I don't have any issues with that. But if you don't keep your Debian up to date the chance that you can't longer upgrade it is high. After 1-2 years.

You can update Debian many years later. I just updated a system over multiple versions no problem.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#192

Post by eknkc »

phoe-krk wrote: post #184
Lio wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only real problem I have left with my XPS13 is with sleep/hibernate. I’d like it to work like macOS. It seems like that’s possible but it requires a swapfile to save state to. As far as I can tell that means enabling virtual memory which is a no no on SSD. Just that and I wish Bluetooth remembered the on/off state it was left in after reboot.

> It seems like that’s possible but it requires a swapfile to save state to. Has macOS solved this issue differently? Do they save RAM state to some non-SSD non-volatile memory, or do they just not care and dump it to SSD anyway?

I believe they favour sleep mode where the ram is powered on and the state is kept alive on ram. Only when the sleep time goes too long or battery starts running low, they dump into SSD.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#193

Post by jeroenhd »

November-Echo wrote: post #158
ohazi wrote: post #123

Maybe we should be angry? Apple has been neglecting OS X since Snow Leopard, thinking that iOS is the only thing worth investing in. Microsoft apparently agrees -- they chopped up the Windows team last year, pushing out the Windows chief and dumping the remaining re-orged husk under Azure. Just for security reasons alone, it should be terrifying that there isn't a standalone Windows group anymore. Windows hasn't been…

About the bash thing: Apple isn’t allowed to ship a newer version due to licensing problems. That’s also the reason why they switched to zsh [1]. [1]: https://thenextweb.com/dd/2019/06/04/why-does-macos-catalina...

Apple is perfectly allowed to ship a newer version, they'd just have to share some of their special sauce. Not entirely unreasonable in my opinion.

Apple doesn't want to ship a new version because they don't want people to see how they've modified bash. I don't know what patents or top secret features they've added to make their version of bash incompatible with GPL, as they're allowed to ship GPL code in a closed source product just fine as long as they ship it as a separate binary, but it's more important than their users' convenience apparently.

Also note that Microsoft ships entire Linux distros without having a problem with GPL licensing.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#194

Post by dwaite »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #55
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 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…

> 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.

I would like to know if an application:

- Is scanning the contents of my documents or desktop outside of files I specifically selected or it previously created

- Is monitoring data going on the clipboard

- Wants permission to make alert sounds or play other audio even if my sound is silenced/muted

- Wants to listen to my microphone

- Wants to monitor sound being output by other applications, such as VOIP

- Is monitoring for keystrokes even when it is not in the foreground.

> 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 the process.

If the new permissions were about security, they would all be denied and applications would have to figure out how to cope. They are about user privacy.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#195

Post by JustFinishedBSG »

trymas wrote: post #189
Razengan wrote: post #122

Apple seems to be forgetting their own credo against nag-based security: https://i.imgur.com/qbUy5aH.png (from an ancient WWDC slide mocking the Windows approach.) They may have overdone it in a few cases, and not done anything where it's really needed (like a unified list of all third-party startup items, such as Google’s sneaky Keystone malware, or seeing all outgoing data and connection attempts like Little Snitch…

> Not long ago DropBox used to show you a fake dialog that then stole your administrator password. Wow. What the hell? Can you provide any sources to read about this more?

https://applehelpwriter.com/2016/07/28/revealing-dropboxs-di...

Dropbox imitated a system dialog box in order to get your password to give itself system level permissions without asking you.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#196

Post by ptah »

I don't see any compelling reason to upgrade to catalina. at least macOS upgrades are a painless process, but the risk of breaking existeng applications is becoming increasingly likely over the years

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#198

Post by JustFinishedBSG »

Lio wrote: post #178
ashishb wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WiFi, battery, and sleep. Have these problems been fixed with Linux on laptops?

The only real problem I have left with my XPS13 is with sleep/hibernate. I’d like it to work like macOS. It seems like that’s possible but it requires a swapfile to save state to. As far as I can tell that means enabling virtual memory which is a no no on SSD. Just that and I wish Bluetooth remembered the on/off state it was left in after reboot.

Both s2idle and deep ( https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/power/states.txt ) are what you want, and work.

> Just that and I wish Bluetooth remembered the on/off state it was left in after reboot.

That's just a Qualcomm problem. The BT is completely broken. Fixed in the latest kernel for me.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#199

Post by eikenberry »

ohazi wrote: post #123

Maybe we should be angry? Apple has been neglecting OS X since Snow Leopard, thinking that iOS is the only thing worth investing in. Microsoft apparently agrees -- they chopped up the Windows team last year, pushing out the Windows chief and dumping the remaining re-orged husk under Azure. Just for security reasons alone, it should be terrifying that there isn't a standalone Windows group anymore. Windows hasn't been…

> Microsoft apparently agrees -- they chopped up the Windows team last year, pushing out the Windows chief and dumping the remaining re-orged husk under Azure.

Do you have a reference for this? This seems like pretty big news.

Re: macOS 10.15 Vista

#200

Post by bskap »

jeroenhd wrote: post #193
November-Echo wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About the bash thing: Apple isn’t allowed to ship a newer version due to licensing problems. That’s also the reason why they switched to zsh [1]. [1]: https://thenextweb.com/dd/2019/06/04/why-does-macos-catalina...

Apple is perfectly allowed to ship a newer version, they'd just have to share some of their special sauce. Not entirely unreasonable in my opinion. Apple doesn't want to ship a new version because they don't want people to see how they've modified bash. I don't know what patents or top secret features they've added to make their version of bash incompatible with GPL, as they're allowed to ship GPL code in a closed so…

It's not a GPL problem. It's a GPLv3 problem. Most likely the anti-tivoization clause. Linux, like the old version of Bash that Apple is shipping, is licensed under GPL v2.

I suspect Microsoft is also very careful to make sure they don't ship any GPL v3 components with Windows itself, even when they're available via separate download, because they want to be able to ship locked down devices.

Post reply on HN