Live data from Hacker News

Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

morrick.me

101–110 of 248 posts

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#101
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not “coordinated pr effort.” Safari stops rendering entirely on iOS every now and then, seems like a pretty major bug no? Not fixed for like five releases. AirPlay 2 is an absolute joke, stops playing after five minutes on the dot in some situations. Again, no fix in like a solid year. Good for you that you don’t have any problems, others do. Regression type problems.

> Safari stops rendering entirely on iOS every now and then Oh great, other people are having this too. Assumed it was only me.

Utterly insane that Apple has dodged the bad PR on this to me, their software has absolutely degraded in quality over the last five years -- in ways that Apple software should never, like exactly the type of thing you paid the premium for. Such as a working f---ing browser.

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#102
post #11

Am I the only person that doesn't have any significant issues with Catalina? I'll admit, some of the permissions-related pop-ups are a bit annoying, but overall it's been a rather stable macOS version for me (developer, working mostly in Xcode and JetBrains IDEs).

No, we just don’t generate any online buzz by not posting about the problems we don’t have.

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#103
I have a new macbook pro 16 inch so I'm forced to use Catalina for it. Up until 10.15.2, it was extremely buggy with applications like the Terminal crashing and then refusing to start again if you force quit them. I had to restart the computer once a day about...

With 10.15.3, it's a bit better but I still see the spinning spinning wheel of death way more than I used to, and my computer completely crashed once with the fan turning on very quickly and the screen becoming completely gray... I don't think it's production ready yet.

As an aside not being able to run 32 bits applications is really annoying to me. I like to play old games, and not being able to annoys me. I can use crossover with the windows version of the games but it's a hassle. Just for the 32 bits issue, I wish I could install Mojave on my mbp 16 inch.

So, yes, worst os upgrade in a long time... I'm now dreading the os update that will disable kernel extensions and stop me from having Little Snitch and Karabiner. If that happens, I'll probably switch to Linux for my personal computers.

Surprisingly, I'm less bothered by the Permission popups, and while I don't care about apps having access to Downloads and Desktop, I do care about them having or not access to Documents. I see this is as a complement of Little Snitch. So this is for me the only positive of Catalina...

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#104
post #7

Also worth reading John Gruber's complaints, over and above bugs: > But I don’t know a single expert Mac user who is not seriously annoyed by the heavy-handed security design of Catalina. Not one. Every single expert user I know is annoyed. That is a bad place for MacOS to be. MacOS 10.16 needs a serious course correction to fix this, and if 10.16 goes the opposite way — growing even more heavy-handed in restricting…

> there should be a single switch for expert users to toggle to effectively say “I trust all of the software on my Mac”. As an "expert" software engineer, I completely trust absolutely zero software running on my computer, in my browser, or basically on any device anywhere. I begrudgingly put up with it all because there is no alternative. Adding friction is good because it will eventually push (force?) developers to…

That it will force developers to safer development patterns has demonstrably not been the case. When comparing the success of apps that work within Apple's sandboxing restrictions in the App Store versus apps that are outside of the App Store, that are not sandboxed, the ones outside the App Store and the sandbox are so much more popular that the sandboxed ones might as well not even exist[0]. Consumer's do not use sandboxed apps when there are more powerful equivalents that are not sandboxed.

[0]: https://blog.robenkleene.com/2019/08/07/apples-app-stores-ha...

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#105
post #49
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar experience. Switching from bash to zsh was probably the most disruptive part of it.

One shouldn't have been running the bash that came with MacOS anyway. It was a decade out of date. You can still install your own bash now, or even continue to run the old, obsolete version. But yes, it won't be the default.

For the amount of work I use the CLI for, it was still perfectly alright for my 30 year old UNIX knowledge.

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an important point to be made here about the gap between theoretical and practical security. Overly elaborate password policies (excessive complexity demands, passwords expiring, no reusing last five passwords) end up causing annoyed users to make bad decisions that compromise password security. Similarly, an excess of popups doesn’t increase security. It annoys users to the point they stop thinking about ind…

>Overly elaborate password policies (excessive complexity demands, passwords expiring, no reusing last five passwords) end up causing annoyed users to make bad decisions that compromise password security. Similarly, an excess of popups doesn’t increase security. It annoys users to the point they stop thinking about individual security decisions. It's particularly annoying b/c there's a subset of craftsmen developers…

What is the alternative to popups here?

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#107
post #7

Also worth reading John Gruber's complaints, over and above bugs: > But I don’t know a single expert Mac user who is not seriously annoyed by the heavy-handed security design of Catalina. Not one. Every single expert user I know is annoyed. That is a bad place for MacOS to be. MacOS 10.16 needs a serious course correction to fix this, and if 10.16 goes the opposite way — growing even more heavy-handed in restricting…

Retrofitting user-centric security model onto an OS and application ecosystem that wasn’t designed for it and has grown up without it was always going to be a giant ballache. There’s no way around the pain. The old “fortress wall” model is worse than useless now that the user’s desktop is itself an untrusted environment.

The problem I see with these current changes is that they appear to be reactive—“X, Y, and Z are potential threat vectors, so we need to lock those down”—rather than taking the long view—“what does the future security model need to look like and do?”—and plot a clear, reasoned course to that from where we are now.

The result is an Application-level security model, when what users need is Task-level security. Users still get all of the pain of change, yet none of the intended benefits—all that’s happened is we’ve gone from one unfit-for-purpose platform to another.

For instance, just consider high-security operations such as internet banking. No way on Earth should we be using the same web browser application for sensitive financials as we use for reading all the daily gossip, browsing teh prawns, etc. Split that out into a dedicated, hardened version with no support for extensions, external automation, and its own isolated password managment. Whitelist security-sensitive URLs so that they open in that version, and restrict opening common-or-garden URLs to the low-security version only.

Isolating sensitive User Tasks within their own “high-security desktop” environment would take a lot of the security pressures off individual apps, obviating the need for these endless “Do you want to grant permission for X to access Y to do Z?” requests. Which, as any security fule kno, are worse than useless at protecting users; protecting only the platform vendor from taking the blame when the inevitable fuckups occur (aka Blame the Luser).

That’s the user-security model Apple ought to pursue, but they’ve been stuck so long in their classically atomic Application-centric view of the universe I don’t think they can imagine a platform where atomic Apps are subservient to the big smooshy probability cloud of user tasks that surrounds them. Partly because that nice simple neatly-packaged atomic App model is what generates revenue, but also partly because it requires giving up control; and both developers and marketeers like keeping control very much, and fear very much ceding it to anyone else.

That takes courage, and Apple hasn’t had that sort of courage for a decade.

But putting Control into the hands of Users, in a form that those users can use, is the very core of UX, and nowhere more important than protecting users from “themselves”.

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that you can configure zsh to write to zsh_history every command to prevent this

setopt inc_append_history

Thank you! I did not know that this option exists!

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#109
Catalina has been a pretty smooth upgrade. Helps to have one of the newer macs with a fingerprint reader... it makes all the new confirm you want to do this thing dialogs much more livable. Migrating to zsh took an unexpected hour of updating build scripts. Honestly, 90% of the annoyance in software updates is being forced to do stuff you really didn't plan on doing.

Re: Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it’s worth (Part 2)

#110

I have a new macbook pro 16 inch so I'm forced to use Catalina for it. Up until 10.15.2, it was extremely buggy with applications like the Terminal crashing and then refusing to start again if you force quit them. I had to restart the computer once a day about... With 10.15.3, it's a bit better but I still see the spinning spinning wheel of death way more than I used to, and my computer completely crashed once with t…

Hold the phone... I am going to have to give up Little Snitch?!? Not cool.
Post reply on HN