41–50 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems unnecessary for core functionality at least -- I installed Zoom by unpacking the .app from the .pkg by hand (without running any installer scripts) and it works fine.
Mind throwing me the name of or link to the program you used to unpack the .app? I'd like to do that myself, and remember stumbling on a program that did that, but can't recall the name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems unnecessary for core functionality at least -- I installed Zoom by unpacking the .app from the .pkg by hand (without running any installer scripts) and it works fine.
Mind throwing me the name of or link to the program you used to unpack the .app? I'd like to do that myself, and remember stumbling on a program that did that, but can't recall the name.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11298855/how-to-unpack-a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They may not be exploiting vulnerabilities but they are breaking the contact with the expectations users have of how installers work.
>with the expectations users have of how installers work Tbh I think that most people here on hn are experiencing cognitive bias because of additional knowledge - reality is that most of regular users do not give a damn about what installer does, they just want working app.
The founder of Zoom used to work at WebEx before it was acquired. Wouldn't be surprised if he brought along some WebEx folks as well.
the founder of zoom brought tons of people from WebEx (know someone who was part of the early webex team and now zoom)
I still don’t understand the issue with this: it’s not using this feature as intended, but they’re not exploiting any vulnerabilities or attempting to exploit a privilege escalation bug in macOS. Apple’s installers allow these scripts to do anything (and I believe there’s a prompt along the lines of “this installer will run a script to determine if the package can be installed”).
> “this installer will run a script _to determine if the package can be installed_” Why would the user expect that script to install the application, or even modify their system in any way?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The standard way to install an application on the Mac is to simply drag it into the Applications folder. That’s what is expected by users. For the vast majority of applications this should be enough. Whenever I see a Windows-style “installer” the first thing I think is... what kind of shenanigans are going on?
it's not like the app couldn't do those shenanigans when it's first started...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> “this installer will run a script _to determine if the package can be installed_” Why would the user expect that script to install the application, or even modify their system in any way?
The fact that Apple allows an application to be installed in this step is an issue with Apple's design.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>with the expectations users have of how installers work Tbh I think that most people here on hn are experiencing cognitive bias because of additional knowledge - reality is that most of regular users do not give a damn about what installer does, they just want working app.
But why are they even using Installer.app? First, why use an installer at all; second, if they really want an installer, why not make a custom installer app and avoid the "run a script" prompt? Installer.app doesn't have special privileges. Is the script approach just easier?