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

MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

sigpipe.macromates.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#391

Post by julianeon »

Nextgrid wrote: post #29
leephillips wrote: post #12

This is completely insane. I am so glad I decided years ago to leave closed operating systems behind. This design seems to cement the trend at Apple to position their products as consumer appliances, not platforms useful for development.

> I am so glad I decided years ago to leave closed operating systems behind. The problem is, there's nothing else out there. Everything is going to shit in one way or another. Windows is now a disaster, Linux was always a disaster in terms of user experience and isn't improving. Mac OS was the last bastion of somewhat good, thoughtful design, user experience and attention to detail and now they've gone to shit too.

If you add "unfixable" to "disaster" the problem becomes more clear.

Windows is a unfixable disaster, you can't fix it sorry.

Mac OS is now an unfixable disaster, you also can't fix it sorry.

Linux may be a UX disaster, but you can, uniquely, modify it. You can change your UI. You can attempt to fix the problem, and have a real shot at doing so.

Linux is the only one where you can do something about the problem - which is a strong reason to prefer it.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#392

Post by LeoPanthera »

xenadu02 wrote: post #103
davidvartan wrote: post #5

> a degraded user experience, as the first time a user runs a new executable, Apple delays execution while waiting for a reply from their server. The way to avoid this behavior is to staple the notarization ticket to your bundle (or dmg/pkg), i.e. "/usr/bin/stapler staple ." Otherwise, Gatekeeper will fetch the ticket and staple it for the user on the first run. (I'm the author of xcnotary [1], a tool to make notariz…

Xcode (the UI) is able to bypass GateKeeper checks for things it builds. The "Developer Tool" pane in System Prefs, Security, Privacy is the same power. Drag anything into that list you'd like to grant the same privilege (such as xcodebuild). This is inherited by child processes as well. The point of this is to avoid malware packing bits of Xcode with itself and silently compiling itself on the target machine, thus b…

Putting Terminal (and your favorite text editor) in this category and in "Full Disk Access" will change your life.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#393

Post by mrits »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #211

Okay, I've tried this test on my MacBook Air 2020 several times, first by saving the "echo Hello" shell script in an editor and then, because I wasn't getting the results the author experienced, trying again exactly as he wrote it. Essentially the same result: airyote% echo $'#!/bin/sh\necho Hello' > /tmp/test.sh airyote% chmod a+x /tmp/test.sh airyote% time /tmp/test.sh && time /tmp/test.sh Hello /tmp/test.sh 0.00s…

Most vendors have separate engines for detecting malicious scripts. I'd assume notarizing is more about executables, in which case it would be checking the signatures around the shell binary.

Also worth noting "echo" doesn't spawn a process but is a routine in the shell itself. If you replaced echo with something that does spawn a process "like scp" it would be interesting to see the results. And if that's doesn't introduce latency then I'd try it with some hello world programs with a UUIDv4 in the binary to ensure they haven't seen the hash before.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#394

Post by unown »

neonate wrote: post #335
unown wrote: post #139

As someone living in China, this is my result when I connected to my VPN (this is my normal life, thus I can visit sites like HN): > Hello > /tmp/test.sh 0.00s user 0.00s system 0% cpu 5.746 total > Hello > /tmp/test.sh 0.00s user 0.00s system 79% cpu 0.006 total And even if I didn't connect to my VPN: > Hello > /tmp/test2.sh 0.00s user 0.00s system 0% cpu 1.936 total > Hello > /tmp/test2.sh 0.00s user 0.00s system 7…

Is HN blocked in China?

HN has been blocked in China since about 9 months ago.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20676573

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#395

Post by kristopolous »

neuronic wrote: post #320
kristopolous wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been seeing the trajectory of Windows (pre-2012 or so) -> Mac (2012 - ~2019 or so) -> Linux (~2018 - now) play out with quite a few people without any issues. And I don't mean developers. They're all pretty educated people but it's taken me by surprise. They come to me in frustration over Mac, they don't want to return to Windows and they really, really, really want linux. I've been using linux since about 1997…

Not associated at all but due to loving it, I wanted to share PhotoPea as you mentioned Gimp. https://www.photopea.com

try this:

$ google-chrome --app=https://www.photopea.com

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#396

Post by kempbellt »

adamtulinius wrote: post #349
glofish wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO the original choice of the path seems incredibly ill-advised and the main burden lies with the original developers. sometimes old errors and mistakes come back and bite

What should the default nix store path have been then?

What it was: `/nix` Or maybe `/notroot/nix` to make people happy.

"The root directory is untouchable" is a new fear-based imperative that would have been hard to predict.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#397

Post by peferron »

halotrope wrote: post #97

I am using Ubuntu 20.04 on a Thinkpad X1 Extreme Gen2 and you would be surprised how "normal" it feels as a development machine. Sure there some little annoyances, the touchpad behaves a little worse than on windows, sound is a little worse. But the most important things, Keyboard and Screen are excellent. The system in general does not feel like the horror stories that people keep telling about linux on desktop(note…

Seconded. I used to work on a Mac laptop for years, then started using a beefy Linux desktop tower on the side for some work that benefited from higher hardware resources. A few months later I realized that I had slowly grown into doing all my work on Linux, even when I didn't need the hardware, mostly because i3 and apt were so much better than the Mac equivalents, and that I was only opening my Mac laptop to walk into meetings. After realizing that I ditched the Mac laptop for a Linux laptop and haven't looked back.

I still use a Mac at home for entertainment (I'm typing this comment on one), and I have to say it works much better used that way. I don't have to worry anymore about random Mac OS upgrades breaking functionality that Apple doesn't care about because it's not part of their vanilla out-of-the-Apple-Store experience, but is vital to me as a developer such as 3rd party window management, dock improvements, keyboard tweaks, or not delaying every new execution by phoning home (LMAO).

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#398

Post by Sangeppato »

saagarjha wrote: post #295
Sangeppato wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you need Xcode, try running "mkdir /Applications/Xcode.app"

I would expect checks for Xcode to go through xcselect rather than a simple directory check. Installing the command line tools (sudo xcode-select --install) might actually be a better idea to test this.

I thought the same, but actually this method worked for me when I wanted the the Spotlight "Developer" option to show up (the CLT were already installed). I have the Developer panel under "privacy" as well, even if I never installed Xcode on my machine

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#399

Post by packetlost »

roguas wrote: post #389
tomp wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. What's more, if we're talking about user hostility, how hostile is when a software doesn't provide a configurable install dir? It's literally a single damn variable!!

This is not the case. The problem is that caching is based on the default path which is /nix. So they would have to rebuild all caches.

Maybe they shouldn't have built it that way then. In my experience nix is nothing but a huge pain in the ass if you don't buy fully into the system, weird design decisions and all
Post reply on HN