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

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#751

Post by userbinator »

roenxi wrote: post #735
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's relevant! Software is a form of expression. Apple controls what types of expression are allowed on your phone. A developer made a game depicting bad practices at FoxConn. Apple removed it for "Objectionable Content"[1]. How is this inherently different from Apple saying you can't use your iPhone to read a certain book? Apple's restrictions also make it easy for authoritarian governments to ban software…

It is identical, and if I considered my phone to be primarily a research platform I'd be really upset. I got really upset with YouTube mucking around curating what videos they allow on their platform because I want to choose my own videos. But ultimately I own an iPhone because I need a GPS map, SIM card and web browser on the go. Apple doesn't exercise any creative control over those things. Apart from that they exp…

If someone used that walled garden approach on my PC I'd be furious.

As this article shows, Apple is slowly moving in that direction for their PCs. They aren't going to be satisfied with locking down their phones only.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#752

Post by oscribinn »

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.

>Linux was always a disaster in terms of user experience and isn't improving

I'm honestly pretty baffled as to what keeps this meme alive, as KDE and GNOME are both very popular and provide simple, intuitive interfaces for the typical user. Plasma is only complex if you're the type that really wants to customize, but there its complexity is (mostly) necessary for its wide range of possible configuration. People have this idea that desktop Linux users are all a bunch of dorks playing around with Arch and tiling window managers all day and then posting their anime wallpaper setups on /r/unixporn, but that hasn't actually been true for a long time.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#753

Post by amatecha »

hoppeilene49 wrote: post #737
amatecha wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is the future I've been foreseeing for years. Every new OS update just ever so slightly decreases your ability to control what software is on your device, and how you can use it. For example, you used to be able to back up your purchased iOS apps to your computer, and restore them from your computer. In one iOS update (9 IIRC?), they removed the ability to back up the apps from your phone. In a later iOS/i…

> making your existing backed-up apps useless, if you still had them. This isn't true. You can still install existing IPAs you have saved in the past by syncing it with Finder. You can also just AirDrop an IPA to your iOS device to install it. > Now, the only way to keep your software on your iPhone indefinitely is to never delete it, and never reformat your phone. You can still back up IPA installers by downloading…

I can't seem to find documentation about AirDrop installation of .ipa backups I have. Also that Apple Configurator 2 process appears to force me to update the apps before they are backed up (I have automatic updates turned off because of how often app updates tend to be regressions rather than improvements)... Also, how do I "sync it with Finder"? (what is "it"?)

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#754

Post by cosmojg »

Myrmornis wrote: post #649
cosmojg wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two years ago, I helped a friend install Ubuntu Linux on a Retina Macbook Pro, and it worked like a charm. If you're looking for a new laptop entirely, there are loads of 4K+ Linux-compatible laptops out there (ThinkPads are probably your best bet).

Thanks. What do you think about this post? The author sounds knowledgable and I think it contradicts what you said to some degree (in that the experience and app support is not good even though Linux is installed on a machine with a high dpi display): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22958647

I don't know about Ubuntu, but my experience with Gnome on Arch Linux and Arch-derived distributions has been pretty good as far as high-DPI displays go. I've only had to make minor tweaks to a few configurations here and there depending on the application.

If you want to avoid tweaking, stick to native applications, and perhaps more importantly, go for a manufacturer with proper firmware support for high-DPI screens like System76 (Adder WS), Dell (XPS 13), or Lenovo (ThinkPad P1/P53/X1).

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#755

Post by ngcc_hk »

VonGuard wrote: post #553
kccqzy wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OCSP is Online Certificate Status Protocol, generally used for checking the revocation status of certificates. You used to be able to turn it off in keychain access, but that ability went away in recent macOS releases.

Ah, Apple. When you can no longer innovate, just start removing features and call it simplicity...

Not sure they have removed anything, but add something.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#756

Post by pier25 »

valuearb wrote: post #536
pier25 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IIRC there was no dedicated macOS “task force” like the one on iOS It's not surprising. Macs are less than 10% of Apple's revenue. https://www.macrumors.com/2020/04/30/apple-2q-2020-earnings/

Apples Macintosh division is the most profitable PC company in the world and has been for at least a decade. In fact, Macintosh is likely more profitable than all other PC companies combined. Less than 10% is no excuse.

Like I said in another comment, is not about the revenue per se, but it's undeniable that the more popular iOS is the less Apple cares about the Mac.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#757

Post by rurban »

usmannk wrote: post #484

It seems like there is a lot of confusion here as to whether this is real or not. I've been able to confirm the behavior in the post by: - Using a new, random executable. Even echo $rand_int will work. Edit: What I mean here is generate your rand int beforehand and statically include it in your script. - Using a fresh filename too. Just throw a rand int at the end there. e.g. /tmp/test4329.sh I MITMd myself while rec…

It's called lockdown for a reason. Apple was just the very first to implement centralized binary blacklisting, revocation. They call it notarization.

Problem is, that they did it unannounced. There must be really some weird stuff going on in those managers heads. How can they possibly think to go away with that?

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#758

Post by markdown »

throwaway851 wrote: post #590
VonGuard wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, Apple. When you can no longer innovate, just start removing features and call it simplicity...

Another way to look at it is that Apple is making it harder to run the system in an insecure fashion. You may not agree with that decision, but I certainly appreciate how Apple is looking out for the safety and security of the user. Tangent: as much as some developers hate that the only way to distribute apps for the iPhone is through the App Store, as a user I consider that walled garden of apps to be a real securit…

Who is this Gruber person you quote and why is he relevant here?

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#759

Post by ridiculous_fish »

brendangregg wrote: post #613

Adding network calls to syscalls like exec() is utterly insane. This road can lead to bricked laptops where you can't run anything to fix it (imagine an unexpected network error that the code doesn't handle properly). And crackers will just use ways to overwrite running instruction text to avoid the exec(). The comments on the article are annoying: it good that there's a mini way to reproduce, but please, use some fu…

The kernel sources are available.

https://opensource.apple.com/source/xnu/xnu-6153.81.5/

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#760

Post by drvdevd »

saagarjha wrote: post #745
drvdevd wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I scrolled all the way down this thread for - to see if anyone thinks this is a good design/security decision on Apples part. I’m trying to understand what the reasoning is for this particular decision and if it actually makes the OS more secure in any meaningful way? Or does it actually- just degrade performance with very limited benefits? Are there any real benefits to this VS current security design i…

It checks that executables have been notarized by Apple? I can't say I really think notarization is great, but I think it's clear from their perspective how it would be beneficial?

Sure. But as Brendan Gregg pointed out in his comment - doing this at the level of exec() on a UNIX-like OS is ... a questionable technical choice to say the least.

What’s the Linux equivalent of “notarization”? I’m not sure. Of course there’s probably more than one answer to that - let’s just taking signing packages as an example.

In theory Apple could put their weight behind vetting some of the popular open source packages perhaps? Or delegate that to the maintainers of those repositories and make them trusted? Like homebrew, for example (maybe a poor example, but you see how I’m trying to compare this with Linux...)

This is after all, what actually makes macOS useful to people on the command line 99% of the time, anyway.

So anyway, I agree on the surface it seems like this might be beneficial to Apple, but it doesn’t appear to be well considered.

They could invest more time in better sandbox and/or container type features that let people define some of their own more granular security boundaries. But they aren’t I guess? What are they doing here?

Post reply on HN