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

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#761

Post by zrm »

43920 wrote: post #597
throwaway851 wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure?

> Wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded directly from them be equally secure?

More relevantly, wouldn't a sandboxed Zoom downloaded from Apple's store be equally secure even if you could install different apps from developers you trust more outside of the store?

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#762

Post by gameswithgo »

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…

if gruber wants to dictate what i run on my computer maybe he can pay for my computer instead of me.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#764

Post by millstone »

cageface wrote: post #722
pmarreck wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s going to be a big exodus of open source developers going to Linux-powered platforms instead of the standard Mac laptop because of this ridiculousness

This is happening at my company already because docker performance on Macs is terrible.

On the one hand, of course it is, because Macs are slow at running Linux stuff in the same way that Linux is slow at running non-Linux stuff.

On the other hand, Apple should decide if they care about Docker performance. The answer seems to be "a little" (Hypervisor.framework) but much less than, say, Microsoft.

Apple doesn't talk about their future plans. Today we see stagnation, YET with spikes of exotic ideas (e.g. L4, which would permit efficient L4 Linux).

Per Apple's style, a big kernel change on the Mac side would absolutely be tied to a hardware change, to break things once and not twice. Build a new Mac with a Linux-friendly kernel (perhaps Linux, perhaps modified L4, or something new), put it on their beastly ARM CPUs, and I'm drooling.

Then again I don't work at Apple.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#766

Post by mattbillenstein »

Man, I think I was having this issue earlier in the year and thought it was some funkyness with the firewall or application -- custom golang apps.

Who at apple thought it was a good idea to hop on the internet when invoking an application without any warning? This is loony.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#767

Post by michaelmrose »

saagarjha wrote: post #747
HappyDreamer wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't this have been a business decision? Not about security? (just what they say?) To make non-App-store apps annoyingly unusable, so the App store will sell more apps, instead of people downloading in other ways? Just like Apple cripples the Safari browser and PWA apps. Long term, maybe Apple wants to be able to remote-forbid apps if Apple is developing their own competing app? Whilst most developers working at…

I don't think the people at Apple are actively trying to make non-App Store apps unusable because they want to make more money from the App Store or anything. It's just that they want code to pass through them, and as a by product making code that has been vetted less or does things that could potentially be abused is made more annoying to run. Such a change is divisive, as you may have guessed.

That vetting will come at the cost of 30% of money paid for your software and any money earned within the software.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#768

Post by BruceEel »

tsukurimashou wrote: post #555
BruceEel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you @all for the suggestions! I'm going to set aside some time to experiment with these and see how far I get.

Nice, I would like to hear your experience with it once you do that

I shall post my findings.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#769

Post by mindfulhack »

saagarjha wrote: post #749
mindfulhack wrote: post #736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I do agree with you with some of those observations. Apple's been trying to fix their terrible T2 issue and I suspect some of the problems lately have been them trying to prevent the T2 reboot crash, while ruining other parts of the experience in the process as a necessary compromise. It may get worse (or better) as they move to all-Arm architecture. I also am sick of the touch bar now - after 2 years livin…

> it's an LCD screen OLED.

I hear OLED can be just as bad if not worse. So same diff.

Re: MacOS Catalina: Slow by Design?

#770

Post by krferriter »

varenc wrote: post #645
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…

Here's some shell script to use a random file name and have friendlier output. RAND_FILE="/tmp/test-$RANDOM.sh"; time_helper() { /usr/bin/time $RAND_FILE 2>&1 | tail -1 | awk '{print $1}'; } # this just returns the real run time echo $'#!/bin/sh\necho Hello' $RANDOM > $RAND_FILE && chmod a+x $RAND_FILE; echo "Testing $RAND_FILE"; echo "execution time #1: $(time_helper) seconds"; echo "execution time #2: $(time_helper…

Huh this is crazy. 2 seconds is way slow and this shouldn't involve any network activity. Seems like a real problem.
Post reply on HN