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

macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

eclecticlight.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 149 posts

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#31

Post by robertlagrant »

pjmlp wrote: post #20
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am quite sure that we have been other this several times in HN. The fact that they're no longer going to allow loading of 3rd party kernel modules (a pure political decision) does not a make a microkernel (which is an architectural style). The kernel is still going to be big and monolithic (it contains the entire BSD kernel in the same address space!), and they're still going to be loading Apple-authorized kernel m…

As you wish, I am no longer going to debate the pedantic meaning of pure microkernel ideology. I rather be happy for the improvements in the long term roadmap and overall outcome for the eco-system.

> As you wish, I am no longer going to debate the pedantic meaning of pure microkernel ideology.

This isn't pedantic, nor is it ideology. If you're acquiescing, do it graciously and please refrain from name calling.

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#32

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

tomduncalf wrote: post #11
the_other wrote: post #7

I've love to hear what this means for realtime multi-channel audio applications. Would someone close to this give us a summary, or recommend some resources for the only-barely-knowledgeable?

I can’t comment on the internals of drivers etc as it’s not a domain I know much about, but I dabble with music production and can tell you that all my audio gear which requires drivers has been updated for Big Sur, which AFAIK is the new model. I’ve not noticed any change in performance at all, so I assume Apple have ensured the API covers the ground required for real time audio - it is one of their specialities as…

> it is one of their specialities as an OS/platform after all.

Apple's been losing ground with creative-types across all industries and areas since their post-2000s peak: the major attitude-adjustment came with the reputational harm that came from the launch-and-downfall of the 2013 Mac Pro.

As a wry zinger, I find it ironic that creative-types cannot express their creativity, and especially their individually by way of system customization - nor explore opportunities for out-of-the-box solutions to their computing problems due to Apple's uniform hardware design and their locking-down of the platform. Remember when people used to apply custom skins to MacOS?

Secure defaults is fine - I actively encourage it - but Apple is increasingly treating their desktop/laptop computing platform as though they own the hardware that's legally yours. It's my laptop and I want to root my own OS, why won't they let me?

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#33

Post by smolyeet »

solarkraft wrote: post #14

systemextensionsctl list yields 0 extensions on my system. Are there any users of these extensions at this point? It does seem a bit weird that installing these extensions supposedly doesn't require any user consent, even though stuff like screen recording or folder access does.

more common in enterprise environment, but vmware fusion, global protect, and lulu/little snitch come to mind from my experience. Big Sur still technically supports Kernel Extensions, and companies will wait until the last minute before giving in.

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#34

Post by immmmmm »

ace2358 wrote: post #13
tomduncalf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t comment on the internals of drivers etc as it’s not a domain I know much about, but I dabble with music production and can tell you that all my audio gear which requires drivers has been updated for Big Sur, which AFAIK is the new model. I’ve not noticed any change in performance at all, so I assume Apple have ensured the API covers the ground required for real time audio - it is one of their specialities as…

I’m running a PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2 (1st gen) and am stuck on 10.13.6 because I’m pretty sure they didn’t release drivers for 10.14+. It’s a FireWire 400 device. I absolutely love it but because of it, I’m probably never going to upgrade my studio mac. I do wonder if it’s a class a compliant device and works without drives (I think I read somewhere that it might work) but I legitimately use the software that com…

i highly recommend RME if long term driver support is a priority. i play live act and my UCX has been 100% reliable so far.

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#35

Post by IndySun »

ace2358 wrote: post #13
tomduncalf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t comment on the internals of drivers etc as it’s not a domain I know much about, but I dabble with music production and can tell you that all my audio gear which requires drivers has been updated for Big Sur, which AFAIK is the new model. I’ve not noticed any change in performance at all, so I assume Apple have ensured the API covers the ground required for real time audio - it is one of their specialities as…

I’m running a PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2 (1st gen) and am stuck on 10.13.6 because I’m pretty sure they didn’t release drivers for 10.14+. It’s a FireWire 400 device. I absolutely love it but because of it, I’m probably never going to upgrade my studio mac. I do wonder if it’s a class a compliant device and works without drives (I think I read somewhere that it might work) but I legitimately use the software that com…

>and am stuck on 10.13.6

We have multiple Apple hardware based music systems 75% of which are deliberately still, not stuck, on 10.13.6.. We also have a few M1s.

After decades of continual forced disconnects/'upgrades' of software/hardware compatibility we drew a line at 10.13.6 and have been very happy and have not missed a single so-called new feature, both from Mac OS or any DAW we use.

We are, however, ready to move to Apple silicon, based on our early assessments.

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#36

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

webmobdev wrote: post #18
nemothekid wrote: post #2

This article does a good job of explaining how kernel extensions worked under Intel and how they will work under M1, and the blessed replacement for kernel extensions by Apple under M1. What it's missing, and what I assume everyone's questions is: Are the capabilities of Apple's user-level APIs sufficient to replace most legitimate uses of kernel extensions?

> Are the capabilities of Apple's user-level APIs sufficient to replace most legitimate uses of kernel extensions? From what I remember reading from some macOS Application Firewall makers, no. (And that's ofcourse, intentional.) While it is true that poorly coded Kernel extensions can make an OS unstable, this is just another example of Apple taking away more control from its users and further crippling macOS to make…

Well, I'm glad to see even the cynics can't find an evil motive here, and has to resort to just assuming stupidity.

That, however, isn't easy to do, considering Apple has a rather impressive track record of creating products people enjoy and buy.

And to jump two replies ahead: them trying to make it "easy" and "save" doesn't imply their users are idiots. Quite a few developers and scientists use Macs, and the lawyers aren't exactly dumb either. Spending hours trying to somehow get both sound and bluetooth to work at the same time, a favourite pastime on Linux, means lifetime wasted for something that shouldn't need doing. And considering nobody reads the source, there is no reason to believe some "expert" has some ability to avoid installing that one extension that soon starts encrypting their files. At least they tend to have better backups...

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#37

Post by amatix »

solarkraft wrote: post #14

systemextensionsctl list yields 0 extensions on my system. Are there any users of these extensions at this point? It does seem a bit weird that installing these extensions supposedly doesn't require any user consent, even though stuff like screen recording or folder access does.

TripMode (https://tripmode.ch/) for filtering application Internet access when you're running on mobile data uses a kernel extension.

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#38

Post by deregulateMed »

nemothekid wrote: post #2

This article does a good job of explaining how kernel extensions worked under Intel and how they will work under M1, and the blessed replacement for kernel extensions by Apple under M1. What it's missing, and what I assume everyone's questions is: Are the capabilities of Apple's user-level APIs sufficient to replace most legitimate uses of kernel extensions?

"blessed" replacement

Why did you use the word Blessed?

I'm curious what made your brain choose that word instead of something neutral.

Reminds me of "Walled garden" marketing speak instead of "Walled Prison".

Edit- is there some sensitive nerve I hit?

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#39

Post by stefanfisk »

deregulateMed wrote: post #38
nemothekid wrote: post #2

This article does a good job of explaining how kernel extensions worked under Intel and how they will work under M1, and the blessed replacement for kernel extensions by Apple under M1. What it's missing, and what I assume everyone's questions is: Are the capabilities of Apple's user-level APIs sufficient to replace most legitimate uses of kernel extensions?

"blessed" replacement Why did you use the word Blessed? I'm curious what made your brain choose that word instead of something neutral. Reminds me of "Walled garden" marketing speak instead of "Walled Prison". Edit- is there some sensitive nerve I hit?

I can't speak for the author, but personally I'm enough of an atheist to not read "blessed" as more than "approved by the powers that be".

Re: macOS extensions are moving away from the kernel

#40

Post by easton »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #32
tomduncalf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t comment on the internals of drivers etc as it’s not a domain I know much about, but I dabble with music production and can tell you that all my audio gear which requires drivers has been updated for Big Sur, which AFAIK is the new model. I’ve not noticed any change in performance at all, so I assume Apple have ensured the API covers the ground required for real time audio - it is one of their specialities as…

> it is one of their specialities as an OS/platform after all. Apple's been losing ground with creative-types across all industries and areas since their post-2000s peak: the major attitude-adjustment came with the reputational harm that came from the launch-and-downfall of the 2013 Mac Pro. As a wry zinger, I find it ironic that creative-types cannot express their creativity, and especially their individually by way…

Are there things you still can't do after running "csrutil disable"? I'm honestly asking, because it seems like after doing that on my Mac I don't hit any weird errors when I try to say, modify the sudoers file or whatever.
Post reply on HN