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

Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

sentinelone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 193 posts

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#11

Post by itg »

ubercore wrote: post #6
ramesh31 wrote: post #3

Am I the only one increasingly frustrated with macOS's naming scheme? I have no idea what the latest version is. Ubuntu versioning gets this right; you can parse their codenames alphabetically to derive the semantic version. But Apple's heuristic here seems to be "throw a dart at a map of California".

Hasn't it been this way the whole time? Why is your frustration increasing?

I imagine as the number of versions increase, there is more tracking you have to do when someone doesn't explicitly mention the version number.

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#13

Post by bangonkeyboard »

giantrobot wrote: post #9
ramesh31 wrote: post #3

Am I the only one increasingly frustrated with macOS's naming scheme? I have no idea what the latest version is. Ubuntu versioning gets this right; you can parse their codenames alphabetically to derive the semantic version. But Apple's heuristic here seems to be "throw a dart at a map of California".

It wasn't much better with big cats. There were two sort of semantically related releases, Leopard/Snow Leopard and Lion/Mountain Lion. Of those on the Leopard/Snow Leopard I thought made sense as Snow Leopard was a "oh shit fix all the bugs" release. SL was the first full OS release after the Intel transition and 64-bit kernel.

I can picture a big cat in my mind. That helped to peg OS X releases and enabled me to mentally distinguish and order them.

I can't picture "Monterey" or "Ventura" or any other macOS names, they have no meaning to me.

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#14

Post by guerrilla »

ubercore wrote: post #6
ramesh31 wrote: post #3

Am I the only one increasingly frustrated with macOS's naming scheme? I have no idea what the latest version is. Ubuntu versioning gets this right; you can parse their codenames alphabetically to derive the semantic version. But Apple's heuristic here seems to be "throw a dart at a map of California".

Hasn't it been this way the whole time? Why is your frustration increasing?

Haven't you not been getting food this whole time? Why is your frustration increasing?

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#16

Post by jessriedel »

pram wrote: post #12

The login items panel is such a good change, and also like 20 years overdue.

Yes, I have been baffled that it was always so difficult for the user to manage what’s auto-launched on start-up. So many apps try to bury into start-up so they can keep collecting data and lightly spamming the user.

Can anyone shed light on why it took so long? I had always figured the non-existence of a login items panel was a purposeful choice.

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#17

Post by Macha »

bangonkeyboard wrote: post #13
giantrobot wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't much better with big cats. There were two sort of semantically related releases, Leopard/Snow Leopard and Lion/Mountain Lion. Of those on the Leopard/Snow Leopard I thought made sense as Snow Leopard was a "oh shit fix all the bugs" release. SL was the first full OS release after the Intel transition and 64-bit kernel.

I can picture a big cat in my mind. That helped to peg OS X releases and enabled me to mentally distinguish and order them. I can't picture "Monterey" or "Ventura" or any other macOS names, they have no meaning to me.

Ventura has a meaning to me.... Ace Ventura, a cartoon from my childhood about a egotistical questionably competent detective.

I'm not sure that's the image Apple wants to give off though...

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#18

Post by duped »

ramesh31 wrote: post #3

Am I the only one increasingly frustrated with macOS's naming scheme? I have no idea what the latest version is. Ubuntu versioning gets this right; you can parse their codenames alphabetically to derive the semantic version. But Apple's heuristic here seems to be "throw a dart at a map of California".

Ventura is MacOS 13.0.0.

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#19

Post by masklinn »

dagmx wrote: post #10
ramesh31 wrote: post #3

Am I the only one increasingly frustrated with macOS's naming scheme? I have no idea what the latest version is. Ubuntu versioning gets this right; you can parse their codenames alphabetically to derive the semantic version. But Apple's heuristic here seems to be "throw a dart at a map of California".

The marketing names for macOS and OSX have always been random other than having a general theme to it. The OS in most cases just refers to itself by the number and is what it will show in a lot of scenarios in addition to the marketing name.

> The marketing names for macOS and OSX have always been random other than having a general theme to it.

Not entirely true: two of the cats were name variations of their predecessors to express an intent of limited end-user / feature updates and a focus on refinement (even though taxonomically the cats have basically no relationships outside of being cats, mountain lions aren’t even in the same genus as lions)

Re: Apple’s macOS Ventura – New Security Changes

#20

Post by Kerrick »

Ensorceled wrote: post #15

5-6 year support for hardware is just too short. I have a Mid 2015 Macbook Pro as a "backup" and that computer is still quite decent.

MacOS versions tend to receive security updates for 2 additional years after they’re supplanted, so it’s more like 7-8 years. Plus, all of the Macs that aren’t eligible for Ventura can use Bootcamp to install Windows or dual boot into Linux if you’re not happy with MacOS anymore.
Post reply on HN