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

Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

lacquer.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 200 posts

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#91

Post by jemeshsu »

makira wrote: post #42

The problem with the current sandboxing is the missing entitlements, for simple things like: - Using the burning framework (cd & dvd burning) - Interfacing with Apple Remotes - Having a shared container between a main app and a helper app Also, many utilities will have to be removed from the App Store because of sandboxing, and that will likely cut revenues dramatically for those developers.

Seems like the current implementation can not take care of a lot of common scenario. It is not as ready. It is hard to be safe in an open world. I guess that's the reason why Apple postpone the requirement for sandboxing to March next year.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#92

Post by jerf »

saturdaysaint wrote: post #85
rbanffy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can still distribute I think "still" is the important word here.

Nope. The gadget-oriented press misses it completely, but Apple's history of catering to creative professionals and media industries goes just as deep as any of their control freak tendencies. Coming straight from Jobs, the purpose of these computers was to serve the arts. They're deeply attuned to the technical requirements (eg plugins) for creative software as well as to what creative pros of all stripes are using.…

Question. What percentage of their sales in this quarter or the last were to support Pro Tools or Illustrator installs?

Are you sure they won't trade that away to Windows for a chance to improve their lockdown? You still seem to be working under the mental model that was created for Apple's actions when those apps were basically the only thing keeping Apple a going concern at all. That is not their current status anymore, and I think the model may need updating to reflect that.

The counterpoint that these people are thought leaders is still valid, but even then... thought leaders for what percentage of their market now?

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#93

Post by recoiledsnake »

mmcconnell1618 wrote: post #65
buro9 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well It already does to some extent. Internet Explorer was the first to introduce it (to my now out of date understanding), and it's since expanded to other products including shipped Windows apps, Office, etc. It happens invisibly for the developer, if you think the registry that you access is THE registry then you're wrong. It's a proxy that you…

Actually, Windows 8 apps are sandboxed too. Take a look at the Microsoft requirements to distribute a new Metro-Style app through their own app store. Same sandboxed requirements. Microsoft must approve and developers must justify any access to resources outside the standard sandbox set.

Yes, but the desktop experience and apps will still be a big part of Windows 8 unless you're running it on an ARM tablet. Microsoft will happily link to your native non-sandboxed app from their App Store.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-store-to-sell-b...

Screenshot http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6209/6144024273_4b505de2fc_o....

I guess a big reason for locking down Metro apps is battery life concerns.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#95

Post by dmbaggett »

ootachi wrote: post #90
dmbaggett wrote: post #48

This is all so well-played by Apple: evolve ever more locked down systems in seemingly consumer-friendly ways. Once consumers forget they can even install their own applications (except through the app store), OS X distribution will be just as heavily moderated by Apple as iOS distribution. Expect Apple, Microsoft, and Google to exert ever more control over distribution. The software industry is evolving into the "st…

"Will users forget they can just type a URL in, and instead install everything through their friendly neighborhood web app store? (Don't laugh.)" Who's laughing? All but two of the Web browser manufacturers (Opera and Mozilla, both of which are losing market share) seem to have vested interests in doing exactly this.

Yes, and add to that the fact that typing on a mobile device is painful, and you have a strong usability argument for doing away with the URL bar entirely.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#96

Post by bonch »

super_mario wrote: post #43

As a die hard Mac user, fuck Apple and the Mac. Honestly. After the rumor they are killing off Mac Pro, and this insane gestapo shit already under way in Lion (which I don't use), I really don't want to be associated with Apple in any way.

You are seriously comparing a security sandbox to the gestapo? If killing off products that aren't profitable is insane to you, and implementing a security sandbox model that every other platform either already has or is going to have (Windows 8 included), I don't think you'll be a die hard fan of any company for very long.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#97

Post by tomlin »

kstenerud wrote: post #70

One problem with sandboxing is that it stifles innovation. Many of the innovations in computers (dynamic libraries, drivers, plugins, screen grabbing, password managers, etc) came from being able to do anything on your computer. Once the sandbox lockdown is complete, you won't be able to invent new techniques that require entitlements the gatekeeper hasn't thought of already. The sandbox marks the end of the open sys…

> plus it will allow them to finally kill Flash off all Apple platforms for good...

You can't declare that sandboxing will destroy innovation, but also actively persist that killing Flash is a good idea. Not saying you are, but you know others will.

Flash is often used as a petri dish - a way to create new experiences and test them with a real audience. YouTube, Blog.tv, many experimental video / social integration and many other innovative (today or yesterday) ideas have lived and died because of Flash. If you've never coded a Flash experience (outside of restaurant websites) and did it well (ie, bother to code it properly), you might find it hard to see this point - again, I point you to the many examples available.

When we talk about the "open web" without Flash, you're really talking about a more closed web, because the average designer / programmer can no longer contribute to the core functionality of the browser - unless, of course, you work alongside W3C.

Unless Adobe begins releasing in longer cycles, by that I mean slower than W3C's snail crawl, the idea that HTML/JS will eventually catch up to Flash is a logical fallacy given history of technology.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#98

Post by mbq »

mike-cardwell wrote: post #41
mbq wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing Apple's achievements in pwn2own, this most likely won't increase the real security... Whatever you do, security always boils down to aware user, thus it is in fundamental contradiction to this company philosophy.

How can you possibly claim that this wont increase security?

Because it is like X-raying people coming through front door to check if they are hiding anything metal having opened and unsupervised kitchen door. Plumbers are banned, yet you can still be killed with a ceramic knife by a polite assassin or with metal pipe by a brutal crook.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#99

Post by anjc »

LaGrange wrote: post #89
statictype wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they will effectively kill off a huge number of professional services, especially in the media industry. Apple has already demonstrated several times over that the professional market isn't really of much interest to them anymore. Witness the disaster of Final Cut Pro X and the gradual phasing out of the Mac Pro hardware line. Apple's focus is squarely on the consumer market. Though it may seem unlikely today that th…

I wouldn't expect Apple to care about any single specific professional niche (maybe except application developers), so keeping any sort of professional software in-house might be even a distraction. But Apple still depends on professionals-as-a-whole — once you add up graphic designers, architects, movie professionals and all others you get quite a lot of people who probably have enough money to buy fancy computers,…

Exactly. Anecdotally, probably everybody i know, who adopted Apple products, at some point mentioned audio engineering or graphic design or something similar as being a driving force to the adoption, as if they were going to be the next Vangelis/head of Pixar. People go where the cool people go, i can't imagine Apple giving that up too readily...

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#100

Post by artursapek »

ootachi wrote: post #90
dmbaggett wrote: post #48

This is all so well-played by Apple: evolve ever more locked down systems in seemingly consumer-friendly ways. Once consumers forget they can even install their own applications (except through the app store), OS X distribution will be just as heavily moderated by Apple as iOS distribution. Expect Apple, Microsoft, and Google to exert ever more control over distribution. The software industry is evolving into the "st…

"Will users forget they can just type a URL in, and instead install everything through their friendly neighborhood web app store? (Don't laugh.)" Who's laughing? All but two of the Web browser manufacturers (Opera and Mozilla, both of which are losing market share) seem to have vested interests in doing exactly this.

This reminds me of Steve demoing the first iPhone, when he pulled out the numpad in the Phone app and called dialing a number "real last-century."

I think soon we will all have the bookmarked websites we regularly visit as browser-apps (contacts, if you will) with most of the rest being taken care of by hyperlinks, and once in a while one will have to pull out the URL bar to actually type an address in manually.

Post reply on HN