101–110 of 185 posts
Was a bit disappointed when I found out they don't have any education/academic discount beyond education bulk purchasing. Looks pretty cool though.
Maybe in the future, if it goes well, the developer might consider selling outside the Mac App Store, and this have more flexibility. I have no knowledge of his plans on that matte,r though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet. First it was a setting in the preference panel, preventing you from installing non-MAS apps without disabling it. Next it's the upcoming rootless OS X, System Integrity Protection: it's only a matter of time until the ability to install non-MAS apps is completely removed, buried, or hidden in Recovery mode (as the SIP setting is) I suspect this will happen within the next one or two major versions of OS X.
This setting in Preference Panel is opt-in, not opt-out. Default behaviour does not reject non-MAS apps. Most likely a security setting for companies or restricted environments. The rest is pure speculation.
The SIP setting is most certainly "opt-out." Have you demoed El Capitan?
The Preferences -> Security -> Allow non-MAS/non-signed apps setting is most certainly "opt-out" on any machine you buy from Apple or at the store.
Prefacing something with "I suspect" generally allows one to speculate.
The trend is that you're gradually losing control of your machine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Integrity_Protection
Which is completely pointless. If a hacker wants to hack your system, the very last thing they want to do is destroy your OS. Who cares about the OS, it's just one re-install away and you got it back. If a hacker were to hack into your system they would want your data, your passwords, your bank account details etc. Or they would want to use your system to do illegal things that look like you did it. It's in the best…
I'm just glad there's a nice binary of GHC available to download from somewhere. I'm running 10.11, and I had to compile GHC from source (homebrew) on my MacBook air in order to install youtube-dl with rtmpdump support. It took literally all night to compile. Hours and hours and hours.
I would like to see some demo version, as 20€ is a bit too much to drop. Looks cool, lots of inspiration from swift playgrounds. Though, aren't there any open source alternatives (I have never tried haskell), probably similar to ipython (jupyter) stack?
I know this is a statement of where the market is going, but boy is it depressing to see people saying that 20 Euros is too much to drop on a piece of software.
Was a bit disappointed when I found out they don't have any education/academic discount beyond education bulk purchasing. Looks pretty cool though.
It's sold through the Mac App Store only right now, so it's limited to what the Mac App Store allows, unfortunately. Maybe in the future, if it goes well, the developer might consider selling outside the Mac App Store, and this have more flexibility. I have no knowledge of his plans on that matte,r though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it’s required. Only some apps are exempt from sandboxing because they existed before sandboxing was introduced. You can also reach out of the sandbox through some user actions, for example opening a file using the system file picker gives you permissions to access this file. Yes, it’s a big constraint. For some apps it’s a show-stopper. As user I mostly welcome it because of the additional protection it gets me.
Apart from that it doesn't get you any additional protection whatsoever. With all the root OS X exploits floating around that bust you out of the sandbox as well as giving you full system access, as someone that has several utilities on the Mac App Store, it would be trivial to put an app there that gets set off by a timer, exploits root, and wreaks havoc. Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=os+x+root+exploit&gws…
And yet we do those things anyway. The idea is defense in depth, such that if one mechanism fails then hopefully another will mitigate the damage. Sandboxing isn't perfect, but it's another layer of security and I'd rather have it than not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your installation would appear to be anomalous, as such reversion of that (or indeed, any) preference isn't the norm.
It wasn't the norm in the past, but that has changed. For those whose memory goes back to the pre-X MacOS, there has been a decline in “respecting your user's decisions” and an increase in inconsistencies. Progress in some areas has definitely cost quality in others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is completely pointless. If a hacker wants to hack your system, the very last thing they want to do is destroy your OS. Who cares about the OS, it's just one re-install away and you got it back. If a hacker were to hack into your system they would want your data, your passwords, your bank account details etc. Or they would want to use your system to do illegal things that look like you did it. It's in the best…
The point of rootless (SIP) is to prevent malware from being able to embed itself into the system such that it's difficult or impossible to remove. And it's also a completely different technology than sandboxing.