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

31–40 of 200 posts

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#31

Post by lisperforlife »

Angostura wrote: post #20
statictype wrote: post #3

This would worry me if there weren't at least two other major Operating Systems available to choose from. The Mac is moving more towards simplicity and safety - targeting normal consumers. That's fine. Ironically, now Linux and Windows (and anything else that comes up down the line) will have to serve as the 'Computer for the rest of us'

This would worry me if the AppStore were the only way to get aplications on to your Mac. I can see it being very disapointing for developers who enjoyed the convenience of the AppStore, but need additional functions. But I guess they will have to sell ex-Store I can also see the benefit of Apple being able to say that 'Anything you buy on the Store is safe(tm)'. However if Apple every makes teh Appstore a compulsory…

The same here. I do not think I would use a Mac OSX if they said that app store was the only way to get software.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#32

Post by shareme »

dlikhten wrote: post #22
nhaehnle wrote: post #2

In general, this type of sandbox is a Good Thing. I would love to live in a world where the default environment for any program is a very limited sandbox that can only interact with the outside world via standardized UI elements. That is, outside a data store specific to the application, it can only access files via the standard dialogs, and so forth. The potential for malware distribution would be significantly redu…

Sandboxing is great since less and less control is in the hands of the app. I am sure apple will keep rolling out features expanding sandboxing, this is just the default impl. This also means that basically it will be harder and harder for apps to be malware in an already hostile system. I wish android had this. Android needs this much more than iOS.

android does have it.. each Dlavik VM instance is its own sandbox

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#33

Post by dubya »

I'm a bit wary of this, but it really does seem like a decent model for most things in the App store. It's pretty clear there needs to be some exception mechanism, since Xcode and Lion won't run in a sandbox, but there were already restrictions. TextWrangler in particular removed some functionality in its App store version. And things like TeXLive and the Haskell Platform and most other developer tools never appeared in the app store.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#34

Post by keeperofdakeys »

mevodig wrote: post #9

Ultimately, for me, this is about creating a reasonable user experience for the majority of users. While it's easy to forget this when spending a lot of time in forums such as HN, _we_ are not that majority. This constant expectation that platforms used everyday by millions of people should be tailored to us is untenable.

You know what, you are a user too. The platform should perform well for everybody, not just the majority. This is what makes me feel Unity and Gnome Shell aren't the best way to go, not just simplifying, but totally removing configurability. There is a central ground, where an interface can be learn-able by a normal user, and not inhibit power users.

The thing with OSX appstore sandbox isn't that it hurts power users, it hurts the majority. It limits what developers can make applications do, preventing many types of applications that users would expect to be possible. Sandboxing itself isn't bad, it is just this implementation that is bad.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#35

Post by darren_ »

duncanwilcox wrote: post #28

The Sandbox makes me sad. Remove exploits of a single poorly written app spreading to the rest of my Mac and taking over make me sadder.

It's not even 'poorly written', it's nearly every non-trivial C/C++ app, over a long enough time, turns out to have _something_ exploitable in it.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#36

Post by dogfu »

darren_ wrote: post #35
duncanwilcox wrote: post #28

The Sandbox makes me sad. Remove exploits of a single poorly written app spreading to the rest of my Mac and taking over make me sadder.

It's not even 'poorly written', it's nearly every non-trivial C/C++ app, over a long enough time, turns out to have _something_ exploitable in it.

sigh

Does that include the sandbox itself, which was written in C?

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#37

Post by podperson »

I don't think he mentions that every app has full access to its own "container". Plugins, per we, are already not possible via the app store, but it's early days yet, and I think the author needs to understand that apple will adapt to user requirements.

Comparing a software security model's trade offs between flexibility, user safety, and developer convenience with being a sharecropper is just another example of hysterical Godwinism.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#38

Post by robterrell »

statictype wrote: post #3

This would worry me if there weren't at least two other major Operating Systems available to choose from. The Mac is moving more towards simplicity and safety - targeting normal consumers. That's fine. Ironically, now Linux and Windows (and anything else that comes up down the line) will have to serve as the 'Computer for the rest of us'

Ironically, you got it backwards. You're "us". Whereas "the rest of us" = non-computer experts, anyone who prefers simplicity and safety. That crowd has always been the Mac's bread and butter.

When we see signs that Apple will block software installation outside the App Store, then I'll grab a pitchfork. Until then, I think this is good for most users.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#39

Post by beedogs »

nknight wrote: post #25
cageface wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AudioUnit plugins have strict realtime requirements that won't work with message passing too. If Apple disallows plugins that will be the end of the Mac as a pro audio platform. Not that a lot of plugin developers would mind so much after the insane platform churn at Cupertino in this last decade, but it's hard for me to imagine Apple would go that far.

"strict realtime requirements" and Mac OS X (and most other off-the-shelf operating systems) do not mix and never have. Either these applications don't belong on the platform in the first place, or you are misunderstanding their requirements. It doesn't matter anyway. What is it Apple has done recently to give you the impression that they place great importance on niche markets?

I think you're misunderstanding what they mean by "realtime".

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#40

Post by tjogin »

natesm wrote: post #15
tjogin wrote: post #6

We don't know that much about the Mac App Store sandboxing yet, it could be perfectly benign. This is mostly a bunch of conjuring of ominous fantasies.

It's been available since Lion, my app uses it. We know everything about it technically . However, we know nothing about how Apple is going to handle exceptions and what will get you rejected. An app that I'm sort of working on right now absolutely needs read access to the entire filesystem, and possible write access in the future, unless Apple makes technical changes in sandboxing (unlikely until 10.8, effectively u…

We know nothing of its future capabilities and limitations.
Post reply on HN