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

MacOS High Sierra

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 630 posts

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#301

Post by systoll »

agildehaus wrote: post #29
mullsork wrote: post #7

Sort of off topic but what has happened to the web design team at Apple? Their landing pages used to be extremely pleasant to read but by now I often struggle to read their headlines. The blurred background with text on top is not easy on my eyes at all. Perhaps my eyes are starting to go bad... Their page for the new iPhone had the same issues. In my opinion their web designs has gone down hill this year.

Plus there's obvious rendering problems with the site's nav on Chrome. Made obvious when you click that little bag icon at the very right of the nav. I'm convinced they don't bother to visit the site on anything but Safari anymore.

That only affects people with 'experimental web platform features' turned on in chrome://flags.

Apple is using 'backdrop-filter' in its CSS. Safari's the only browser to support it ATM, but it degrades gracefully. If you have that flag set, though, chrome lets you see their half-finished implementation.

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#302

Post by lee »

fairview14 wrote: post #299

> Apple File System. > Your data is under new management. Ok, should I expect it now finally to be case sensitive? Or is that still science fiction for MacOS?

Case sensitivity does already exist, it's just turned off by default.

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#303

Post by kiliankoe »

fairview14 wrote: post #299

> Apple File System. > Your data is under new management. Ok, should I expect it now finally to be case sensitive? Or is that still science fiction for MacOS?

Apfs ist case-insensitive by default, probably due to legacy reasons.

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#304

Post by pohl »

falsedan wrote: post #73
gmac wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding was that recent versions of Mac OS have an upgrade process that works a bit like this anyway — i.e., behind the scenes it's doing a fresh install, then copying your files back across. But I could be wrong.

> behind the scenes it's doing a fresh install, then copying your files back across Are you thinking of the reformatting to APFS? That's kind of done like this. Aside from this, the OS upgrade is the same as it always is: install the new system-level packages over the existing files & reboot.

The migration from HFS to APFS does not move your files at all. It leaves the files exactly where they are on the disk. Instead of moving the files, it writes new the new APFS metadata onto unused areas of your disk. When it's done with that, it changes the superblock header to point to the new APFS metadata. Then it marks the old HFS metadata as blank space. Your files are not moved or copied.

By doing it this way, they make the dangerous part of the process as small as possible. They actually did a dry-run to collect success/failure metrics before APFS was released to iOS devices:

https://www.macobserver.com/analysis/apple-dry-run-apfs-prio...

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#305

Post by deong »

tomsmeding wrote: post #255
mcv wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, Apple has been pushing me in a direction I don't want to go with their recent OS X versions. I paid a lot of money for my mackbook and was quite happy with Lion, but was recently forced to upgrade because apparently Lion is way too out of date. So now I'm on Sierra, and I absolutely hate it. I thought it'd mostly just be uglier, but it bugs me with updates I don't want or need but am not allowed to ignore. A…

Which notifications are you talking about? I have no such experience using Sierra.

"Hey, have you tried Safari? It's pretty great. Why don't you give it a try?"

"Umm, hey there...me again. You still haven't tried Safari? What's wrong? Want me to launch it for you?"

"Ok, this is getting a little awkward. We worked pretty hard making Safari, and you won't even try it? I'm trying to not be insulted here, but you're not making it easy."

"Listen motherfucker. You know that Keychain thing that you don't really pay much attention to. Well, I control that. If you want to see your Gmail password again, try motherfucking Safari. Clicky clicky, you lazy fuck."

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#306

Post by rahoulb »

gradstudent wrote: post #81
petercooper wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest change I’m hoping for (but not expecting) is the ability to sort shared iCloud albums by time taken, not time added to the album. This isn't a criticism of you, but when a major OS update comes down to trivia like this, it seems a bit of a shame to me. I remember the 10.2-10.6 releases and just how significant they were and it feels like rearranging deck chairs in comparison nowadays.

I remember the first time I saw Spotlight. It was magic. Then came Expose. Wireless that worked. Sleep that worked. Trivial configuration of things like sshd, apache and samba. Amazing days. Lately I only upgrade when forced. I ran 10.8 until earlier this year when I finally upgraded my machine. Then I spent a week trying to figure out how the hell to get gdb working again because binaries now require code signing an…

Use Ctrl-C instead of Esc - you don't even have to move your hands off the home position

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#307

Post by falsedan »

pohl wrote: post #304
falsedan wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> behind the scenes it's doing a fresh install, then copying your files back across Are you thinking of the reformatting to APFS? That's kind of done like this. Aside from this, the OS upgrade is the same as it always is: install the new system-level packages over the existing files & reboot.

The migration from HFS to APFS does not move your files at all. It leaves the files exactly where they are on the disk. Instead of moving the files, it writes new the new APFS metadata onto unused areas of your disk. When it's done with that, it changes the superblock header to point to the new APFS metadata. Then it marks the old HFS metadata as blank space. Your files are not moved or copied. By doing it this way,…

> Your files are not moved or copied.

:extremely pedantic voice: ITYM your data is not moved. Your inodes are.

:normal voice: thank you for taking the time to explain clearly this in more detail.

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#308

Post by kazagistar »

allenbrunson wrote: post #204
smcleod wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, American dates are confusing and illogical at the best of times, I wish America would standardise on the international ascending order date style of 25/09/2017.

argh! i can't believe people are still arguing about whether we should do MM/DD/YYY or DD/MM/YYYY or anything similar to that. here's how you should write a date that you are going to show to a user: Jan 11 2016 if you accept that premise, it doesn't matter (much) what order you put the elements in, because none of them can be confused with any other. a word is a month, a one- or two-digit number is the day of the mo…

That sounds a lot harder to localize, if local month names have different abbreviations.

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#309

Post by phamilton »

wiredfool wrote: post #219
petercooper wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest change I’m hoping for (but not expecting) is the ability to sort shared iCloud albums by time taken, not time added to the album. This isn't a criticism of you, but when a major OS update comes down to trivia like this, it seems a bit of a shame to me. I remember the 10.2-10.6 releases and just how significant they were and it feels like rearranging deck chairs in comparison nowadays.

Snow Leopard was a boring release, but a very nice OS. This release feels like it might be similar.

Snow Leopard freed up something like 12 GB of space. I was impressed.

Re: MacOS High Sierra

#310

Post by kiliankoe »

aneidon wrote: post #39

The biggest change I’m hoping for (but not expecting) is the ability to sort shared iCloud albums by time taken, not time added to the album. Currently they’re all but useless for something like a shared album from a vacation, because it groups photos by when family members upload them. I tend to upload photos at the end of each day, but other family members who were shooting on a normal camera waited until the end o…

I submitted a radar for this last year or the one before, it was closed as a dupe, so there's at least two people Apple knows that want this feature^^
Post reply on HN