Live data from Hacker News

macOS Sonoma is available today

apple.com

321–330 of 691 posts

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#321
post #68

> The implementations of the exfat and msdos file systems on macOS have changed; these file systems are now provided by services running in user-space instead of by kernel extensions. This sounds interesting! I really wish there was a native FUSE alternative on macOS; just recently I found myself in a pickle due to not being able to mount an ext4 boot volume on an SD card on my Mac at all. (Passing through to a VM wo…

I wish they did something so deleting files from the bin wouldn't take millenia on my iMac Pro. Yes, it's an old computer, but shouldn't that be a solved problem?

This wasn’t slow for me unless I was deleting a node_modules folder or something with a gazillion files in it. Sounds like something’s weird on your not-that-old iMac Pro.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh oh, it's getting closer. Currently on MacOS 12 with my trusted 2015 Macbook Pro. It still goes strong, but looks like the next major release may see the end of homebrew for this one. There's really no issue with this computer other than 16gb of RAM being a bit tight when every modern app is using Electron. Oh well, see how we go.

Fedora mostly works out of the box on my 2015 MBP

How’s resolution scaling? I tried Fedora KDE and setting a scaled resolution didn’t do anything.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good ol' Windows Vista

We were doing similar things on the Mac back then by editing plist files :)

I remember creating widgets in windows 98 by setting my desktop wallpaper to a local webpage that had a full-screen background image and some dhtml for interactivity.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#324
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://nixos.org/download.html#nix-install-macos The homebrew team seems incredibly burnt-out, to the point of hostility. I've really enjoyed the nixpkgs community so far and encourage others to check it out; it hasn't replaced homebrew entirely for me (yet), but it's getting closer every day.

Yes, the Homebrew message does seem unnecessarily hostile. Not everyone can afford to buy a brand new computer every year.

I wish there were a macOS (and Homebrew) "extended support" edition with security patches for 10 years rather than 7.

Old Macs are often perfectly usable in terms of hardware, but macOS security updates have left them behind.

As of today, it's likely that the 2016 Mac I'm writing this on (which can run Monterey but not Ventura or Sonoma) is out of support.

Of course the Mac apocalypse will be when x86 support is dropped, possibly starting in the next macOS release.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#325

I used to love the in depth reviews of macOS from John Siracusa. They aren’t the same since then, but I still tend to look to Ars for a full review before upgrading. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/09/macos-14-sonoma-the-...

Since he has left his day job I was hoping he would start writing them again but that hasn't happened.

He has RSI, so most of those reviews were dictated into a microphone.

Nowadays, most of his microphone time goes into podcasts like https://atp.fm>, and he doesn’t have to worry about the voice recognition screwing up.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#326
post #318
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the Homebrew message does seem unnecessarily hostile. Not everyone can afford to buy a brand new computer every year.

This seems a little exaggerated? Macos 12 will run on most Macs from 2015 and later. 8 year old hardware isn't Earth shattering, but it's also not a "hostile" period of time for a non-commercial open source project to support. And it's certainly not "new hardware every year".

The "period of time" isn't what was hostile.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#327
post #62
post #4

For those curious, yes Apple did fix the Sonoma firewall bug reported by Mullvad. https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2023/9/22/macos-14-sonoma-firewa...

Yep, OrbStack's networking issue (similar PF bug) was also fixed in RC 2.

What about the dynamic memory allocation bug?

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#328

Update: simscitizen has confirmed below that 1Password 7 still works in Sonoma. This will be the first macOS upgrade I won’t be doing for a while. I’d like to try it out, but I need to figure out how to migrate off of 1Password 7 (standalone) first or to make sure it still works with Sonoma. (Edit: I'm expecting that 1Password 7 will break with the new OS and make me convert to their subscription product.)

Which features lacking from the passwords system in Sonoma keeps you in 1Password?

Cross platform support (with Android)

I should add I'm quite impressed Apple implemented import/export. It's not something I expected them to officially support.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#329
post #188

So it goes... Warning: You are using macOS 11. We (and Apple) do not provide support for this old version. It is expected behaviour that some formulae will fail to build in this old version. It is expected behaviour that Homebrew will be buggy and slow. Do not create any issues about this on Homebrew's GitHub repositories. Do not create any issues even if you think this message is unrelated. Any opened issues will be…

https://nixos.org/download.html#nix-install-macos The homebrew team seems incredibly burnt-out, to the point of hostility. I've really enjoyed the nixpkgs community so far and encourage others to check it out; it hasn't replaced homebrew entirely for me (yet), but it's getting closer every day.

[deleted]

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says the in the "About This Mac" Apple menu item. In this case, it will be Sonoma 14.0. Historically versioning is weird due to the integration of NextSTEP after Job's return to the company. First it was versioned up to 9, then the NextSTEP integration was 10, then subsequent major releases were minor bumps (ie 10.1, 10.2) as OSX was a brand unto itself until 11 which rebranded to MacOS and full versions were used…

I went to the wikipedia page, which is kinda the point. No other OS requires you too look it up. Even WatchOS and iOS directly use version numbers. Saying it's due to NextStep integration sounds like a strange defense of this naming strategy (if that was your intention). They have version numbers, but they decide to use the "code name" as a product name.

Have you been following Windows 10/11 versions? macOS’ naming scheme is a breeze in comparison.
Post reply on HN