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

macOS Sonoma is available today

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 691 posts

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#451

Post by baz00 »

reacharavindh wrote: post #441
amatecha wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting, I've been using OpenBSD for the past couple years and it has _not once_ enraged me the way Windows and Mac do. I still use Windows for work, and own a ton of Macs (probably getting close to ~30 by now), but OpenBSD is the OS I use for most general computing stuff. I mean, I'm using a GUI that is really primitive by comparison to Win/Mac (i3wm) but it's actually great. Extremely fast, efficient, and…

I love OpenBSD…… as a server particularly as a DNS or a network gateway with pf as a firewall. But, I cannot fathom how using OpenBSD on a Desktop/Laptop for personal computing would NoT enrage me everyday. The things I’d do on my personal computer : 1. Browse all bloated modern websites using a modern web browser - Firefox 2. Work with photos(personal) - edit them, crop them to share with someone, markup screenshots…

I haven't touched OpenBSD for a few years if I'm honest but one of the things that did not enrage me about it was that it didn't nag me to change anything once I'd got it working properly. I suspect that's part of it. There is a clear separation of OS and applications. Regarding all the other stuff I remember it mostly just worked. But of course that is within the realms of the particular package actually working in the first place, which is variable probability.

As for myself I got lazy and just use Windows 10. It doesn't enrage me if you turn off all the cloud shit, treat it like a file manager/window manager shell and run all your open source stuff on it. Again that works because there's a clear separation of OS and applications.

When you start mixing the two (hello Linux) it's where you get problems. I think snaps were an attempt to solve some of that (badly).

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#452

Post by lynx23 »

aeyes wrote: post #341
bombcar wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow on migrating to a new iPhone the music app decided it needed full notification permissions, apparently because a new Taylor swift album is of the same notification level as an incoming missile strike. At least it’s easy enough to turn off.

At least they didn't "gift" you the album like they did with U2

Oh yeah, esp. funny if you always hated U2, and suddenly it appears in the middle of your music collection. Same with "Alone at home", not quite my taste.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#453

Post by flumpcakes »

I'm very glad they've fixed the performance issue with stage manager.

Before macOS Sonoma using mission control while having stage manager enabled would be very choppy. This seems to have been resolved and now I can finally use stage manager on macOS.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#454

Post by pxc »

bshacklett wrote: post #240
n8henrie wrote: post #197

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.

My issue with Nix is that you are forced to install packages in a global location. Why is it that every package manager assumes I’m an administrator on my machine? Even if I am, how does it make sense to take over a global directory as a single user?

Nix leverages hardcoded paths inside the binaries and other outputs it builds in order to ensure determinacy. Nix packages are not always trivially relocatable. Consequently, reliance on the binary caches means different users have to rely on the same path to the Nix store, since it's part of all those outputs.

You can build Nix with a custom store prefix and run it that way if you're willing to build from source.

In practice, Linux users don't really have to contend with that tradeoff because you can relocate a Nix store wholesale using a bind mount, or a user namespace (unprivileged chroot), or various fakeroot tricks to run a Nix store in your homedir as if it lives in /nix. Unfortunately macOS just doesn't have any of those mechanisms.

If macOS some day gets first-class container support and, consequently, relevant user-facing primitives for user-mode chroot, then unprivileged, cache-friendly Nix installation methods for macOS will doubtless follow. I hope both happen!

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#455

Post by prmoustache »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #416
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched to it because it worked much better out of the box and required next to no fiddle-fucking to install tools I need, so I can spend my time doing what I'm actually paid for, and good at. I have no idea whether the alternatives improved in the intervening 10-ish years, any I have no good reason to look into it since homebrew still works.

That's great until homebrew breaks in some fucked up way (which a few years ago it used to do often), or they break a package (ditto) and you try to report that to them, and they act like insufferable little shits back (and don't fix the problem.) It reminds me of my boss emailing gnu.org to tell them one of their mirrors was down and got a nastygram back that said "It's spelled GNU/Linux" and the mirror went unfixed…

> and the mirror went unfixed.

They don't maintain the mirrors themselves. These are maintained by third party who decide to hosts the mirrors so there is that.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#456

Post by eviks »

astrange wrote: post #213
cglong wrote: 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…

Once again a good time to remember that there were multiple perfectly good package managers available when Homebrew was invented, they were more future-proof (by eg not putting files in /usr/local), and everyone only switched to it because for some reason Ruby programmers wanted all of their tools to be written in Ruby (and possibly by people with waxed mustaches.)

That's a false trip down the memory lane, nothing was "perfectly good" back then, arguably even now there are big issues with all the package managers

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#457

Post by eviks »

pedalpete wrote: post #249

Does anyone else have no idea what macOS version is which? Which came first? Is there some hidden naming protocol that I just don't grasp? I've only started using a mac part-time while I've been developing an iOS app over the past few weeks, and I keep seeing different names for the OS version. I have no idea what version I'm on, or if Big Sur came before Sierra, or what. I know I could look it up, but it seems that…

Instead of sorting by alphabet there's a pretty good thing called time, so adding the last two digits of the release year would solve the issue

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#458

Post by pxc »

astrange wrote: post #213
cglong wrote: 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…

Once again a good time to remember that there were multiple perfectly good package managers available when Homebrew was invented, they were more future-proof (by eg not putting files in /usr/local), and everyone only switched to it because for some reason Ruby programmers wanted all of their tools to be written in Ruby (and possibly by people with waxed mustaches.)

I'm sure some Ruby programmers were attracted to Homebrew because it felt more familiar than something written in a language like Tcl.

But Homebrew's fundamental tradeoff w/r/t purity was also a huge boost to installation speed at a time when most package managers for macOS still required you to build most things from source.

That and the slick, user-friendly UI were probably the biggest factors for Homebrew's success when it came out.

Re: macOS Sonoma is available today

#460

Post by pxc »

jcelerier wrote: post #231
headwayoldest wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately users will go where the package maintainers are. There are more people out there willing and able to write Ruby today than Perl (Fink) or TCL (MacPorts). I'm sure someone will start a macOS package manager based on python and yum to signal the waning days of those technologies.

I'm secretly hoping for a makepkg / pacman-based replacement to homebrew, to have the same set of commands and package naming conventions across mac / win / linux

There was one, and you can find it here: https://github.com/orgs/archmac/repositories

But it is unmaintained (it seems its author has moved on to Nix).

Post reply on HN