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

61–70 of 200 posts

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#61

Post by brudgers »

saturdaysaint wrote: post #50

This article mostly seems to ignore the fact that you can still distribute apps outside of the App Store. In fact, considering the falling costs of hosting and easy access to marketing tools (look at the quality of the website for any Mac App), it's probably never been easier. For pro apps with dedicated audiences (see: Adobe, Ableton, Avid, Nuance) which is just about anything with a plugin architecture, the App Sto…

>"For pro apps with dedicated audiences (see: Adobe, Ableton, Avid, Nuance) which is just about anything with a plugin architecture, the App Store's distribution is unnecessary."

It is true that inn terms of dedicated (aka existing) audiences or customers, access to is probably still unnecessary, however it is clearly a disadvantage when it comes to generating new users or providing upgrades to existing users.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#62

Post by nimrody »

saturdaysaint wrote: post #50

This article mostly seems to ignore the fact that you can still distribute apps outside of the App Store. In fact, considering the falling costs of hosting and easy access to marketing tools (look at the quality of the website for any Mac App), it's probably never been easier. For pro apps with dedicated audiences (see: Adobe, Ableton, Avid, Nuance) which is just about anything with a plugin architecture, the App Sto…

Apple may eventually disable loading of executables which are not cryptographically signed.

At this point, you'll have to resort to kernel patches to bypass that mechanism and load non-authorized applications.

Hopefully, Apple will leave a way to disable code verification. At least for advanced users.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#63

Post by DrJokepu »

nknight wrote: post #7

I can think of only two GUI apps I semi-regularly use that can't fit within those restrictions: VMware Fusion, and Steam. Plugins are a red herring. Some poorly-designed plugin infrastructures will not be workable, boo-hoo. Valid use cases can be accommodated with proper message passing. Maybe we'll finally get applications that don't crash horribly because of buggy plug-ins?

Xcode, Firefox, Safari, Google Chrome, VLC Player, Dropbox, BBEdit, TextMate, StuffIt, UnRarX. These are all well-known OS X applications, all of them having important features that require being able to open an arbitrary file without user interaction.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#65

Post by mmcconnell1618 »

buro9 wrote: post #8
masklinn wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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' I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well, at least for Metro/WinRT. I know Miguel de Icaza also hopes for broad sandboxing support by default. Regarding TFA, he does not make much of a case against sandboxing (applications not being a…

> I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well It already does to some extent. Internet Explorer was the first to introduce it (to my now out of date understanding), and it's since expanded to other products including shipped Windows apps, Office, etc. It happens invisibly for the developer, if you think the registry that you access is THE registry then you're wrong. It's a proxy that you…

Actually, Windows 8 apps are sandboxed too. Take a look at the Microsoft requirements to distribute a new Metro-Style app through their own app store. Same sandboxed requirements. Microsoft must approve and developers must justify any access to resources outside the standard sandbox set.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#66

Post by grillz »

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…

I think the part that bothers me is that this is going into place after many people, including myself, have started buying most apps in the App Store. It is insanely convenient to have all my apps and licenses in one place. New computer? Open the App Store and you're done.

If I had known that Apple would move towards a sandbox model that breaks tools I use everyday, like Transmit and Coda (Viewing file tree etc.), I would have kept my license with Panic. What happens when a Transmit bug fix comes out and it no longer appears in the App Store? A whole new purchase most likely.

Steve himself had called Macs our "trucks", with iOS device being cars. Not everyone needs a truck, but for those of us who do I am getting a little worried about the direction they're moving.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#67

Post by glassx »

statictype wrote: post #59
marquis wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this happens they will effectively kill off a huge number of professional services, especially in the media industry. I'm not looking forward to a future where I have to look to Windows or Unix as my main development platform.

they will effectively kill off a huge number of professional services, especially in the media industry. Apple has already demonstrated several times over that the professional market isn't really of much interest to them anymore. Witness the disaster of Final Cut Pro X and the gradual phasing out of the Mac Pro hardware line. Apple's focus is squarely on the consumer market. Though it may seem unlikely today that th…

"Witness the disaster of Final Cut Pro X"

But they responded to that by putting Final Cut Pro 7 back on the market. Sounds like they care a lot...

Hanlon Razor makes sense here.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#68

Post by feralchimp »

"If you choose not to sandbox your app now or to use a temporary exception entitlement, use Apple’s bug reporting system to let Apple know about the issue you are encountering. Apple considers feature requests as it develops the Mac OS X platform."

So everyone with grave concerns about sandboxing is filing Radars, right?

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#69

Post by guygurari »

statictype wrote: post #59
marquis wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this happens they will effectively kill off a huge number of professional services, especially in the media industry. I'm not looking forward to a future where I have to look to Windows or Unix as my main development platform.

they will effectively kill off a huge number of professional services, especially in the media industry. Apple has already demonstrated several times over that the professional market isn't really of much interest to them anymore. Witness the disaster of Final Cut Pro X and the gradual phasing out of the Mac Pro hardware line. Apple's focus is squarely on the consumer market. Though it may seem unlikely today that th…

> Apple has already demonstrated several times over that the professional market isn't really of much interest to them anymore.

There is one group of professionals Apple cannot do without: developers. One of the main appeals of both iOS and the Mac is the availability of exclusive, high-quality apps. I expect that limiting all app distribution to the Mac App Store will send developers running to other platforms. A platform without developers is an empty shell, and Apple knows this.

Re: Why the Mac App Sandbox makes me sad

#70

Post by kstenerud »

One problem with sandboxing is that it stifles innovation.

Many of the innovations in computers (dynamic libraries, drivers, plugins, screen grabbing, password managers, etc) came from being able to do anything on your computer. Once the sandbox lockdown is complete, you won't be able to invent new techniques that require entitlements the gatekeeper hasn't thought of already.

The sandbox marks the end of the open system. Protecting users from malware is a noble goal, but I don't see sandboxing as an effective enough tool to justify the loss of freedom. iOS is still to this day being compromised with ease despite its massively locked-down design, and I don't see the cat-and-mouse game ending any time soon. In fact, the malware danger from email and web pages is FAR higher than that from shady apps.

The motivation for the app store is purely financial, of course, which means that over the coming years it's in their interests to command as much control as possible, even to the point of eliminating unsigned apps altogether once the app store ecosystem is mature enough (plus it will allow them to finally kill Flash off all Apple platforms for good, as well as hobble all competing browsers, and, well, pretty much any software they decide to compete with). I don't see this scenario playing out well.

Post reply on HN