4 ms·

That's not an insurmountable problem though, and sandboxed environments are getting better in this regard. E.g., it is now possible in iOS to launch one applica

That's not an insurmountable problem though, and sandboxed environments are getting better in this regard. E.g., it is now possible in iOS to launch one application from another which edits the source document directly — not a copy. That said, the notion of a file system isn't inherently incompatible with sandboxing. If you allow the user to grant permission on a per-app basis whether those apps can read/write to a common data store, you essentially have the benefits of a local file system in a way that does not break sandboxing. You only want to sandbox apps to keep them from touching the OS and other private app data. If it is user-permitted for them to touch a common data store then that means data does not always have to stay within the app in which it was created.

TeMPOraL 11y ago
Fair, but I also want to grant sandbox apps to touch the OS and other private app data. The way how on desktop I can use Emacs to edit /etc/hosts, or MS Paint to change some other program's splash screen.
- interpol_p 11y ago
  Well that defeats the purpose of a sandbox. A sandbox is specifically to disallow apps from touching OS or private data. But there's no reason such apps can't live side-by-side. I use Emacs to edit my hosts file, it's pretty convenient. A sandboxed Emacs would not be. But I don't mind if the painting app I download is sandboxed because I'm going to be dragging-and-dropping my artwork into that program and I don't want it having access to my disk or network outside its sandbox.
- geofft 11y ago
  There are methods for solving that, like powerboxes: http://plash.beasts.org/powerbox.html http://plash.beasts.org/powerbox.html I believe that Apple's desktop sandbox does use powerboxes, in that the Open dialog is privileged code and hands the app an open file handle. But it means that you can't tell Emacs to edit an entire source code directory. BBEdit had exactly this complaint about the sandbox.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

Fair, but I also want to grant sandbox apps to touch the OS and other private app data. The way how on desktop I can use Emacs to edit /etc/hosts, or MS Paint to change some other program's splash screen.

interpol_p 11y ago
Well that defeats the purpose of a sandbox. A sandbox is specifically to disallow apps from touching OS or private data. But there's no reason such apps can't live side-by-side. I use Emacs to edit my hosts file, it's pretty convenient. A sandboxed Emacs would not be. But I don't mind if the painting app I download is sandboxed because I'm going to be dragging-and-dropping my artwork into that program and I don't want it having access to my disk or network outside its sandbox.
geofft 11y ago
There are methods for solving that, like powerboxes: http://plash.beasts.org/powerbox.html http://plash.beasts.org/powerbox.html I believe that Apple's desktop sandbox does use powerboxes, in that the Open dialog is privileged code and hands the app an open file handle. But it means that you can't tell Emacs to edit an entire source code directory. BBEdit had exactly this complaint about the sandbox.