4 ms·

> If Apple ever decided to change mac os x to no longer allow external applications, I would switch to Linux right away. Even if that did happen, which it woul

> If Apple ever decided to change mac os x to no longer allow external applications, I would switch to Linux right away. Even if that did happen, which it wouldn't, what would stop you from compiling the application yourself, theoretically? If Apple computers allow for compilation of their own software, which they probably always will given that a Mac is the only way you can make OS X or iOS apps at this time, then OS X will never get to a point like the iPad wherein you are very limited in what you can do.

eveningcoffee 11y ago
What if they restrict running compilers? Edit: I see from down votes that people disagree with this idea (no problem with that). Still, why not? You need a developer licence for iOS that effectively means that you are restricted to run compilers on iOS. Why not extend it to OSX?
- SneakerXZ 11y ago
  Because you would lose your customers. If my operating system limits me from doing things that I can do on other platforms and I want to do them, I will simply not use the system. Are you realizing Mac is used also by creative people that use Adobe tools, tools for 3D and so on and if everything was sandboxed you couldn't do it anymore.
  - djloche 11y ago
    Apple's core customers are iPhone and iPad customers now. They realized that catering to consumer electronics customers is far more profitable than catering to pc power users, and adjusted everything to fit the profit model that makes them the most money. At times, I wish they had spun off Apple Computer as a separate entity with OS X so that the computer division wouldn't have to sit and play fourth seat to the rest of the business.
    - SneakerXZ 11y ago
      They sell a lot of Macs http://9to5mac.com/2015/10/27/apple-earnings-fy15-q3-2/ http://9to5mac.com/2015/10/27/apple-earnings-fy15-q3-2/ Killing that segment would be silly from them.
      - djloche 11y ago
        It is silly, yet Apple continues to do things that are hostile to power users.
  - jkestner 11y ago
    To reply to sibling: Apple has never catered to PC power users, going back to Jobs arguing against slots in the Apple ][ and getting his way in the first Mac. That a Mac user at all is now considered a power user indicates which way the wind is blowing. Apple's pointed in the right direction. Given that the PC is an increasingly obsolete platform for most people, I don't think Apple's going to expend a lot of energy changing the status quo one way or another. Its style is to start over from scratch.
    - SneakerXZ 11y ago
      Their ecosystem is powered by power users, who do you think is creating apps, games, design, books, videos and so on? If Apple forces to move these users out, they will probably focus on other platforms where they are not so restricted.
  - eveningcoffee 11y ago
    Are you realizing Mac is used also by creative people that use Adobe tools, tools for 3D and so on. I.e. not programmers but users of software from big software companies. and if everything was sandboxed you couldn't do it anymore. Yes, you could not run arbitrary programs and Apple may see it as a feature. You seem to be in big denial as it would be horrible thing to happen. I still see this as very likely possibility.
    - SneakerXZ 11y ago
      Of course, it is a horrible thing to happen. Just to give you some apps from my dock. Chrome, Spotify, Outlook, HipChat, Viber, Skype, SourceTree, Atom, Sketch, Dropbox. All these would be not be usable because they are not sandboxed. Basically I would have to install Windows on my Macbook and I would virtualize Mac OS X so I can use Xcode and I would use Windows for everything else. It would be suicide for Mac OS X and if you think Apple is so stupid to do it, okay then...
      - eveningcoffee 11y ago
        SourceTree, Atom are not needed by an Apple usual user. Others are Apple competitors. It would be suicide for Mac OS X and if you think Apple is so stupid to do it, okay then... They dried to get rid of Google Maps on iOS.
        SneakerXZ 11y ago
        What would they gain at the end? I would leave their system and also many others. Thinking people would switch just to Apple products is naive.
        eveningcoffee 11y ago
        What would they gain at the end? Control and from there perhaps more money. I would leave their system and also many others. Yes, but what if there are only about 100k of such people?
lmm 11y ago
Maybe you'll only be able to run your own software after getting an expensive code signing certificate and going through an identity verification process. Or it'll be like games consoles, with the "dev" versions being different from the retail ones.
- oddevan 11y ago
  They're actually moving in the opposite direction. With iOS 9, you no longer need an expensive code signing certificate to load your own software onto an iPhone.
mikeash 11y ago
You can compile software for iOS too. If you consider this to be an adequate escape hatch for the Mac, then it must also be one for iOS. If OS X "will never get to a point like the iPad" then the iPad can't get to that point either!
- squeaky-clean 11y ago
  But you can't compile software for iOS on iOS, can you? You'd need an iPad + Mac to compile the software. You don't need {{external machine with different OS}} + Mac to compile OSX software.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    That is true, so we could limit it to "if you own a Mac" then the iPad is not limited. But basically nobody actually bothers to work around the limitations in this way, aside from recent events surrounding f.lux.
rmc 11y ago
> what would stop you from compiling the application yourself, theoretically? What do you do about third party closed source Mac software?

eveningcoffee 11y ago

What if they restrict running compilers? Edit: I see from down votes that people disagree with this idea (no problem with that). Still, why not? You need a developer licence for iOS that effectively means that you are restricted to run compilers on iOS. Why not extend it to OSX?

SneakerXZ 11y ago
Because you would lose your customers. If my operating system limits me from doing things that I can do on other platforms and I want to do them, I will simply not use the system. Are you realizing Mac is used also by creative people that use Adobe tools, tools for 3D and so on and if everything was sandboxed you couldn't do it anymore.
- djloche 11y ago
  Apple's core customers are iPhone and iPad customers now. They realized that catering to consumer electronics customers is far more profitable than catering to pc power users, and adjusted everything to fit the profit model that makes them the most money. At times, I wish they had spun off Apple Computer as a separate entity with OS X so that the computer division wouldn't have to sit and play fourth seat to the rest of the business.
  - SneakerXZ 11y ago
    They sell a lot of Macs http://9to5mac.com/2015/10/27/apple-earnings-fy15-q3-2/ http://9to5mac.com/2015/10/27/apple-earnings-fy15-q3-2/ Killing that segment would be silly from them.
    - djloche 11y ago
      It is silly, yet Apple continues to do things that are hostile to power users.
- jkestner 11y ago
  To reply to sibling: Apple has never catered to PC power users, going back to Jobs arguing against slots in the Apple ][ and getting his way in the first Mac. That a Mac user at all is now considered a power user indicates which way the wind is blowing. Apple's pointed in the right direction. Given that the PC is an increasingly obsolete platform for most people, I don't think Apple's going to expend a lot of energy changing the status quo one way or another. Its style is to start over from scratch.
  - SneakerXZ 11y ago
    Their ecosystem is powered by power users, who do you think is creating apps, games, design, books, videos and so on? If Apple forces to move these users out, they will probably focus on other platforms where they are not so restricted.
- eveningcoffee 11y ago
  Are you realizing Mac is used also by creative people that use Adobe tools, tools for 3D and so on. I.e. not programmers but users of software from big software companies. and if everything was sandboxed you couldn't do it anymore. Yes, you could not run arbitrary programs and Apple may see it as a feature. You seem to be in big denial as it would be horrible thing to happen. I still see this as very likely possibility.
  - SneakerXZ 11y ago
    Of course, it is a horrible thing to happen. Just to give you some apps from my dock. Chrome, Spotify, Outlook, HipChat, Viber, Skype, SourceTree, Atom, Sketch, Dropbox. All these would be not be usable because they are not sandboxed. Basically I would have to install Windows on my Macbook and I would virtualize Mac OS X so I can use Xcode and I would use Windows for everything else. It would be suicide for Mac OS X and if you think Apple is so stupid to do it, okay then...
    - eveningcoffee 11y ago
      SourceTree, Atom are not needed by an Apple usual user. Others are Apple competitors. It would be suicide for Mac OS X and if you think Apple is so stupid to do it, okay then... They dried to get rid of Google Maps on iOS.
      - SneakerXZ 11y ago
        What would they gain at the end? I would leave their system and also many others. Thinking people would switch just to Apple products is naive.
        eveningcoffee 11y ago
        What would they gain at the end? Control and from there perhaps more money. I would leave their system and also many others. Yes, but what if there are only about 100k of such people?

lmm 11y ago

Maybe you'll only be able to run your own software after getting an expensive code signing certificate and going through an identity verification process. Or it'll be like games consoles, with the "dev" versions being different from the retail ones.

oddevan 11y ago
They're actually moving in the opposite direction. With iOS 9, you no longer need an expensive code signing certificate to load your own software onto an iPhone.

mikeash 11y ago

You can compile software for iOS too. If you consider this to be an adequate escape hatch for the Mac, then it must also be one for iOS. If OS X "will never get to a point like the iPad" then the iPad can't get to that point either!

squeaky-clean 11y ago
But you can't compile software for iOS on iOS, can you? You'd need an iPad + Mac to compile the software. You don't need {{external machine with different OS}} + Mac to compile OSX software.
- mikeash 11y ago
  That is true, so we could limit it to "if you own a Mac" then the iPad is not limited. But basically nobody actually bothers to work around the limitations in this way, aside from recent events surrounding f.lux.

rmc 11y ago

> what would stop you from compiling the application yourself, theoretically? What do you do about third party closed source Mac software?