7 ms·
I don't think that the obvious problems with OS X (macOS, whatever) are with the UX, though. Sure, there are problems on that front, but I don't think they're t
by drb91 8y ago
I don't think that the obvious problems with OS X (macOS, whatever) are with the UX, though. Sure, there are problems on that front, but I don't think they're the major pain points people deal with on a daily basis.
Meanwhile, user-controllable per-process (or per-app) sandboxing would provide tangible benefit to all of us. This means, easy controls for accessing filesystem, network, cpu, gpu, memory, peripherals, and other processes.
Most of these controls exist, but in ways that don't map well to the desktop environment. How do I see what that adobe agent is doing? Sure, I can buy Little Snitch, but this should really be built into the OS. Too much of the UNIX model is designed to secure a user's information from other users, which simply isn't a massive concern these days when we often have dedicated workstations and have issues trusting the processes we run as our own user. What if I suspect my TODO list has a built-in bitcoin miner? I should be able to limit its use of the CPU and GPU.
Meanwhile, my editor still needs to read the configs of all my sandboxed apps, and whatever else I want it to access. This isn't necessarily an easy problem, but it's one I have confidence Apple could tackle, especially with mobile paving the way already.
All this time, docker has been innovating on the sandboxing, with mostly positive results. Android, I believe, runs each process as its own user, leveraging the existing UNIX controls better. I'm not sure what precisely iOS does, but it's locked down well enough to cause me immense frustration building stuff for my phone--not exactly what I'd like to see on the desktop, but they clearly have the ability to provide many of the controls I am looking for on the desktop.
I'm sure this would result in an improved UX as a result, TBH.
If not, Google is coming down the road with Fuschia.
- _bxg1 8y agoYeah, some (arguably most) of the missing features/core problems are due to the fact that OSX has been all-but-ignored by Apple for half a decade, but some of them are just due to the fact that the UNIX paradigms are becoming outdated. Google is trying to solve the latter problem with Fuschia, you're right, which is interesting. But so far that OS's UX also looks like it's primarily mobile-focused, even if it's designed to be adaptable to desktops too. I think OSX's UX problems are mainly in the first category - Apple just doesn't care. Windows introduced snapping in Windows 7, nearly ten years ago. It is extremely useful and seems pretty easy to implement. As you say, you can always get a third-party application like the (fantastic) BetterTouchTool. But you shouldn't have to do that for something so fundamental. The very least Apple could be bothered to do is keep up.
- fiddlerwoaroof 8y agoI actually like having to use third party utilities for things like snapping, because it means I can pick the snapping paradigm I want, rather than the one Apple chooses for me.
- _bxg1 8y agoGnome has built-in functionality, yet it can still be extended with third-party plugins. One doesn't preclude the other.
- fiddlerwoaroof 8y agoIt depends on how the built-in functionality is implemented. If it's a plugin of some sort that I can remove/disable and replace, built-in functionality is ok. OSX doesn't generally pick that route, though.
- georgrwasington 8y agoWell you will be happy to know that you can get third party utilities to manage window snapping in Windows too.
- __sr__ 8y agomacOS does have — kind of — window snapping, doesn’t it? The split window mode? Or am I missing something? Although I agree that it should be more flexible and should have better keyboard controls....
- _bxg1 8y agoIt does not, or at least I haven't found it in the past four years of using OSX for all of my professional development. It has multiple desktop spaces, fullscreen mode, and "expose". It used to be that clicking the green dot on a window expanded it in developer-defined ways that were often unpredictable, but that got replaced with fullscreen mode.
- pier25 8y ago> If not, Google is coming down the road with Fuschia. I'm also hoping Fuchsia will save us.
- bhnmmhmd 8y agoHow is Fuchsia pronounced? Is it like "f*ck+sia"? Or more like "fushia"? Edit: looking up in dictionay, it's actually /fjuːʃə/.
- freehunter 8y agoIt's a real English word. You can look it up in a dictionary.
- grzm 8y agohttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fuchsia https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fuchsia \ ˈfyü-shə \
- whyenot 8y agoThe color is named after the genus of plants which is in turn named after the German botanist Leonhart Fuchs.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoI wouldn't count on it. Google doesn't seem particularly interested in the desktop at all. And if they were, then my worry is that it'll be seen like Windows 10 is now seen by Microsoft: as an "experience" (aka advertising platform), not a tool people use to get things done that should spend most of its time staying the hell out of the way.
- gnl 8y agoYup. While I do need to use a number of third-party tools to get the UX like I want it (Hammerspoon, Hyperswitch, Spectacle and Quicksilver), they do exist, they work fine and I think this has more to do with my specific requirements than with any fundamental issues or missing features in the UX. Going forward, advanced sandboxing is indeed one of the most important things that I would love to see Apple focus on. Ever since I first considered the possibility that apps can have individual access controls, probably around the time I first encountered SELinux/RSBAC and later AppArmor, I've been wondering why vendors aren't pushing this as an absolute top priority on the security front. Meanwhile I'm using this: https://beta.f-secure.com/key/XFence https://beta.f-secure.com/key/XFence It's Jonathan Zdziarski's Little Flocker rebranded after he sold it to F-Secure. It works great, but it does admittedly require an upfront investment. 2 caveats: - Current version only works on Sierra (I'm not touching High Sierra until just before the next one comes out) - Creating "any via" rules can lead to noticeable slowdowns, while "ancestor" rules, even though they are theoretically more expensive, don't (unless one overuses them, I suppose). It's probably a bug. Other than this, I've been using it for over a year and have no complaints whatsoever.
- finchisko 8y agomacOS has sandbox based on TrustedBSD MAC framework. However official documentation is non existent and implementation looks like unfinished product, but I've tried it and it worked. Recommend you to read "Apple's Sandbox Guide" pdf. https://reverse.put.as/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Apple-Sandbox-Guide-v1.0.pdf https://reverse.put.as/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Apple-Sand...
- gnl 8y agoThat looks like it might easily involve lots of fiddling, tweaking and dealing with obscure issues while XFence just works, which is worth a lot to me these days.
- SSLy 8y agoIs there something akin to the little flocker for windows?