4 ms·

I don't understand why everyone is so excited about this. I don't like using brew. I use a Mac because things just work. It was annoying that the system version

by bla3 7y ago

I don't understand why everyone is so excited about this. I don't like using brew. I use a Mac because things just work. It was annoying that the system versions were old, but most of the time they were still workable. To me, this is another (admittedly small) thing I liked about the Mac that's going away.

olliej 7y ago
The problem is accruing security flaws (increasingly difficulty to back port fixes), and also the problems that come up when you install a different version (lots of Software just assumes it can use the same system python, which causes issues when it isn’t the archaic version).
- bla3 7y ago
  I'd prefer if Apple took care of security fixes instead of some third party. And they could ship newer versions if keeping the old ones secure is harder.
  - olliej 7y ago
    The problem is that updating to a new version isn’t possible if it breaks existing software - what happens is that the end user experience is “I installed these updates and Apple broke my program” so don't update in future, and tell others not to as well. The only way to stop the OS from including out of date software and libraries is to not ship them if they don’t have stable abi. That’s what Apple is doing: it can’t reasonably ship them and keep them up to date, so it is going to stop.
    - jdsully 7y ago
      Doesn’t removing them have the same issue? “My software dependent on this ancient python no longer works - because there’s no python anymore”
      - olliej 7y ago
        Yes, the difference is that now Apple is shipping a new version that will have the same problem in a years time, so instead of one compatibility event there’s a new one. The app developer also now has a problem - their binary only works on one OS revision so they have to start shipping the same code, just compiled separately. The only safe solution is to ship with their own embedded version. Which is also the correct solution to the interpreters not being part of the platform.
mproud 7y ago
You don't have to use brew. And if you aren’t a developer making software, you don’t need to do anything. If you are a developer, there are many ways to get the software you need for development. Apple is saying they’re just not going to provide it on client machines by default — which is probably fine because honestly, more often what happens is the version Apple has on the machine is old or missing newer parts anyway. I guess you could argue Apple should make their own package manager, but they just don’t want to spend the time and energy on that when they want to focus on Mac and iOS software rather than UNIX software.

by bla3 7y ago

olliej 7y ago

The problem is accruing security flaws (increasingly difficulty to back port fixes), and also the problems that come up when you install a different version (lots of Software just assumes it can use the same system python, which causes issues when it isn’t the archaic version).

bla3 7y ago
I'd prefer if Apple took care of security fixes instead of some third party. And they could ship newer versions if keeping the old ones secure is harder.
- olliej 7y ago
  The problem is that updating to a new version isn’t possible if it breaks existing software - what happens is that the end user experience is “I installed these updates and Apple broke my program” so don't update in future, and tell others not to as well. The only way to stop the OS from including out of date software and libraries is to not ship them if they don’t have stable abi. That’s what Apple is doing: it can’t reasonably ship them and keep them up to date, so it is going to stop.
  - jdsully 7y ago
    Doesn’t removing them have the same issue? “My software dependent on this ancient python no longer works - because there’s no python anymore”
    - olliej 7y ago
      Yes, the difference is that now Apple is shipping a new version that will have the same problem in a years time, so instead of one compatibility event there’s a new one. The app developer also now has a problem - their binary only works on one OS revision so they have to start shipping the same code, just compiled separately. The only safe solution is to ship with their own embedded version. Which is also the correct solution to the interpreters not being part of the platform.

mproud 7y ago

You don't have to use brew. And if you aren’t a developer making software, you don’t need to do anything. If you are a developer, there are many ways to get the software you need for development. Apple is saying they’re just not going to provide it on client machines by default — which is probably fine because honestly, more often what happens is the version Apple has on the machine is old or missing newer parts anyway. I guess you could argue Apple should make their own package manager, but they just don’t want to spend the time and energy on that when they want to focus on Mac and iOS software rather than UNIX software.