7 ms·

Which is completely frustrating, because Mac is totally in the position of using its built-in capabilities to deal with this. The Mac Bundle (.app) format coul

Which is completely frustrating, because Mac is totally in the position of using its built-in capabilities to deal with this. The Mac Bundle (.app) format could solve this entirely. All application specific data should be written inside of the bundle folder, so that when you delete the app, you delete the thing entirely. I mean, maybe you need a "user data" bundle of sorts tied to the specific application. If you delete the app, it deletes all the user data bundles as well. The default installer and bundle runners should be controlling the process. "XYZ App is attempting to write data files outside of its bundle location. These may not be cleaned up if you delete the application. Do you want to continue?" The unix permissions system and the Mac bundle format should completely solve this problem. I honestly just don't get why this still happens. Doesn't iOS at least get this right?

maxsilver 7y ago
> The default installer and bundle runners should be controlling the process. "XYZ App is attempting to write data files outside of its bundle location. These may not be cleaned up if you delete the application. Do you want to continue?" If you do that, the entire system stops working. Everyone will just click "ok" and then still gets mad when uninstalling doesn't fully clean things up.
- taftster 7y ago
  Well, that's fair. But hopefully in the process of getting mad, it starts to reflect negatively on the application vendors and/or Apple directly. Maybe that will be enough for them to change. Maybe the app bundle runner should be logging files written outside of the bundle folder? Then the uninstall process will wipe those out?
  - hunter2_ 7y ago
    Wipe out all the things that you create with the app? All the text you created when you uninstall a text editor, the photos you touched up and saved under a new name, the audio recordings you made?
- lonelappde 7y ago
  So users who want crapware can get it, and users who want a clean secure system can get it, and app developers are pressured to build apps correctly. And App Store/GateKeeper can prevent misbehavior for apps distributiled through Apple's friendly marketplace. Win-win-win.
mceachen 7y ago
I'd argue that linux distros have this power, too, and they haven't either (unless you use a snap, which has compatibility and performance issues). If you uninstall a .deb or .rpm or AppImage, the files you wrote into XDG_CONFIG_HOME (defaults to ~/.config) won't magically get cleaned up. I'd love to be wrong here, BTW! I've had several PhotoStructure users try to reset their configuration by uninstall/reinstall, but that just removes the files in the installer, it doesn't do anything to files in user directories (and I'd be really surprised if that was ever a thing). Can you imagine the havoc from `apt remove vscode` and having it remove user's keybindings, extensions, and anything else?
- simion314 7y ago
  >~/.config) won't magically get cleaned up. >I'd love to be wrong here, Isn't this what apt purge appname does ? or is something missing Form the apt-get docs: purge - purge is identical to remove except that packages are removed and purged (any configuration files are deleted too).
  - _ikke_ 7y ago
    That would only purge config files that came with the package (which would live in /etc/). Config files in the homedir of a user are not managed by apt.
    - simion314 7y ago
      Thanks, I was wrong, not sure why I believed that it worked. so in the end Linux needs a CCleaner tool like Windows, it should also contain a browser cache cleaner, I sometimes find a few Gb of space in Chromium localstorage/cache and have to hunt them down and delete manually.
moduspol 7y ago
As a Mac app developer, you mostly have to go out of your way to install things[1] outside of the app bundle, and you typically don't want to because that's only extra maintenance you have to do to update / version those files. Most apps don't, and that's why most apps actually are effectively removed when you drag the bundle into the trash. There is already a concept of a "user data" directory for the app, which is determined just like on iOS. There are also other directories for things like caches that the system can clear if it's low on disk space. Of course they could sandbox Mac apps just like on iOS, and Mac App Store apps essentially already work that way. I can assure you, though, that any barrier they put in the way of letting non-App Store apps run however they always have will be met by strong resistance. It's easy to point to this occurrence with Zoom and call it unreasonable, but prompts like what you're describing will undoubtedly disrupt what other people see as totally valid use cases and ruining of the UX. [1] By "things", I mean things like a separate web server process. Apps do store files in app-specific folders like "Application Support" by convention, but not for separate processes.
- taftster 7y ago
  Thanks for the reply, really good stuff. But what I don't get, why even have an "Application Support" directory at all. There is absolutely nothing of value added to me (as a user) to have files stored there. It's just one more place I have to look to clean up after an application is deleted. So dumb and adds zero value. I'll put my files into Documents (or whatever). And you (as an application developer) put your files in your app bundle directory. That should be the contract for most (all?) user space applications. I agree my prompt idea is generally poor and wouldn't work, it was mostly just for discussion purposes. But the mechanics of a fix for this are in place, rogue daemons that can't be deleted are just unacceptable.
  - taftster 7y ago
    [self-reply, sorry] For example, Steam games stored in Application Support. Why?? If I install a game from Steam, it should be installed somewhere in the Steam app bundle. When I delete the Steam app, I delete everything related. So dumb.
whywhywhywhy 7y ago
> All application specific data should be written inside of the bundle folder, so that when you delete the app, you delete the thing entirely Not even Apple follows that ideology though, I can't be the only one who has had to delete the gigs of Garageband data from ~/Library/Application Support on an under-specced company laptop 128GB SSD

maxsilver 7y ago

> The default installer and bundle runners should be controlling the process. "XYZ App is attempting to write data files outside of its bundle location. These may not be cleaned up if you delete the application. Do you want to continue?" If you do that, the entire system stops working. Everyone will just click "ok" and then still gets mad when uninstalling doesn't fully clean things up.

taftster 7y ago
Well, that's fair. But hopefully in the process of getting mad, it starts to reflect negatively on the application vendors and/or Apple directly. Maybe that will be enough for them to change. Maybe the app bundle runner should be logging files written outside of the bundle folder? Then the uninstall process will wipe those out?
- hunter2_ 7y ago
  Wipe out all the things that you create with the app? All the text you created when you uninstall a text editor, the photos you touched up and saved under a new name, the audio recordings you made?
lonelappde 7y ago
So users who want crapware can get it, and users who want a clean secure system can get it, and app developers are pressured to build apps correctly. And App Store/GateKeeper can prevent misbehavior for apps distributiled through Apple's friendly marketplace. Win-win-win.

mceachen 7y ago

I'd argue that linux distros have this power, too, and they haven't either (unless you use a snap, which has compatibility and performance issues). If you uninstall a .deb or .rpm or AppImage, the files you wrote into XDG_CONFIG_HOME (defaults to ~/.config) won't magically get cleaned up. I'd love to be wrong here, BTW! I've had several PhotoStructure users try to reset their configuration by uninstall/reinstall, but that just removes the files in the installer, it doesn't do anything to files in user directories (and I'd be really surprised if that was ever a thing). Can you imagine the havoc from `apt remove vscode` and having it remove user's keybindings, extensions, and anything else?

simion314 7y ago
>~/.config) won't magically get cleaned up. >I'd love to be wrong here, Isn't this what apt purge appname does ? or is something missing Form the apt-get docs: purge - purge is identical to remove except that packages are removed and purged (any configuration files are deleted too).
- _ikke_ 7y ago
  That would only purge config files that came with the package (which would live in /etc/). Config files in the homedir of a user are not managed by apt.
  - simion314 7y ago
    Thanks, I was wrong, not sure why I believed that it worked. so in the end Linux needs a CCleaner tool like Windows, it should also contain a browser cache cleaner, I sometimes find a few Gb of space in Chromium localstorage/cache and have to hunt them down and delete manually.

moduspol 7y ago

As a Mac app developer, you mostly have to go out of your way to install things[1] outside of the app bundle, and you typically don't want to because that's only extra maintenance you have to do to update / version those files. Most apps don't, and that's why most apps actually are effectively removed when you drag the bundle into the trash. There is already a concept of a "user data" directory for the app, which is determined just like on iOS. There are also other directories for things like caches that the system can clear if it's low on disk space. Of course they could sandbox Mac apps just like on iOS, and Mac App Store apps essentially already work that way. I can assure you, though, that any barrier they put in the way of letting non-App Store apps run however they always have will be met by strong resistance. It's easy to point to this occurrence with Zoom and call it unreasonable, but prompts like what you're describing will undoubtedly disrupt what other people see as totally valid use cases and ruining of the UX. [1] By "things", I mean things like a separate web server process. Apps do store files in app-specific folders like "Application Support" by convention, but not for separate processes.

taftster 7y ago
Thanks for the reply, really good stuff. But what I don't get, why even have an "Application Support" directory at all. There is absolutely nothing of value added to me (as a user) to have files stored there. It's just one more place I have to look to clean up after an application is deleted. So dumb and adds zero value. I'll put my files into Documents (or whatever). And you (as an application developer) put your files in your app bundle directory. That should be the contract for most (all?) user space applications. I agree my prompt idea is generally poor and wouldn't work, it was mostly just for discussion purposes. But the mechanics of a fix for this are in place, rogue daemons that can't be deleted are just unacceptable.
- taftster 7y ago
  [self-reply, sorry] For example, Steam games stored in Application Support. Why?? If I install a game from Steam, it should be installed somewhere in the Steam app bundle. When I delete the Steam app, I delete everything related. So dumb.

whywhywhywhy 7y ago

> All application specific data should be written inside of the bundle folder, so that when you delete the app, you delete the thing entirely Not even Apple follows that ideology though, I can't be the only one who has had to delete the gigs of Garageband data from ~/Library/Application Support on an under-specced company laptop 128GB SSD