7 ms·

> Many things will be further crippled and lobotomized with even more sandboxing restrictions Agree on the first half, strong disagree on the second. We need w

> Many things will be further crippled and lobotomized with even more sandboxing restrictions Agree on the first half, strong disagree on the second. We need way more sandboxing restrictions on all operating systems. I have yet to see someone run into sandboxing problems on MacOS (in production) that wasn't doing some evil shit that should be difficult. As a developer it's a bit annoying. As a user it's why the OS experience sucks less than windows and linux for user applications. The .app and permissions design is fantastic - the experience of developing it not so much, but it could be improved. I really don't want your app spawning off god knows how many processes doing god knows what with unfettered access to my filesystem and network.

jsjohnst 7y ago
Couldn’t agree more! > I really don't want your app spawning off god knows how many processes doing god knows what with unfettered access to my filesystem and network. Look no further than apps like Zoom if you think this isn’t rampant. There are lots more examples of course!
newscracker 7y ago
(GP here) I agree, and would like to have more restrictions on what data apps can have access to. The problem I see is how to make it effective while also keeping it easy to use. I don't see a point in an app asking a user (through the system) for access to the Documents folder or Desktop folder and the user granting it. I'd prefer something more granular...something that fits the "sandbox" model with precise and granular access. I realize this may be complex, but there's hardly any point arguing about restrictions if giving access means opening up a really big chunk of data (folder) up for an app.
robenkleene 7y ago
> I have yet to see someone run into sandboxing problems on MacOS (in production) that wasn't doing some evil shit that should be difficult. What do you mean here? Photoshop, Lightroom Classic, Illustrator, Visual Studio Code, Adobe Premiere, Logic Studio, Final Cut, Unity, Steam, Chrome, Terminal, iTerm2, Blender, and Cinema 4D are some examples of applications that are not sandboxed. Are those apps all doing evil stuff?

jsjohnst 7y ago

Couldn’t agree more! > I really don't want your app spawning off god knows how many processes doing god knows what with unfettered access to my filesystem and network. Look no further than apps like Zoom if you think this isn’t rampant. There are lots more examples of course!

newscracker 7y ago

(GP here) I agree, and would like to have more restrictions on what data apps can have access to. The problem I see is how to make it effective while also keeping it easy to use. I don't see a point in an app asking a user (through the system) for access to the Documents folder or Desktop folder and the user granting it. I'd prefer something more granular...something that fits the "sandbox" model with precise and granular access. I realize this may be complex, but there's hardly any point arguing about restrictions if giving access means opening up a really big chunk of data (folder) up for an app.

robenkleene 7y ago

> I have yet to see someone run into sandboxing problems on MacOS (in production) that wasn't doing some evil shit that should be difficult. What do you mean here? Photoshop, Lightroom Classic, Illustrator, Visual Studio Code, Adobe Premiere, Logic Studio, Final Cut, Unity, Steam, Chrome, Terminal, iTerm2, Blender, and Cinema 4D are some examples of applications that are not sandboxed. Are those apps all doing evil stuff?