14 ms·

Apple has been making things more and more restrictive over a decade now. New versions of mac os introducing new restrictions. Doesn't take a genius to see th

• brundolf 6y ago
  As long as there's software there will be devs who need machines with which they can build it. Those machines will always need mechanisms for circumventing safety constraints, almost by definition. I guess it's possible Apple could decide, one day, "macOS isn't for developers anymore, it's just like iOS, devs will just have to go elsewhere". But that seems like it would be a profoundly stupid thing to do. I do wish they would just bundle up all of the safety-guards under a single toggle - put it in the recovery UI for maximum obscurity - to make this stuff as convenient for developers as possible. But I take the fact that they don't to be a shortcoming of product development, not malice.
  • the8472 6y ago
    Look at iOS, you need to pay for a developer account and the signed applications can't be distributed (otherwise they'll revoke your account) and have short-lived certs.
    • brundolf 6y ago
      You're not listening: you don't make software on iOS.
      • the8472 6y ago
        Those people already pay for that account and thus could sign whatever they need to work. For them it wouldn't change a thing. It's just everyone else.
      • jentist_retol 6y ago
        I have a feeling that this is going to change in the next year or two.
        • brundolf 6y ago
          It could. But still, someone has to develop iOS itself. And someone has to write the server back-ends that all those apps depend on. And the cloud infrastructure that those back-ends run within. By definition there will always be something out there that can't be developed on a locked-down platform. So there will always be an open platform, even if Apple decided one day (again, unlikely I think) to recuse themselves from that market.
          • saagarjha 6y ago
            Apple always has the option of fusing their Macs and selling blown ones externally, and then writing their OS to turn off parts of the OS that they use but think you don't need. They haven't done that, but it is always possible that they could.
          • totetsu 6y ago
            But the people who make iOS work for apple, can't they use an in house proprietary tool set, to develop it?
            • cwhiz 6y ago
              Sure they could. They could basically fork macOS and maintain an entirely separate version just for developing iOS, iPadOS, WatchOS, and macOS. I don't know why in the world they would do that. This whole "issue" is just Apple trying to get people to put their software in the Mac App Store. Maybe a day will come where Apple try and lock down macOS to the level that they have locked down iOS... but I just don't see it happening. Apple will always need developers to develop software for Apple products. Maybe they will drop a nuclear bomb on themselves. Anything is theoretically possible.
    • madeofpalk 6y ago
      IIRC you don’t need to pay for an Apple dev membership to self-sign and run the app on your own device. They made this change a few years ago I believe.
      • saagarjha 6y ago
        This happens to depend on the code you're trying to run!
        • judge2020 6y ago
          Can you elaborate? Do you mean entitlements, or perhaps how it's deployed (xcode vs some random binary)?
          • saagarjha 6y ago
            Yup, entitlements.
      • deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  • stjohnswarts 6y ago
    If they remove the ability to install software that I want to install they lose me as a customer forever. I don't have a problem with the warning. Windows has similar but it's super easy to turn off completely. I know you can do it as well on Apple as well but it's a bit more hidden. Mostly I use linux, but I also have a small mac pro that I like to travel with and has 90% of my development software on it.
  • lizardmancan 6y ago
    tier 1 : consume preselected media with preselected software! tier 2 : select media by yourself! tier 3 : edit media! tier 4 : instal custom software! tier 5 : create your own plugins! tier 6 : write your own software!!!
• npunt 6y ago
  To be fair, the world itself has changed a lot in a decade. Risks are much higher now than before, as malicious actors have become much more sophisticated, and we're running much more of our lives through software. The downside of insecure systems is orders of magnitude greater - life savings wiped, every personal detail leaked, etc.
• manquer 6y ago
  You stop using Apple and go to a reasonable OS. You and I are not going to help Apple keep their $2T valuation, we are no longer the market not been one for 5 + years for Apple Apple moved their focus from the professional market who were willing to pay premium for productivity with better UX/Hardware/Software, to people paying just the premium . It is a lifestyle brand now, people money because it is Apple, not because there is real value they gain for the higher cost. Depending on what you work with, Windows or Linux is by far better option today. MS listens to developers (eventually), WSL , professional support, a lot of graphical professional grade applications all make it attractive. Linux is lot more flexible, works with less friction makes it easy to work with containers servers etc, If you really need Apple hardware dual boot or flash a sensible OS .
  • gpanders 6y ago
    While I also find these changes to macOS alarming and disappointing, I still vastly prefer macOS to Windows. My 2013 Macbook Pro is also still the best laptop I have ever used (I also have a 2017 Macbook Pro for work and I have to admit that the newer models rightfully earn their bad reputation). If Apple continues to head in this direction, I think the right move is to migrate to Linux. Windows is a huge step back, as far as I'm concerned.
    • Wohlf 6y ago
      You may be surprised how much equivalent laptops from other OEMs have caught up. The Dell XPS is very similar to the Macbook Pro, and Dell supports Ubuntu on it.
      • EForEndeavour 6y ago
        How do the trackpad and battery life compare?
        • defnotashton2 6y ago
          Have yet to see a non Mac track pad that has more than two gestures..
• sneak 6y ago
  > Doesn't take a genius to see that their end goal is to make mac os as restrictive as ios. I don’t see that. I see them trying to protect average users from malware, something they have done a pretty decent job of. It’s the job of a gui shell (finder/explorer) to discern user intent and do the thing it thinks the user wants. This is that happening. Users don’t want to run malware. I’ve not seen anything that suggests that Apple wants to remove the ability of people to run arbitrary programs. Indeed, it is essential for developers to run novel binaries.
• spideymans 6y ago
  >Doesn't take a genius to see that their end goal is to make mac os as restrictive as ios. I've been hearing that for the past decade. With the exception of some reasonably deprecated technologies (32-bit support, etc...), to this day I'm able to run essentially all of the software on my Mac that I did back in 2010. If and when Apple does prohibit the running of third party apps, I'll switch to another platform. Until then, this is all just FUD.
  • readams 6y ago
    They've already effectively prohibited it because, as you can see from the article, installing software that doesn't go through Apple is made incredibly painful and essentially nobody will succeed in doing it. Apple doesn't really care that you can run it by using a bunch of workarounds if they have 99.9% control over all software distribution.
    • read_if_gay_ 6y ago
      > installing software that doesn't go through Apple is made incredibly painful and essentially nobody will succeed in doing it. Come on. It’s literally five mouse clicks.
      • stickfigure 6y ago
        ...and if they forget that, they can just edit the source code in "command.com" https://dilbert.com/strip/1994-02-01 https://dilbert.com/strip/1994-02-01
        • read_if_gay_ 6y ago
          GP is basically arguing it's impossible to run arbitrary software which is BS. It's not as simple as it could be, but Apple didn't prohibit it, they just hid it behind a few menus. And if you are too incompetent to click through these then you probably shouldn't be running arbitrary software. That's why the comic does not really apply here IMO.
• nuker 6y ago
  > to see that their end goal is to make mac os as restrictive as ios. Well, there is no Mac ransomware, right?
• Razengan 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
• Cthulhu_ 6y ago
  For 99% of customers that is just fine. I don't know how old you are but think back of the early / mid 2000's where everyone and their dog got computers and went on the internet, while the main operating systems then - Windows XP - were not ready yet, in that they couldn't protect their users.
• whywhywhywhy 6y ago
  I'd really be interested to hear someone who defended Apple's 30% cut battle against Epic on why Macs shouldn't be locked down and everything forced through the store. People like Gruber coined the term "App Console" to try and justify locked down iOS yet we're also told how powerful iPads are and how they're computers. Why is it ok for the iPads to be locked down "App Consoles", if that's ok shouldn't it also be fine to lock down Macs and force everything through the App Store and make sure Apple gets a cut from say Creative Cloud subscriptions and Alberton Live installations? I personally don't agree with any of it but I'd like to try and understand why people think one is ok but also not the other.
  • ubermonkey 6y ago
    I'll bite. The iPad is by definition a more limited environment in that it IS locked down and heavily sandboxed. What you get from that is a hyperportable tool that pretty much Just Works All The Time without the need to worry about security or administration. There are absolutely things you can't do there. For any advanced user, it's unlikely to provide a sufficient computing environment in and of itself -- but there are lots of folks for whom a nice iPad is entirely enough. My 80 year old mother only rarely touches her laptop nowadays (realistically, it exists for the version of Quicken she likes + the need to write embroidery patterns to flash drives for use with her INSANELY complicated sewing machine). This is good. But you trade some things away by setting the dials in that way (high portability & battery, high security) -- obviously, there's less direct user control, and less ability to customize, and outside environments like Pythonista I don't think there's any way to write code on it you could use on it. But that's fine, because if the iPad doesn't meet your need as a primary, you probably have a regular computer on your desk, too. A Mac works just like computers have worked for 40 years -- you own the machine, down to the metal, and can do anything you want with it. This freedom comes at a cost (increased risk of crashes or malware infection), and may not represent the dominant mode of computing for regular humans going forward. That's fine. Not everybody needs that. So the distinction is actually really simple: They're different products, positioned to address different user stories. Why shouldn't they have different approaches to lockdown/security/customization? I mean, car makers have several models available, too, with often very very different capabilities and functions. That's also ok.
• mlindner 6y ago
  Corporations don't sign the apps they run on company-owned computers all the time. This isn't going away unless Apple wants to dump the very valuable business customers. You don't need to worry.
• stevefan1999 6y ago
  And it's right, Apple is more and more being a China