3 ms·

Sorry, that seems like a total non sequitur to me. What about that (an outage + a failure to correctly handle the outage on the clientside) suggests Apple is pl

Sorry, that seems like a total non sequitur to me. What about that (an outage + a failure to correctly handle the outage on the clientside) suggests Apple is planning to lock down macOS like iOS, either in terms of hardware or software? Or rather, maybe you'd like to explain what you think Apple would have to gain from doing something like that?

fsflover 6y ago
You cannot start any non-Apple applications unless Apple explicitly allows them and keeps a list of what and when you are running. Looks totally fine...
- machello13 6y ago
  Again, I'm having trouble making the leap from this: "Apple checks which macOS applications I run in order to verify that the developers credentials are still valid and not expired/revoked, but only for macOS apps and not executables in general, and you can still open apps that are not signed with a Developer ID using a manual bypass" (which is certainly not ideal but seems like a reasonable security compromise. There's no evidence they're keeping a list of this information anywhere.) to: "Apple will lock down macOS and make it utterly impossible to run any executable or even scripting code that hasn't gone through a strict review process" Since you're unwilling (or unable?) to explain that leap without just spouting pithy 3-word comebacks, I guess we're done :)
  - fsflover 6y ago
    I suggest you read the comments in the linked thread. Why do I have to repeat those who can explain better than me? It's pretty clear that the current state: 1) cannot be called "fully unlocked", 2) more locked than what people used to have, even on Apple devices. It might be fine for you, but it certainly is potentially bad for privacy and freedom. Look up keyword "tor" in the thread if genuinely want to understand and not trolling.
    - johnofthesea 6y ago
      But isn't it possible to turn off System Integrity Protection and Gatekeeper?
    - machello13 6y ago
      Maybe you should go back and read the article that spawned this thread. Apple literally put engineering time + effort just to allow 3rd-party OSes to be run on their chip. That doesn't strike me as the move of a company that wants to lock down their OS. You can disagree with the tradeoffs Apple decided to make in the name of security/privacy, fair enough. And you can certainly blame them for their mistakes (like not thinking to handle a case where their Developer ID verification servers were offline). But practically, these tradeoffs don't really hamper almost anyone's usage of the OS, and the few people for whom it does can disable them.

fsflover 6y ago

You cannot start any non-Apple applications unless Apple explicitly allows them and keeps a list of what and when you are running. Looks totally fine...

machello13 6y ago
Again, I'm having trouble making the leap from this: "Apple checks which macOS applications I run in order to verify that the developers credentials are still valid and not expired/revoked, but only for macOS apps and not executables in general, and you can still open apps that are not signed with a Developer ID using a manual bypass" (which is certainly not ideal but seems like a reasonable security compromise. There's no evidence they're keeping a list of this information anywhere.) to: "Apple will lock down macOS and make it utterly impossible to run any executable or even scripting code that hasn't gone through a strict review process" Since you're unwilling (or unable?) to explain that leap without just spouting pithy 3-word comebacks, I guess we're done :)
- fsflover 6y ago
  I suggest you read the comments in the linked thread. Why do I have to repeat those who can explain better than me? It's pretty clear that the current state: 1) cannot be called "fully unlocked", 2) more locked than what people used to have, even on Apple devices. It might be fine for you, but it certainly is potentially bad for privacy and freedom. Look up keyword "tor" in the thread if genuinely want to understand and not trolling.
  - johnofthesea 6y ago
    But isn't it possible to turn off System Integrity Protection and Gatekeeper?
  - machello13 6y ago
    Maybe you should go back and read the article that spawned this thread. Apple literally put engineering time + effort just to allow 3rd-party OSes to be run on their chip. That doesn't strike me as the move of a company that wants to lock down their OS. You can disagree with the tradeoffs Apple decided to make in the name of security/privacy, fair enough. And you can certainly blame them for their mistakes (like not thinking to handle a case where their Developer ID verification servers were offline). But practically, these tradeoffs don't really hamper almost anyone's usage of the OS, and the few people for whom it does can disable them.