5 ms·

The firewall is just the tip of the iceberg. Microsoft provides the sources and special builds for sensitive environments. They work with governments worldwid

The firewall is just the tip of the iceberg. Microsoft provides the sources and special builds for sensitive environments. They work with governments worldwide and open their source code to get certified. As far as I understand it never was Apple's priority.

davisr 6y ago
You're commending Micro$oft for sharing source code? Please! They both are completely irresponsible and push proprietary malware. Anything less than freely usable/sharable software is inadequate.
- jojobas 6y ago
  I'm not in the business of commending or admonishing. The question was whether Apple could/should be used in government classified/sensitive business environments.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  I wasn't aware that VS Code was "proprietary malware"? All the code for that is right on GitHub.[0] If you don't trust the prebuilt ones, you're free to build it from the source yourself. Want something else? Their GitHub repo list has almost 4000 repositories totaling 130 pages![1] Just because the OS itself isn't open source[a] doesn't mean that Microsoft doesn't open source a whole crap ton of stuff. And sure, Window's telemetry can easily be construed as "malware", but Windows is not the entirety of Microsoft. [a]: And that's a lie too (sortove). It is open source.[2] (ahem source available (sorry, FSF)) You just need a valid reason to look at it besides "I want to". Sidenote: I personally would hope that Windows gets open sourced, but I'm not holding my breath. [0]: https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode [1]: https://github.com/microsoft https://github.com/microsoft [2]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/ P.S. Can we not use the "M$" moniker? It's almost childish. Just like "Crapple", "Microshit", etc, It serves no purpose.
  - ianlevesque 6y ago
    One clarification, VS Code does have closed-source components, like the python extension and remoting.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - Sebb767 6y ago
    > [a]: And that's a lie too. It is open source.[2] You just need a valid reason to look at it besides "I want to" Google Search is open source as well, you just need a valid reason for them to hire you for their search team! /s I agree with your overall comment in that Microsoft is not bad, but calling Windows 'open source' when the only ways to access it involves a long application process and a lot of money is quite a stretch. Nearly all source code is open under these definitions, as you can always pay for access, get hired, hack their servers or straight out buy the company. That's not what people usually consider open.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    Source available means available to all. It's just proprietary if they can decide you can't see it.
  - design-material 6y ago
    Of course VSCode is proprietary malware - unless, as you suggest, you build it yourself and get rid of that proprietary telemetry malware (https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium) But please don't suggest that we should praise Microsoft because they're decent enough to almost give us a somewhat convenient-if-you're-a-dev way to avoid being tracked?
    - orf 6y ago
      Calling things “proprietary telemetry malware” is why nobody takes this seriously.
  - jraph 6y ago
- lovelyviking 6y ago
  I find it amazing that recently on a presumably ‘hacker’ forum opinions showing a ‘freedom software’ perspective get a bully response in form of simply downvoting and shutting up the person. I urge the admins to stop this practice. I wish to hear such points of view and consider things from such perspective. It is very logical to assume that once you have no direct access to the sources of software, that software could do things that malware does. Yet this obviously logical reminder get downvoted like it is irrational or off topic. It is on topic, it is rational, it is a good reminder and we see Microsoft and Apple consistently disrespect a right of a person to control own _Personal_ computer(PC). On recent M1 you can’t even have own OS without Apple permission, which makes it useless brick for me. Do some people still understand what ‘personal’ means ?
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    Using Micro$oft at any point in your discussion is a great way to get people to not hear what you have to say.
  - cromka 6y ago
    > On recent M1 you can’t even have own OS without Apple permission That's not true. https://asahilinux.org/about/ https://asahilinux.org/about/ , "Does Apple allow this? Don’t you need a jailbreak?"
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      And Apple released a build today which provides the kmutil options for it, too :)
      - lovelyviking 6y ago
        great, and how it helps to boot own os?
        saagarjha 6y ago
        You make a boot object and use that to point your Mac at it.

davisr 6y ago

You're commending Micro$oft for sharing source code? Please! They both are completely irresponsible and push proprietary malware. Anything less than freely usable/sharable software is inadequate.

jojobas 6y ago
I'm not in the business of commending or admonishing. The question was whether Apple could/should be used in government classified/sensitive business environments.
colejohnson66 6y ago
I wasn't aware that VS Code was "proprietary malware"? All the code for that is right on GitHub.[0] If you don't trust the prebuilt ones, you're free to build it from the source yourself. Want something else? Their GitHub repo list has almost 4000 repositories totaling 130 pages![1] Just because the OS itself isn't open source[a] doesn't mean that Microsoft doesn't open source a whole crap ton of stuff. And sure, Window's telemetry can easily be construed as "malware", but Windows is not the entirety of Microsoft. [a]: And that's a lie too (sortove). It is open source.[2] (ahem source available (sorry, FSF)) You just need a valid reason to look at it besides "I want to". Sidenote: I personally would hope that Windows gets open sourced, but I'm not holding my breath. [0]: https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode [1]: https://github.com/microsoft https://github.com/microsoft [2]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/ P.S. Can we not use the "M$" moniker? It's almost childish. Just like "Crapple", "Microshit", etc, It serves no purpose.
- ianlevesque 6y ago
  One clarification, VS Code does have closed-source components, like the python extension and remoting.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- Sebb767 6y ago
  > [a]: And that's a lie too. It is open source.[2] You just need a valid reason to look at it besides "I want to" Google Search is open source as well, you just need a valid reason for them to hire you for their search team! /s I agree with your overall comment in that Microsoft is not bad, but calling Windows 'open source' when the only ways to access it involves a long application process and a lot of money is quite a stretch. Nearly all source code is open under these definitions, as you can always pay for access, get hired, hack their servers or straight out buy the company. That's not what people usually consider open.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  Source available means available to all. It's just proprietary if they can decide you can't see it.
- design-material 6y ago
  Of course VSCode is proprietary malware - unless, as you suggest, you build it yourself and get rid of that proprietary telemetry malware (https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium) But please don't suggest that we should praise Microsoft because they're decent enough to almost give us a somewhat convenient-if-you're-a-dev way to avoid being tracked?
  - orf 6y ago
    Calling things “proprietary telemetry malware” is why nobody takes this seriously.
- jraph 6y ago
lovelyviking 6y ago
I find it amazing that recently on a presumably ‘hacker’ forum opinions showing a ‘freedom software’ perspective get a bully response in form of simply downvoting and shutting up the person. I urge the admins to stop this practice. I wish to hear such points of view and consider things from such perspective. It is very logical to assume that once you have no direct access to the sources of software, that software could do things that malware does. Yet this obviously logical reminder get downvoted like it is irrational or off topic. It is on topic, it is rational, it is a good reminder and we see Microsoft and Apple consistently disrespect a right of a person to control own _Personal_ computer(PC). On recent M1 you can’t even have own OS without Apple permission, which makes it useless brick for me. Do some people still understand what ‘personal’ means ?
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Using Micro$oft at any point in your discussion is a great way to get people to not hear what you have to say.
- cromka 6y ago
  > On recent M1 you can’t even have own OS without Apple permission That's not true. https://asahilinux.org/about/ https://asahilinux.org/about/ , "Does Apple allow this? Don’t you need a jailbreak?"
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    And Apple released a build today which provides the kmutil options for it, too :)
    - lovelyviking 6y ago
      great, and how it helps to boot own os?
      - saagarjha 6y ago
        You make a boot object and use that to point your Mac at it.