10 ms·

This would worry me if there weren't at least two other major Operating Systems available to choose from. The Mac is moving more towards simplicity and safety

This would worry me if there weren't at least two other major Operating Systems available to choose from. The Mac is moving more towards simplicity and safety - targeting normal consumers. That's fine. Ironically, now Linux and Windows (and anything else that comes up down the line) will have to serve as the 'Computer for the rest of us'

robterrell 15y ago
Ironically, you got it backwards. You're "us". Whereas "the rest of us" = non-computer experts, anyone who prefers simplicity and safety. That crowd has always been the Mac's bread and butter. When we see signs that Apple will block software installation outside the App Store, then I'll grab a pitchfork. Until then, I think this is good for most users.
- jarek 15y ago
  I'm sure you will be able to reason it away, just like you did on iOS. "I can still jailbreak" might be the mantra.
masklinn 15y ago
> That's fine. Ironically, now Linux and Windows (and anything else that comes up down the line) will have to serve as the 'Computer for the rest of us' I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well, at least for Metro/WinRT. I know Miguel de Icaza also hopes for broad sandboxing support by default. Regarding TFA, he does not make much of a case against sandboxing (applications not being able to write wherever the hell they want without warning the user counts as a positive in my book), and his final quote (of Tim Bray) is relevant to appstores, but it has no relevance whatsoever to sandboxing. Not impressed. Even the plugins stuff has limited relevance in the grand scheme of things, it will affect some applications for non-technical users (more technically oriented ones will likely be able to put their plugins where they know they should be).
- buro9 15y ago
  > I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well It already does to some extent. Internet Explorer was the first to introduce it (to my now out of date understanding), and it's since expanded to other products including shipped Windows apps, Office, etc. It happens invisibly for the developer, if you think the registry that you access is THE registry then you're wrong. It's a proxy that you access, and the proxy has a view on what you will see or not. An example mention of this is here (one of the first Google hits): http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/access-help/enable-or-disable-sandbox-mode-HP001050432.aspx http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/access-help/enable-or-disa... Basically, you the user get the choice, but by default your apps, the things they open, are all sandboxed and protected. For compatibility reasons you can currently choose to override this, but as you might expect group policy can be used to disable someone's ability to lower their security.
  - mmcconnell1618 15y ago
    Actually, Windows 8 apps are sandboxed too. Take a look at the Microsoft requirements to distribute a new Metro-Style app through their own app store. Same sandboxed requirements. Microsoft must approve and developers must justify any access to resources outside the standard sandbox set.
    - recoiledsnake 15y ago
      Yes, but the desktop experience and apps will still be a big part of Windows 8 unless you're running it on an ARM tablet. Microsoft will happily link to your native non-sandboxed app from their App Store. http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-store-to-sell-both-metro-style-apps-and-conventional-w/ http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-store-to-sell-b... Screenshot http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6209/6144024273_4b505de2fc_o.jpg http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6209/6144024273_4b505de2fc_o.... I guess a big reason for locking down Metro apps is battery life concerns.
- vidarh 15y ago
  Sandboxing in general is great. It only becomes a problem if there's no mechanism for users to adjust permissions for apps in cases where they are overly strict. I love how sandboxing on smartphones have gotten users to ask more questions of why a certain app needs the permissions they request, for example.
Angostura 15y ago
This would worry me if the AppStore were the only way to get aplications on to your Mac. I can see it being very disapointing for developers who enjoyed the convenience of the AppStore, but need additional functions. But I guess they will have to sell ex-Store I can also see the benefit of Apple being able to say that 'Anything you buy on the Store is safe(tm)'. However if Apple every makes teh Appstore a compulsory way to get software onto the Mac, I will drop Macs. And I speak as someone who has used them for about 20 years.
- lisperforlife 15y ago
  The same here. I do not think I would use a Mac OSX if they said that app store was the only way to get software.
- mbq 15y ago
  Knowing Apple's achievements in pwn2own, this most likely won't increase the real security... Whatever you do, security always boils down to aware user, thus it is in fundamental contradiction to this company philosophy.
  - mike-cardwell 15y ago
    How can you possibly claim that this wont increase security?
    - mbq 15y ago
      Because it is like X-raying people coming through front door to check if they are hiding anything metal having opened and unsupervised kitchen door. Plumbers are banned, yet you can still be killed with a ceramic knife by a polite assassin or with metal pipe by a brutal crook.
      - mike-cardwell 15y ago
        That analogy bears no resemblance to the issue at hand. These changes improve security. Just because they don't improve the security to 100%, that doesn't make them worthless.
fpgeek 15y ago
Soon to be 1.5 major operating systems (since Windows 8 Metro apps are going to be locked down in exactly the way people fear is coming from Apple evolving the Mac App Store).

robterrell 15y ago

Ironically, you got it backwards. You're "us". Whereas "the rest of us" = non-computer experts, anyone who prefers simplicity and safety. That crowd has always been the Mac's bread and butter. When we see signs that Apple will block software installation outside the App Store, then I'll grab a pitchfork. Until then, I think this is good for most users.

jarek 15y ago
I'm sure you will be able to reason it away, just like you did on iOS. "I can still jailbreak" might be the mantra.

masklinn 15y ago

> That's fine. Ironically, now Linux and Windows (and anything else that comes up down the line) will have to serve as the 'Computer for the rest of us' I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well, at least for Metro/WinRT. I know Miguel de Icaza also hopes for broad sandboxing support by default. Regarding TFA, he does not make much of a case against sandboxing (applications not being able to write wherever the hell they want without warning the user counts as a positive in my book), and his final quote (of Tim Bray) is relevant to appstores, but it has no relevance whatsoever to sandboxing. Not impressed. Even the plugins stuff has limited relevance in the grand scheme of things, it will affect some applications for non-technical users (more technically oriented ones will likely be able to put their plugins where they know they should be).

buro9 15y ago
> I'm expecting Windows to move towards a more sandboxed experience as well It already does to some extent. Internet Explorer was the first to introduce it (to my now out of date understanding), and it's since expanded to other products including shipped Windows apps, Office, etc. It happens invisibly for the developer, if you think the registry that you access is THE registry then you're wrong. It's a proxy that you access, and the proxy has a view on what you will see or not. An example mention of this is here (one of the first Google hits): http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/access-help/enable-or-disable-sandbox-mode-HP001050432.aspx http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/access-help/enable-or-disa... Basically, you the user get the choice, but by default your apps, the things they open, are all sandboxed and protected. For compatibility reasons you can currently choose to override this, but as you might expect group policy can be used to disable someone's ability to lower their security.
- mmcconnell1618 15y ago
  Actually, Windows 8 apps are sandboxed too. Take a look at the Microsoft requirements to distribute a new Metro-Style app through their own app store. Same sandboxed requirements. Microsoft must approve and developers must justify any access to resources outside the standard sandbox set.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    Yes, but the desktop experience and apps will still be a big part of Windows 8 unless you're running it on an ARM tablet. Microsoft will happily link to your native non-sandboxed app from their App Store. http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-store-to-sell-both-metro-style-apps-and-conventional-w/ http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/13/windows-8-store-to-sell-b... Screenshot http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6209/6144024273_4b505de2fc_o.jpg http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6209/6144024273_4b505de2fc_o.... I guess a big reason for locking down Metro apps is battery life concerns.
vidarh 15y ago
Sandboxing in general is great. It only becomes a problem if there's no mechanism for users to adjust permissions for apps in cases where they are overly strict. I love how sandboxing on smartphones have gotten users to ask more questions of why a certain app needs the permissions they request, for example.

Angostura 15y ago

This would worry me if the AppStore were the only way to get aplications on to your Mac. I can see it being very disapointing for developers who enjoyed the convenience of the AppStore, but need additional functions. But I guess they will have to sell ex-Store I can also see the benefit of Apple being able to say that 'Anything you buy on the Store is safe(tm)'. However if Apple every makes teh Appstore a compulsory way to get software onto the Mac, I will drop Macs. And I speak as someone who has used them for about 20 years.

lisperforlife 15y ago
The same here. I do not think I would use a Mac OSX if they said that app store was the only way to get software.
mbq 15y ago
Knowing Apple's achievements in pwn2own, this most likely won't increase the real security... Whatever you do, security always boils down to aware user, thus it is in fundamental contradiction to this company philosophy.
- mike-cardwell 15y ago
  How can you possibly claim that this wont increase security?
  - mbq 15y ago
    Because it is like X-raying people coming through front door to check if they are hiding anything metal having opened and unsupervised kitchen door. Plumbers are banned, yet you can still be killed with a ceramic knife by a polite assassin or with metal pipe by a brutal crook.
    - mike-cardwell 15y ago
      That analogy bears no resemblance to the issue at hand. These changes improve security. Just because they don't improve the security to 100%, that doesn't make them worthless.

fpgeek 15y ago

Soon to be 1.5 major operating systems (since Windows 8 Metro apps are going to be locked down in exactly the way people fear is coming from Apple evolving the Mac App Store).