3 ms·

As a lazy developer I also dislike what’s slowly happening to macOS. Apple wants you to switch to sandboxed apps but they don't provide a way for you to do even

by dcow 4y ago

As a lazy developer I also dislike what’s slowly happening to macOS. Apple wants you to switch to sandboxed apps but they don't provide a way for you to do even half the things a traditional app can (because they can’t imagine them all up front). That’s just frustrating and lazy on their part and makes the developer UX shitty. But, as an end user, what Apple is doing (bringing sandboxed apps and better security to the desktop) is inarguably the right thing to do. It’s a far superior position for the user and it greatly raises the bar for malware. As developers, to me, it feels a little bit backwards. I guess my critique is that there must be a nuanced way to say “hey Apple you need to do a better job at supporting valid developer use cases” (and I’ll be the first to admit I have many grievances) while at the same time acknowledging that the increased complexity of modern computing systems is moving the needle meaningfully from a security standpoint and so we should be okay with having to work harder to keep our users secure. Like, I’d truly hope if we all switched to Linux, we’d find a way to make secure boot and code signing standard. Not just say “ah isn’t the old dying way of user-domain permissions nice let’s live here forever”. Even Microsoft is pushing code signatures and sandboxed apps. We should be making a stink and pushing for these platforms to allow custom root signing keys and fully secure/sandboxed replacements for the functionality they’re taking away. Not just throwing up our hands and saying fuck security I’ll just use Linux. Not a great image…

lapcat 4y ago
Developers vs. users is a false dichotomy. Users need software. Without software, there's nothing to use. The native Mac software ecosystem is slowly dying. Eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought.
- Maursault 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - lapcat 4y ago
    > only in your little dreams Please don't violate the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > 21.5% of developers used macOS in 2015,[1] increasing to 27.5% in 2020. I said the native Mac software ecosystem is slowly dying, and eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought. The total number of registered Apple developers (not Mac specifically) isn't really relevant to that. Every iOS developer has to use macOS in order to access Xcode, but that doesn't mean they're making native Mac software.
- dcow 4y ago
  Developers are really lazy. We have terms like DX and UX. It’s not a false dichotomy at all.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    > Developers are really lazy. Speak for yourself. > We have terms like DX and UX. It’s not a false dichotomy at all. It's still a false dichotomy, because they're not necessarily opposed. Making the native Mac software DX worse can also make the UX worse, and making the DX better can make the UX better. When I said "Eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought", I meant that the UX is becoming totally crappy. We get Electron, we get Catalyst, we get iOS apps on macOS. Crap. Bad UX. Lack of powerful software, due to excessive security restrictions, is also a bad UX. Endless "Cancel or Allow" dialogs are a bad UX.
    - dcow 4y ago
      Lazy in this context doesn't mean “lacks work ethic”. You might be unfamiliar with the Gates quote. Point is devs often whine when they have to take the scenic route even if it’s safer for the user. Anyway, I’m not saying they’re at odds and you can only pick one. So we seem to agree. I’m saying devs should be applauding better security and not whining about the transition away from user-domain security which is kinda what is implied in the OP. We should be whining about not having access to to the system in ways we need. Better security needs to accommodate valid use cases not stifle creativity. We probably also agree there. Opining Linux because it’s still the wild west of software and you can do shit like zip up the user’s browser history, logins, and cookies, or idk dump entire hardware profiles without any user interaction, or prompt the user to install a new boot loader or drop your rootkit into initrd because your program “just needs their password to update” is just that.
      - lapcat 4y ago
        > I’m saying devs should be applauding better security and not whining about the transition away from user-domain security which is kinda what is implied in the OP. It's not better security, it's security theater. Security researchers roll out of bed in the morning and find bypasses to macOS TCC (Transparency, Consent, and Control). I've done it myself, and I'm not a professional security researcher. The so-called "security" doesn't actually stop real malware, it only stops honest developers from making a living.
- nonethewiser 4y ago
  But, increasingly, users don’t need desktop software. In fact, the move towards sandboxes apps makes native apps closer to browser apps. I’m not even saying it’s a good thing. Just that gimping native apps isn’t the footgun it would have been 10 years ago.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    What do you mean by "need"? Increasingly, users are force-fed cross-platform web apps. I wouldn't say that's what they need, and you're not even saying it's a good thing. If users don't need desktop software, then why do they need desktop hardware?
    - nonethewiser 4y ago
      Take Figma for example. Couldn’t have been a web app 10 years ago. Users would have needed a desktop app in that case. You emphasize “need” but it seems you mean “want.” You bring up a great point about hardware too. People don’t need as much hardware given the increased connectivity and cloud computing. Again, I’m not suggesting all this is good. But of course users _need_ local compute and native apps less than 10 years ago.
      - lapcat 4y ago
        > Again, I’m not suggesting all this is good. But of course users _need_ local compute and native apps less than 10 years ago. Isn't this a problem for the future of Mac, though? It seems to me that dumbing down the Mac is the opposite of what Apple should do. Why not place emphasis on what makes desktop special, rather than morphing the Mac into an overpriced iOS device that only runs web apps?
        nonethewiser 4y ago
        That’s an interesting point. I don’t necessarily think it will go that far for the record. But Mac is probably comparatively well suited to make a profit off fancy devices with low computing power.
smoldesu 4y ago
> We should be making a stink [...] Not just throwing up our hands and saying fuck security I’ll just use Linux. I'm not sure what you're asking for, here. People have protested OS changes from Apple and Microsoft for decades, but it's never worked. Your only viable method of protest is using an OS where you control the featureset, which (as you've pointed out) is an unrealistic and bad habit.

by dcow 4y ago

lapcat 4y ago

Developers vs. users is a false dichotomy. Users need software. Without software, there's nothing to use. The native Mac software ecosystem is slowly dying. Eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought.

Maursault 4y ago
[flagged]
- lapcat 4y ago
  > only in your little dreams Please don't violate the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > 21.5% of developers used macOS in 2015,[1] increasing to 27.5% in 2020. I said the native Mac software ecosystem is slowly dying, and eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought. The total number of registered Apple developers (not Mac specifically) isn't really relevant to that. Every iOS developer has to use macOS in order to access Xcode, but that doesn't mean they're making native Mac software.
dcow 4y ago
Developers are really lazy. We have terms like DX and UX. It’s not a false dichotomy at all.
- lapcat 4y ago
  > Developers are really lazy. Speak for yourself. > We have terms like DX and UX. It’s not a false dichotomy at all. It's still a false dichotomy, because they're not necessarily opposed. Making the native Mac software DX worse can also make the UX worse, and making the DX better can make the UX better. When I said "Eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought", I meant that the UX is becoming totally crappy. We get Electron, we get Catalyst, we get iOS apps on macOS. Crap. Bad UX. Lack of powerful software, due to excessive security restrictions, is also a bad UX. Endless "Cancel or Allow" dialogs are a bad UX.
  - dcow 4y ago
    Lazy in this context doesn't mean “lacks work ethic”. You might be unfamiliar with the Gates quote. Point is devs often whine when they have to take the scenic route even if it’s safer for the user. Anyway, I’m not saying they’re at odds and you can only pick one. So we seem to agree. I’m saying devs should be applauding better security and not whining about the transition away from user-domain security which is kinda what is implied in the OP. We should be whining about not having access to to the system in ways we need. Better security needs to accommodate valid use cases not stifle creativity. We probably also agree there. Opining Linux because it’s still the wild west of software and you can do shit like zip up the user’s browser history, logins, and cookies, or idk dump entire hardware profiles without any user interaction, or prompt the user to install a new boot loader or drop your rootkit into initrd because your program “just needs their password to update” is just that.
    - lapcat 4y ago
      > I’m saying devs should be applauding better security and not whining about the transition away from user-domain security which is kinda what is implied in the OP. It's not better security, it's security theater. Security researchers roll out of bed in the morning and find bypasses to macOS TCC (Transparency, Consent, and Control). I've done it myself, and I'm not a professional security researcher. The so-called "security" doesn't actually stop real malware, it only stops honest developers from making a living.
nonethewiser 4y ago
But, increasingly, users don’t need desktop software. In fact, the move towards sandboxes apps makes native apps closer to browser apps. I’m not even saying it’s a good thing. Just that gimping native apps isn’t the footgun it would have been 10 years ago.
- lapcat 4y ago
  What do you mean by "need"? Increasingly, users are force-fed cross-platform web apps. I wouldn't say that's what they need, and you're not even saying it's a good thing. If users don't need desktop software, then why do they need desktop hardware?
  - nonethewiser 4y ago
    Take Figma for example. Couldn’t have been a web app 10 years ago. Users would have needed a desktop app in that case. You emphasize “need” but it seems you mean “want.” You bring up a great point about hardware too. People don’t need as much hardware given the increased connectivity and cloud computing. Again, I’m not suggesting all this is good. But of course users _need_ local compute and native apps less than 10 years ago.
    - lapcat 4y ago
      > Again, I’m not suggesting all this is good. But of course users _need_ local compute and native apps less than 10 years ago. Isn't this a problem for the future of Mac, though? It seems to me that dumbing down the Mac is the opposite of what Apple should do. Why not place emphasis on what makes desktop special, rather than morphing the Mac into an overpriced iOS device that only runs web apps?
      - nonethewiser 4y ago
        That’s an interesting point. I don’t necessarily think it will go that far for the record. But Mac is probably comparatively well suited to make a profit off fancy devices with low computing power.

smoldesu 4y ago

> We should be making a stink [...] Not just throwing up our hands and saying fuck security I’ll just use Linux. I'm not sure what you're asking for, here. People have protested OS changes from Apple and Microsoft for decades, but it's never worked. Your only viable method of protest is using an OS where you control the featureset, which (as you've pointed out) is an unrealistic and bad habit.