7 ms·

You're right, but Gatekeeper does something else: It marks the line in the sand. So long as that choice is there as an option in settings for me to make, Apple

by nirvana 15y ago

You're right, but Gatekeeper does something else: It marks the line in the sand. So long as that choice is there as an option in settings for me to make, Apple is in the right. If they ever take that choice away, and they start dictating what I can run or not run, they will have crossed that line, and lost me as a customer forever. I think a lot of people think that Apple taking away that choice is inevitable. I don't think so- I think it would be completely out of character. But if I'm wrong, I'm gone.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
  Apple's pattern with iOS has actually been one of slowly opening up. Just web apps, then native apps with massive restrictions on what you can do and how you can build them, then native apps with a few less restrictions on what you can do and how you can build them (for instance compiled from non-objective C sources). I get that people don't like where they are now but the pattern isn't one of closing down, it's slow but in the other direction. I don't think it's a jump to assume it might keep moving if Apple see the benefit of allowing it. Gatekeeper might, just might, be them seeing how such a model might work.
  - fpgeek 15y ago
    > Apple's pattern with iOS has actually been one of slowly opening up. Tell that to Amazon or Barnes & Noble or Netflix or Hulu or anyone else burned by the In-App Purchase mess. I'd bet none of them would say Apple's pattern has been to open up iOS.
    - Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
      I should possibly have been clearer - from the perspective of software development. Even with those three it's not closed. I read Kindle books on my iPhone (and use iBooks as nothing more the a PDF reader as it goes), just the purchasing model isn't as streamlined as Amazon would like.
  - dchest 15y ago
    then native apps with massive restrictions on what you can do and how you can build them No. They originally allowed any programming language, then played a bit with disallowing anything other than C/C++/Objective-C.
ugh 15y ago
I think it’s right to make very clear that Apple overstepping that line would be inexcusable and evil, or else they might think people would be ok with that. So a bit of outrage isn’t altogether a bad thing, really. (Although it’s pretty obvious that acting like Apple already overstepped that line or will certainly overstep that line in the future is very childish.)
tptacek 15y ago
It's a sensible feature, and there's no reasonable way to implement it without that settings option, and the options they've chosen make total sense. I agree with you: not having the option would be very bad... but it's very unlikely they'll ever take the option away. Why would they? The overwhelming majority of their users will never touch it.
- yequalsx 15y ago
  Right now there is no need to take the option away. You are certainly correct about that. Microsoft is going to soon start pushing its users to buy from its app store. I can see a future in which only 'trusted' programs can be run on new computers. Trusted here means programs approved by Apple/Microsoft and the national government of the country in which your computer resides. I don't know how likely this would be but China seems to like to have a lot of control over the computing its citizens do.
  - tptacek 15y ago
    Sure is handy for China how easy it is to get a keylogger installed on someone's computer, isn't it?
    - yequalsx 15y ago
      Yes. Unfortunately control of citizens' computing is one area that China leads in. Other national government appear to be envious of this control seek to emulate it.
      - mbateman 15y ago
        I think you may be missing tptacek's point. Things like code signing make it harder for bad things to run without the user's permission.
        yequalsx 15y ago
        If option 3 is removed then how is this so? It's not in Apple's interest right now to do this. In five years? Maybe China decides that in order to get access to its market Option 3 must not be available. Maybe Gatekeeper gets enhanced in the future. Obviously this is hypothetical but given the trend toward national surveillance is it hard to imagine that this can happen?
MatthewPhillips 15y ago
What I'm curious about is how they'll present this to users who try to install an unsigned application the first time. Will they educate the user, and provide a way to get to the Settings and change it if they want? Or will they present it in such a way that 90% of users give up and assume the installer is broken.
- Maxious 15y ago
  Just as long as they don't present it the way Windows does - pretty much the same dialog boxes but one has a blue banner (signed) and one has a yellow banner (unsigned).
- wtallis 15y ago
  Remember that most Mac apps don't have an installer - they're self-contained, and installing consists of extracting the DMG and putting the app on your hard drive. The notification will probably take the same form as the error message you get upon trying to launch a PowerPC app on 10.6 without Rosetta installed.
  - dedward 15y ago
    TO be fair, even apps without an installer will open a warning dialogue the first time it's actually run letting the user know this is an application that's "new" and hasn't been run before. Also - as long as Apple makes it easy for developers to get signing keys, which seems to be their direction as far as OS X goes, there's no reason for developers to complain about it too much. Just sign your builds, and you probably avoid any warning message.
rryan 15y ago
But will you be able to leave with your data? Or will it be locked in to iCloud?
- k-mcgrady 15y ago
  iCloud is not a drive you store your data on. iCloud syncs data and changes between your devices. So you have local copies of a document on your iPhone and Mac. Make a change on your Mac and it will show up on the iPhone. Both devices have local copies. In other words you will always have your data. The only things stored on iCloud are device backups and iTunes purchases.
  - jrockway 15y ago
    In other words you will always have your data. In what format? If addresses and mail are stored like Apple stores my iTunes metadata, I'll never get them back if I stop using Apple products.
    - k-mcgrady 15y ago
      I'm not sure about mail because I don't use it but you can export your contacts as a Vcard.
    - microtherion 15y ago
      Addresses exportable as vcards, as noted above. Mail has export options for mail boxes and individual mails, plus icloud is using IMAP, so you should be able to export both from the server and the client.
    - glhaynes 15y ago
      iTunes metadata can be exported as an XML file.
tomjen3 15y ago
To me it depends on what happens when you attempt to run the binary. If there is an override button which remembers that setting, fine. If not, to hell with Apple.
mikeash 15y ago
I'm curious, what makes you say that taking away that choice is completely out of character when they've already done so on a different, more popular platform?
- evan_ 15y ago
  they never gave you that choice on iOS, so they never took it away, did they?
  - mikeash 15y ago
    Never giving the choice in the first place is stronger, not weaker, than giving it and then taking it away.
    - kemiller 15y ago
      I disagree. Pulling access to something you've come to depend on (especially, derive your livelihood from) is worse than never fostering that dependence in the first place.
      - mikeash 15y ago
        I was aiming more at the idea that it would be out of character for Apple to completely restrict access to just certain sources of apps. If we're talking about whether Apple would take something away that people had come to rely upon, well, there's a whole long list of technologies I could list off to support the idea that they have no problem doing that....
        kemiller 15y ago
        Not arguing that they won't do it. Just that it's worse than never allowing something.
        mikeash 15y ago
nextparadigms 15y ago
Shouldn't it work the same way for iOS, too? It seems Android is the only one who's allowing you you to make that choice. Neither iOS nor WP7 allow it.
courtewing 15y ago
I don't necessarily think Gatekeeper is a bad thing, but I worry about the impact if Apple were to make the default setting for Gatekeeper be Mac-store-only. Having the option to install other software would be great, but such a move would further marginalize non-Apple-approved software in a huge way. Assuming a large portion of Mac users are not the type to lower default security settings, then that could have a severe impact on the way people think about software in the "wild".
bishnu 15y ago
Agreed on all points. I think it's far likelier that this form of tiered app access will make its way over to iOS eventually.

by nirvana 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
Apple's pattern with iOS has actually been one of slowly opening up. Just web apps, then native apps with massive restrictions on what you can do and how you can build them, then native apps with a few less restrictions on what you can do and how you can build them (for instance compiled from non-objective C sources). I get that people don't like where they are now but the pattern isn't one of closing down, it's slow but in the other direction. I don't think it's a jump to assume it might keep moving if Apple see the benefit of allowing it. Gatekeeper might, just might, be them seeing how such a model might work.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  > Apple's pattern with iOS has actually been one of slowly opening up. Tell that to Amazon or Barnes & Noble or Netflix or Hulu or anyone else burned by the In-App Purchase mess. I'd bet none of them would say Apple's pattern has been to open up iOS.
  - Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
    I should possibly have been clearer - from the perspective of software development. Even with those three it's not closed. I read Kindle books on my iPhone (and use iBooks as nothing more the a PDF reader as it goes), just the purchasing model isn't as streamlined as Amazon would like.
- dchest 15y ago
  then native apps with massive restrictions on what you can do and how you can build them No. They originally allowed any programming language, then played a bit with disallowing anything other than C/C++/Objective-C.

ugh 15y ago

I think it’s right to make very clear that Apple overstepping that line would be inexcusable and evil, or else they might think people would be ok with that. So a bit of outrage isn’t altogether a bad thing, really. (Although it’s pretty obvious that acting like Apple already overstepped that line or will certainly overstep that line in the future is very childish.)

tptacek 15y ago

It's a sensible feature, and there's no reasonable way to implement it without that settings option, and the options they've chosen make total sense. I agree with you: not having the option would be very bad... but it's very unlikely they'll ever take the option away. Why would they? The overwhelming majority of their users will never touch it.

yequalsx 15y ago
Right now there is no need to take the option away. You are certainly correct about that. Microsoft is going to soon start pushing its users to buy from its app store. I can see a future in which only 'trusted' programs can be run on new computers. Trusted here means programs approved by Apple/Microsoft and the national government of the country in which your computer resides. I don't know how likely this would be but China seems to like to have a lot of control over the computing its citizens do.
- tptacek 15y ago
  Sure is handy for China how easy it is to get a keylogger installed on someone's computer, isn't it?
  - yequalsx 15y ago
    Yes. Unfortunately control of citizens' computing is one area that China leads in. Other national government appear to be envious of this control seek to emulate it.
    - mbateman 15y ago
      I think you may be missing tptacek's point. Things like code signing make it harder for bad things to run without the user's permission.
      - yequalsx 15y ago
        If option 3 is removed then how is this so? It's not in Apple's interest right now to do this. In five years? Maybe China decides that in order to get access to its market Option 3 must not be available. Maybe Gatekeeper gets enhanced in the future. Obviously this is hypothetical but given the trend toward national surveillance is it hard to imagine that this can happen?

MatthewPhillips 15y ago

What I'm curious about is how they'll present this to users who try to install an unsigned application the first time. Will they educate the user, and provide a way to get to the Settings and change it if they want? Or will they present it in such a way that 90% of users give up and assume the installer is broken.

Maxious 15y ago
Just as long as they don't present it the way Windows does - pretty much the same dialog boxes but one has a blue banner (signed) and one has a yellow banner (unsigned).
wtallis 15y ago
Remember that most Mac apps don't have an installer - they're self-contained, and installing consists of extracting the DMG and putting the app on your hard drive. The notification will probably take the same form as the error message you get upon trying to launch a PowerPC app on 10.6 without Rosetta installed.
- dedward 15y ago
  TO be fair, even apps without an installer will open a warning dialogue the first time it's actually run letting the user know this is an application that's "new" and hasn't been run before. Also - as long as Apple makes it easy for developers to get signing keys, which seems to be their direction as far as OS X goes, there's no reason for developers to complain about it too much. Just sign your builds, and you probably avoid any warning message.

rryan 15y ago

But will you be able to leave with your data? Or will it be locked in to iCloud?

k-mcgrady 15y ago
iCloud is not a drive you store your data on. iCloud syncs data and changes between your devices. So you have local copies of a document on your iPhone and Mac. Make a change on your Mac and it will show up on the iPhone. Both devices have local copies. In other words you will always have your data. The only things stored on iCloud are device backups and iTunes purchases.
- jrockway 15y ago
  In other words you will always have your data. In what format? If addresses and mail are stored like Apple stores my iTunes metadata, I'll never get them back if I stop using Apple products.
  - k-mcgrady 15y ago
    I'm not sure about mail because I don't use it but you can export your contacts as a Vcard.
  - microtherion 15y ago
    Addresses exportable as vcards, as noted above. Mail has export options for mail boxes and individual mails, plus icloud is using IMAP, so you should be able to export both from the server and the client.
  - glhaynes 15y ago
    iTunes metadata can be exported as an XML file.

tomjen3 15y ago

To me it depends on what happens when you attempt to run the binary. If there is an override button which remembers that setting, fine. If not, to hell with Apple.

mikeash 15y ago

I'm curious, what makes you say that taking away that choice is completely out of character when they've already done so on a different, more popular platform?

evan_ 15y ago
they never gave you that choice on iOS, so they never took it away, did they?
- mikeash 15y ago
  Never giving the choice in the first place is stronger, not weaker, than giving it and then taking it away.
  - kemiller 15y ago
    I disagree. Pulling access to something you've come to depend on (especially, derive your livelihood from) is worse than never fostering that dependence in the first place.
    - mikeash 15y ago
      I was aiming more at the idea that it would be out of character for Apple to completely restrict access to just certain sources of apps. If we're talking about whether Apple would take something away that people had come to rely upon, well, there's a whole long list of technologies I could list off to support the idea that they have no problem doing that....
      - kemiller 15y ago
        Not arguing that they won't do it. Just that it's worse than never allowing something.
        mikeash 15y ago

nextparadigms 15y ago

Shouldn't it work the same way for iOS, too? It seems Android is the only one who's allowing you you to make that choice. Neither iOS nor WP7 allow it.

courtewing 15y ago

I don't necessarily think Gatekeeper is a bad thing, but I worry about the impact if Apple were to make the default setting for Gatekeeper be Mac-store-only. Having the option to install other software would be great, but such a move would further marginalize non-Apple-approved software in a huge way. Assuming a large portion of Mac users are not the type to lower default security settings, then that could have a severe impact on the way people think about software in the "wild".

bishnu 15y ago

Agreed on all points. I think it's far likelier that this form of tiered app access will make its way over to iOS eventually.