7 ms·

"Not Apple's fault" is up for debate; even if Electron shouldn't be doing this, Apple arguably shouldn't be pushing out updates that cause issues with wide-swat

by wk_end 1y ago

"Not Apple's fault" is up for debate; even if Electron shouldn't be doing this, Apple arguably shouldn't be pushing out updates that cause issues with wide-swaths of software that users use regardless.

tom1337 1y ago
So you're blaming because they've changed a private API which electron not only used, but also seemed to have patched?
- asqueella 1y ago
  No, for "pushing out updates that cause issues [with very common software]".
  - smashedtoatoms 1y ago
    As a dev, if you use a private method, you've just taken ownership of the problem. I suggested to you in our contract not to do it, and that it would likely not be supported, and you did it anyway. Fix your shit, common software or not.
    - asqueella 1y ago
      This is what an Apple engineer could write in the electron's github issue if they refused to fix it. We're not discussing that, but that they have pushed an update without proper testing. You can see from the other comments that breakage is not limited to people using private methods.
pavlov 1y ago
That’s the principle that prevented Windows from making any meaningful progress for the past three decades.
- wk_end 1y ago
  What? Windows made tons of progress while maintaining this principle and became the most popular operating system in the world. Are you trying to tell me that you believe the evolution of Windows from 1.0 all the way to 7 - the entire time trying to operate according to this principle - doesn't constitute meaningful progress? The recent stagnation of the OS has nothing to do with attempting to maintain backwards compatibility.
  - acdha 1y ago
    It’s true that they’ve made some progress but my work laptop running Windows 11 still has UI elements from Windows 95/NT 4. The file system hasn’t improved since then and the keyboard responsiveness is actually worse. BeOS on 90s hardware absolutely torches Windows 11 on things like UI responsiveness, ability to multitask without degrading UI performance, and the file system (not networking, of course, it wasn’t perfect). I think it’s fair to question whether the decisions around backwards compatibility have been worth the cost but I’d imagine they’re already doing that. Enterprise IT departments love Windows but nobody else does, and the generation of people who grew up using iOS/Android and macOS/ChromeOS for school aren’t going to jump at the chance to bring that enterprise IT experience into their personal lives.
    - cyberax 1y ago
      You can actually tell the old controls from the Win NT by how fast and responsive they are. They also properly follow the best practices by showing keyboard accelerators when you press "alt". It's the new stuff that is slow and unusable.
      - 1718627440 1y ago
        And they also explain themself to the user. The new UI often doesn't tell you at all, what exactly you are modifying here, while the old often has paragraphs of explanation.
    - wk_end 1y ago
cosmic_cheese 1y ago
Apple’s attitude here is that it’s an inherent risk of using private APIs, because it’s not something they want devs doing. They don’t facilitate it like MS tends to. Don’t touch the stove if you don’t want to get burnt.
- wk_end 1y ago
  The person who's getting burnt is Random Officer Worker Joe, who just wants to run Slack and Spotify and who doesn't know a thing about Electron or private APIs, but knows that ever since upgrading their version of macOS things are running terribly. Apple's position is technically noble, but that doesn't help their users.
  - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
    The Electron maintainers should've considered that possibility before reaching for a private API. It's on the Electron's team's shoulders and nobody else's. If I were building a FOSS platform, I wouldn't give a second thought to third parties making use of my platform's private APIs. They're private for a reason, whether that be because they're not yet fully baked or because using them can have unintended consequences, they're not intended for public consumption. I especially wouldn't want somebody else's platform to depend on my private APIs, because I am then effectively locked into keeping that API frozen in time by the numerous others building on this other person's platform. It's generally poor practice to build upon such brittle things as under-the-hood tinkering anyway.
  - Aaargh20318 1y ago
    > Apple's position is technically noble, but that doesn't help their users. The alternative doesn’t help either. That’s the approach Microsoft has taken and look what a mess Windows is because of it.
    - viraptor 1y ago
      > what a mess Windows is because of it. Can you point at any part of windows being a mess specifically because of backwards compatibility?
Aurornis 1y ago
We've had developer betas of macOS Tahoe since June. Standard practice for any mobile or desktop software is to start testing on the betas as soon as they're available. Unless this was a last-minute change before the final release, it's on the software developers to use the betas to prepare their software for upcoming releases.
- Tteriffic 1y ago
  Exactly. Who you blame depends on if it was introduced in beta 1 or RC.

by wk_end 1y ago

tom1337 1y ago

So you're blaming because they've changed a private API which electron not only used, but also seemed to have patched?

asqueella 1y ago
No, for "pushing out updates that cause issues [with very common software]".
- smashedtoatoms 1y ago
  As a dev, if you use a private method, you've just taken ownership of the problem. I suggested to you in our contract not to do it, and that it would likely not be supported, and you did it anyway. Fix your shit, common software or not.
  - asqueella 1y ago
    This is what an Apple engineer could write in the electron's github issue if they refused to fix it. We're not discussing that, but that they have pushed an update without proper testing. You can see from the other comments that breakage is not limited to people using private methods.

pavlov 1y ago

That’s the principle that prevented Windows from making any meaningful progress for the past three decades.

wk_end 1y ago
What? Windows made tons of progress while maintaining this principle and became the most popular operating system in the world. Are you trying to tell me that you believe the evolution of Windows from 1.0 all the way to 7 - the entire time trying to operate according to this principle - doesn't constitute meaningful progress? The recent stagnation of the OS has nothing to do with attempting to maintain backwards compatibility.
- acdha 1y ago
  It’s true that they’ve made some progress but my work laptop running Windows 11 still has UI elements from Windows 95/NT 4. The file system hasn’t improved since then and the keyboard responsiveness is actually worse. BeOS on 90s hardware absolutely torches Windows 11 on things like UI responsiveness, ability to multitask without degrading UI performance, and the file system (not networking, of course, it wasn’t perfect). I think it’s fair to question whether the decisions around backwards compatibility have been worth the cost but I’d imagine they’re already doing that. Enterprise IT departments love Windows but nobody else does, and the generation of people who grew up using iOS/Android and macOS/ChromeOS for school aren’t going to jump at the chance to bring that enterprise IT experience into their personal lives.
  - cyberax 1y ago
    You can actually tell the old controls from the Win NT by how fast and responsive they are. They also properly follow the best practices by showing keyboard accelerators when you press "alt". It's the new stuff that is slow and unusable.
    - 1718627440 1y ago
      And they also explain themself to the user. The new UI often doesn't tell you at all, what exactly you are modifying here, while the old often has paragraphs of explanation.
  - wk_end 1y ago

cosmic_cheese 1y ago

Apple’s attitude here is that it’s an inherent risk of using private APIs, because it’s not something they want devs doing. They don’t facilitate it like MS tends to. Don’t touch the stove if you don’t want to get burnt.

wk_end 1y ago
The person who's getting burnt is Random Officer Worker Joe, who just wants to run Slack and Spotify and who doesn't know a thing about Electron or private APIs, but knows that ever since upgrading their version of macOS things are running terribly. Apple's position is technically noble, but that doesn't help their users.
- cosmic_cheese 1y ago
  The Electron maintainers should've considered that possibility before reaching for a private API. It's on the Electron's team's shoulders and nobody else's. If I were building a FOSS platform, I wouldn't give a second thought to third parties making use of my platform's private APIs. They're private for a reason, whether that be because they're not yet fully baked or because using them can have unintended consequences, they're not intended for public consumption. I especially wouldn't want somebody else's platform to depend on my private APIs, because I am then effectively locked into keeping that API frozen in time by the numerous others building on this other person's platform. It's generally poor practice to build upon such brittle things as under-the-hood tinkering anyway.
- Aaargh20318 1y ago
  > Apple's position is technically noble, but that doesn't help their users. The alternative doesn’t help either. That’s the approach Microsoft has taken and look what a mess Windows is because of it.
  - viraptor 1y ago
    > what a mess Windows is because of it. Can you point at any part of windows being a mess specifically because of backwards compatibility?

Aurornis 1y ago

We've had developer betas of macOS Tahoe since June. Standard practice for any mobile or desktop software is to start testing on the betas as soon as they're available. Unless this was a last-minute change before the final release, it's on the software developers to use the betas to prepare their software for upcoming releases.

Tteriffic 1y ago
Exactly. Who you blame depends on if it was introduced in beta 1 or RC.