[HN Gopher] Users are losing out against Big Sur's sealed System
___________________________________________________________________
Users are losing out against Big Sur's sealed System
Author : zdw
Score : 173 points
Date : 2021-02-28 17:43 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (eclecticlight.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (eclecticlight.co)
| santamex wrote:
| Imagine the environmental impact of this design decision. 2-3gb
| download. Installation time of half an hour. Millions of macs.
| Crazy.
| buildbot wrote:
| It's actually basically nothing if you do the math... Let's
| assume 50 million macs for a half hour at an average wattage of
| 20W TDP, wolfram alpha tells me worth that's 360 metric tons of
| co2 , or about 24 USA citizens worth of co2 for a year. 24 <<<
| 300 million people in the USA, apple isn't having much impact.
| I'd argue windows would be far worse anyway...
| stevenhuang wrote:
| That's just one update.
|
| Multiply that for every week throughout the lifetime of a mac
| and the benefits of delta updates are clear.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| Building a 13" MBP produces ~200kg of CO2[1]. Taking GP's
| 50 million figure we get 10 billion tons of CO2. Very
| generously assume each one gets 1000 updates, you end up
| with 360,000 tons of CO2 total for all of these updates, or
| about 0.0036% of the cost of building them in the first
| place.
|
| There are actual benefits to delta updates but the
| environmental impact isn't one of them.
|
| [1] https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/notebook
| s/13-...
| Someone wrote:
| Do Macs see a multi-gigabyte update each week? I haven't
| noticed that. What do I overlook?
| brobinson wrote:
| The environmental impact of this decision is nothing compared
| to this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26296339
|
| (and the linked one is trivial to fix!)
| katbyte wrote:
| Imagine the environmental impact of downloading all
| dependencies in a large project every CI run? and running it
| every commit of a pr? sometimes totalling in multi gigabyes.
| Crazy.
|
| If your going to apply that logic, take a closer look at a lot
| of build chains out there.
| [deleted]
| wnoise wrote:
| Yes, that's bad too.
| throwsdadsd wrote:
| This is whataboutism.
|
| There is no way Apple's own development process was so
| wasteful as the waste they will bring to the millions of
| their own users.
|
| If anything, the moment a company notices waste it goes
| towards reducing it.
| InvertedRhodium wrote:
| This is why we have local cache.
| viktorcode wrote:
| TL;DR
|
| macOS Big Sur updates got bigger.
| lilyball wrote:
| Do Big Sur updates really take longer to install? I've been
| putting off installing a Catalina update on my laptop because my
| impression is they take ~45 minutes to install, which is what
| this article claims Big Sur updates take.
| viktorcode wrote:
| Personally I didn't notice, but I haven't timed them. Any OS
| update takes rather noticeable amount of time, so I switch to
| something else while this is happening.
| liminal wrote:
| My biggest gripe with the Big Sur update is that it's now
| incredibly slow to swipe between desktops. It used to be
| responsive and now I need to wait 5-6 seconds before anything
| happens.
| mcguire wrote:
| " _Make is fine, but it's not standard. Disturbingly large
| swathes of critical open source infrastructure are compiled using
| a hodgepodge of Make, autogenerated rules from autotools..._ "
|
| 1. Autotools use make. GNU make, but make.
|
| 2. There's a historical reason for this goofiness:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_wars
|
| " _Companies should be paying for this directly: if pyca
| /cryptography actually broke on HPPA or IA-64, then HP or Intel
| or whoever should be forking over money to get it fixed or using
| their own horde of engineers to fix it themselves._"
|
| If pyca/cryptography breaks on HPPA or whatever, it's pyca's
| problem, not HPs or Intels. Unless your project is big enough
| that you already have HP or Intel working on it.
| comex wrote:
| You seem to have posted in the wrong thread.
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| macOS can be booted from a .dmg for decades already, why make a
| "sealed" "read-only" volume if the updater then unseals it,
| basically copies all files from the update package into it, those
| files including generated stuff like the shared dyld cache, and
| then re-seals the volume again, recalculating all the checksums?
|
| All that work the updater does seems really superfluous, since
| the System volume is declared "immutable". Why replace files on
| it? Just drop a .dmg, boot from it.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| I don't know enough about macOS system internals to confidently
| speak about them, but my guess is that there's some kind of
| legacy cruft/holdover that's preventing a direct disk image
| replacement for updates. Wouldn't be surprised if this were
| fixed in the next major release or two, likely paired with
| dropping support for something.
| tekstar wrote:
| My ~2013 macbook pro has this issue where, if
| AppleThunderboltNHI.kext is loaded, it will crash and restart
| every couple minutes on batteries. I'm not the only one with this
| issue. If you google that kext you'll see it's an issue with a
| lot of us and it's a shame that it's such a dumb problem because
| otherwise this 9 year old laptop is absolutely great to work
| with. SSD, 2.3 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7, 16 GB RAM. Magsafe
| and good keyboard.
|
| So anyways, this locked-down system volume is a real problem
| because typically after a system update I reboot into recovery
| mode, disable CSR, remove the kext, re-enable CSR and then I'm
| good until the next OS update where the kext is re-added and my
| computer starts to crash again.
|
| It seems like a bigger issue now to remove that kext, to deal
| with Apple's own software problem, to keep using my old laptop.
| What a pain.
| katbyte wrote:
| I believe it is possible to unseal the volume and disable these
| protections, a quick google seems to indicate this. Apple
| usually does seem to provide (a maybe annoying) way to bypass
| these sort security measures.
| bombcar wrote:
| He described how he does exactly this - and has to reapply it
| after every update.
| tekstar wrote:
| I'm still on Catalina. I've read reports that on Big Sur
| you cannot remove the kext and re-enable CSR. Seems the
| only solution might be to leave csr disabled, which would
| be unfortunate.
| peterlvilim wrote:
| I don't believe you can turn on file vault if you do this
| (full disk encryption)
| worik wrote:
| I learnt to programme using Pascal on Mac Plus in 1988. I had my
| first job as a programmer in 1989 on Macs.... Until very recently
| I had a soft spot for Macs, I had not really used them since 1992
|
| Recently getting a job developing for iOS in Swift I am amazed at
| how the developer experience has degraded. There is so much
| friction
|
| In 1988 the documentation was very useful (Inside Macintosh - I
| think that was the name of the book). In 2020 Apple has decided
| that documentation is not really worth the effort. There is a
| cursory description of most APIs, not all, and no examples.
|
| I had to get a license to develop software for the computer (paid
| for) sitting on my desk. I paid, but did not get the license. I
| swallowed that insult because if I make a fuss Apple could wipe
| out my employer at the stroke of a pen.
|
| Accessing the file system is a constant hassle. Why so hard?
|
| I cannot install emacs on my mac. (I probably could, but how hard
| am I going to struggle?)
|
| Software that is free (as in GNU) is charged for in the App
| store. For example I cannot get my hands on a simple interface to
| diff anything like ediff.
|
| The Xcode compiler/debugger has some serious bugs, and as far as
| I can tell Apple's policy is not to fix bugs in developer
| tools...
|
| I am amazed that they care so little for those who are not quite
| the most important. If I could find a quality tablet that runs
| free software (are you listening Pine?) I would lobby _hard_ to
| get off iOS.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Accessing the file system is a constant hassle. Why so hard?
|
| Apple prioritise the user at the expense of the developer. I
| think this is the right balance.
|
| > I cannot install emacs on my Mac.
|
| What's stopping you?
|
| > Software that is free (as in GNU) is charged for in the App
| store.
|
| I don't think this is in conflict with the spirit of the GNU
| project? Paying for software distribution is fine in the eyes
| of the GNU project and their licence. What's your problem with
| it?
|
| > I am amazed that they care so little for those who are not
| quite the most important.
|
| Apple think normal users are the most important, not
| developers. I think they're probably right.
| skynet-9000 wrote:
| > Apple prioritise the user at the expense of the developer.
| I think this is the right balance.
|
| Not for the developer.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Last month I heard people saying that Apple thinks normal
| users are more important than graphic designers, and the
| month before that I heard people claiming that we shouldn't
| worry about Parallels support because "normal users" don't
| need it. At this point, I'm not even convinced there is a
| normal user.
| andrekandre wrote:
| > At this point, I'm not even convinced there is a normal
| user.
|
| i think the right word is maybe "consumers" instead of
| "users"... the thing is, ipad and ios are fine for those
| use cases (super locked down, "safe", limited capabilities,
| better revenue funnel etc), dumbing down macos to get those
| users just hurts the macs value proposition imo
| chrisseaton wrote:
| If you prioritised developers over everyone else... who do
| you think the developers would be developing for?
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| It's ironic that Apple is also preaching "Everyone Can
| Code". In other words, everyone is or can be a power user.
|
| Computers are becoming more and more essential to our
| lives, so deliberately dumbing them down is a disservice to
| everyone, who should be learning _more_ not less about how
| computers work.
|
| My dad was in sales. My first exposure to computers was
| when he bought an Apple II way back in the day. He used
| VisiCalc, naturally, the "killer app" for the Apple II. Was
| he a "power user" or a "normal person"? I'd say both!
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Why does a coder have to be a 'power user'? Why can't the
| applications needed for coding be like any other normal
| application? You don't need to use esoteric stuff like
| emacs to be a coder.
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| > Why can't the applications needed for coding be like
| any other normal application? You don't need to use
| esoteric stuff like emacs to be a coder.
|
| What's a "normal application"? How would you classify
| Xcode?
|
| The complexity comes from the nature of the work. Nobody
| _wants_ complexity for its own sake, but sometimes you
| _need_ it, otherwise you can 't accomplish anything.
| That's what the "power" part of the power user means. The
| power to accomplish your goals. I would contrast "power
| user" with "powerless user". ;-)
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Xcode is a normal application. I think you can get it
| from the App Store? It comes with all the permissions it
| needs, simulators, ability to connect to your devices
| etc. You don't need emacs or something like that.
|
| People get this funny idea that coding is a fundamentally
| low-level activity in conflict with user protection. It
| isn't - it can be high-level. A compiler is a pure
| function!
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| > I think you can get it from the App Store? It comes
| with all the permissions it needs, simulators, ability to
| connect to your devices etc. You don't need emacs or
| something like that.
|
| Haha, that's only because Apple controls the App Store
| and the OS. The first time you launch Xcode, it wants
| your admin privileges so it can install a bunch of stuff
| outside the sandbox. I shouldn't even say sandbox,
| because I think Xcode is not actually sandboxed?
| smoldesu wrote:
| Why does a coder have to use Apple's tools? Why can't the
| applications needed for coding be like any other normal
| application? You don't need to use proprietary software
| like xCode to be a coder.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Why does a coder have to use Apple's tools?
|
| A coder doesn't have to do anything. They don't have to
| use a Mac, they don't have to use Apple's tools.
|
| Apple provides an ecosystem. Coding tools can fit into
| that ecosystem, or they can whine about it, or they can
| leave it.
|
| > Why can't the applications needed for coding be like
| any other normal application?
|
| They are - install them like a word processor or a
| graphics editor or whatever.
|
| > You don't need to use proprietary software like xCode
| to be a coder.
|
| Who said you did? You also don't need to use emacs. And
| it's Xcode, not 'xCode'.
|
| The point is - Apple make it easy to code - the provide
| XCode. Saying 'but why not emacs' is entirely missing the
| point on what they're trying to do.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Seems we're in agreement then. My point wasn't that you
| shouldn't develop on MacOS, but that it won't fit my
| needs or workflow. If Apple is disinterested in
| supporting that, then I'm not interested in supporting
| them.
|
| Why would I pay a premium to use an operating system that
| can't run software my free OS can?
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Why would I pay a premium to use an operating system
| that can't run software my free OS can?
|
| Because you don't need all that software if your goal is
| to 'code'. If your goal is to run some specific ancient
| text editor then yeah you may struggle. If you want to
| code and get something done it's the right platform.
|
| And because the 'normal' things are 10x better - power
| management, touchpad, display driving, etc.
|
| Do you want to spend your time creating, or time trying
| to make basic display scaling work on Linux? And why are
| they better? Because Apple integrates.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I'd like to propose an amendment to their catchphrase,
| maybe you all can offer some feedback?
|
| "Everyone Can Code*
|
| *Unless you have a 128gb SSD."
| salawat wrote:
| The non-existence of Free Software in iOS or Android (though
| F-droid has made it more accessible, but still at the cost of
| being to actually use your device to it's max without going out
| of your way to Root) is all because of the friction of
| development to facilitate a monetizability first model.
|
| Monetizability scales inversely with usability. The more usable
| something is by the end user, the less control a manufacturer
| has over what eventually gets done with it.
|
| Manufacturers have come to realize this, and are pushing hard
| to sell people on them knowing what is best for people so they
| can perpetuate user hostile design paradigms. It's sickening,
| and practically ensures the creation of a larger rift between
| those who eventilually learn to use computers to their max
| potential and those who don't. The mechanisms required to
| constrain the overall programming space to enable gatekeeping
| mechanisms necessarily set the barrier to entry higher than it
| would otherwise need to be set.
| artificial wrote:
| A lot has changed over the decades, security models and stances
| have traded a lot of flexibility. To smooth some of the rough
| edges of purely compiling from source take a look at homebrew
| (https://brew.sh/). Spacemacs (https://www.spacemacs.org/). I
| don't develop desktop software any more and didn't rush get
| into it on Mac, I've played around with swiftui a bit for iOS
| and server side (https://vapor.codes/). Perhaps the server side
| will scratch the itch?
| smoldesu wrote:
| These are stopgap solutions made to imitate aspects of other
| operating systems, and ultimately "break" the security model
| of the Mac. Apple knows the end-user is the weakest link in
| any security model, so by reducing the end-user's
| capabilities, you limit the risk they pose to the system. I'd
| rather just use an operating system that doesn't second-guess
| my choices in the first place.
| Someone wrote:
| _"Software that is free (as in GNU) is charged for in the App
| store"_
|
| It can be argued that the App Store is incompatible with the
| GPL for other reasons (in spirit, if not in letter), but
| selling GPL software is allowed.
| https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-
| faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMon...:
|
| _"Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for
| money? (#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney)
|
| Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell
| copies is part of the definition of free software. Except in
| one special situation, there is no limit on what price you can
| charge. (The one exception is the required written offer to
| provide source code that must accompany binary-only release.)"_
| cptskippy wrote:
| This explains a lot.
|
| I have a 2015 Macbook Pro that I use irregularly. I haven't
| needed it for about 6 months and I dusted it off the other day to
| do something.
|
| It said it had updates to install. 6 hours and 5 reboots later it
| was up to date.
|
| Does Apple not do cumulative updates?
| jandrese wrote:
| My wife had exactly the same experience last night with her
| 2015 MacBook Pro. She was getting regular kernel panics so I
| went to the updater to see if it was just a software problem.
| It says Safari is out of date so I clicked "update", and
| literally 5 hours later (I clicked the button around 20:00, it
| didn't finish until sometime after 01:00) it finally finished.
| I'd thought I had it set up to auto-update, but apparently it
| got stuck on something.
| uncledave wrote:
| I hadn't even noticed this to be honest. And I'm not particularly
| bothered. It just works for me. I'm sure at some point it'll poke
| me in the eye but so far this has been the least painful OS for
| me to use for years.
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| Yes it's running smoother than ever on all my machines.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| It's time for this month's installation of "HN Hates Macs!"...
| now with 150% more anecdotal complaining!!!
| smoldesu wrote:
| Honestly, it's better than "HN Worships The M1".
| davidf18 wrote:
| People are complaining about really a non-issue. You can work
| off-line or on your tablet for the brief download time of a few
| minutes and the update.
|
| People that use Macs a lot besides Office should do yearly fresh
| installs because computers are computers and it helps to keep the
| problems down.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >The Big Sur 11.2.2 update is a good example of what's almost a
| null change, yet requires ... 3.1 GB for an M1 model.
|
| What _Is_ the change?!
|
| Official site doesn't have entry for 11.2.2 or am I missing
| something ?
|
| GUI says this: macOS Big Sur 11.2.2 prevents MacBook Pro (2019 or
| later) and MacBook Air (2020 or later) models from incurring
| damage when they are connected to certain third-party, non-
| compliant powered USB-C hubs and docks.
|
| Then for more details it sends here:
| https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT211896
|
| What about massive writings to SSD? has it been addressed? Or
| it's not a problem?
|
| PS: GUI says for my M1 it's 2.17GB and article says 3.1 GB who is
| correct?
| csande17 wrote:
| Bug fixes and performance improvements, probably.
|
| (The actual answer is that the release notes are only available
| in the US version of the support page:
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211896 )
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| For some reason the en-gb page is missing 11.2.2, but it's on
| the en-us page:
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211896#macos1122
| smoldesu wrote:
| I get the feeling Apple isn't going to fix the swap issue
| anytime soon. I don't think they're being insidious about it,
| though: the BSD memory model is (arguably overly) complicated,
| and refactoring any portion of it's memory management is
| guaranteed to be a pain in the ass. The TL:DR is that MacOS
| doesn't virtualize memory, and when that memory is unified it
| will frequently spill over into the swap storage. I have no
| idea how Apple can pull themselves out of this one, and I have
| a sneaking suspicion that the swap usage will only increase as
| time goes on.
| eddieh wrote:
| The sealed/locked-down system gives me pause, but not in the
| least for the size of the updates or whatever the update does
| that takes forever.
|
| The things that give me pause are more in line with IPC,
| DYLD_FRAMEWORK_PATH, the App Sandbox, and Hardened Runtime. Plus
| any private entitlements or APIs that Apple can use, but an indy
| developer can not.
|
| I'm having to jump through hoops avoiding App Store review
| pitfalls for something I'm developer and I might not be able to
| get the app on the App Store in the end. Not looking forward to
| rolling my own store or distributing the app myself.
| cma wrote:
| Dealing in giant gigs of "adaptive" wallpapers in the sealed
| volume, seemingly just to make you have to upgrade SSDs, was it
| for me. Some of the included wallpapers are nearly 1GB in size
| individually, and to remove them you have to do all kinds of
| stuff only for it to be added back again on update.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Yeah I noticed that too. I'm always struggling with Space (my
| work only gave me a 128G MacBook :S ), and using DiskInventoryX
| I found that these wallpapers occupied a non-trivial amount of
| space.
|
| This is especially weird considering Apple has been pushing
| HEIF so much which is mainly intended to reduce space occupied
| by images, really they shouldn't be this large.
| smoldesu wrote:
| It's especially concerning for developers, since this
| mentality is sadly spreading through the rest of the
| ecosystem. If your Mac has a 128 gig drive and you install
| xCode, you'll be left with a little over 20 gigs of free
| space.
| lostmsu wrote:
| To give some contrast Windows 10 + Visual Studio (not VS
| Code, but C# workload only) leaves about 15GB from 60GB
| primary SSD.
| codetrotter wrote:
| My previous Mac was a 2018 model MacBook Air with 128GB SSD,
| and I soon discovered that 128GB was way too little.
|
| Even the 256GB I have in my 2020 model MacBook Pro M1 is a
| little bit on the short side tbh.
|
| I have a 1TB external m2 SSD with an USB-C enclosure, but I
| only use it when I really really need to because it's still a
| bit of a drag to have it sitting on the side and taking up
| one of the two ports.
|
| If I could afford it I would probably go with 1TB internal
| storage. But even if I could afford it, I would then really
| really like to see such a MBP have 4 USB-C ports and not just
| 2.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Apple could pretty easily fix this by offering an M.2 slot
| in the Macbook. It's a shame they don't too: once the SSD
| dies in these Macs, they're dead forever. Not very
| "environmentally friendly" to me.
| kevindong wrote:
| I just checked and the entirety of the wallpapers folder is
| 1.14 GB which admittedly is a lot bigger than I originally
| thought.
|
| /System/Library/Desktop Pictures
| 0x0 wrote:
| Even iOS can do delta updates, sometimes in the size of only a
| dozen megabytes to download, and I had the impression they've
| been using sealed system volumes for much longer. Hopefully Apple
| can get macOS up to par soon...?
| smoldesu wrote:
| This article echoes a lot of the reasons why I ultimately ditched
| MacOS. Apple no longer respects when the user wants to update,
| it's all just a different flavor of Windows at this point.
| Thankfully, leaving MacOS has put most of those issues in the
| rearview. Hopefully someday Apple recognizes that a bloated OS
| doesn't make anyone happy, I'm kinda surprised that more people
| don't talk about the 50 gig download that xCode requires. Kinda
| insane for a glorified text editor.
| sdfjkl wrote:
| Agreed. And on Windows at least there are now mitigation
| measures created by the community, such as WUMT.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| When you describe it this way, and I think it is an accurate
| perspective, it feels like the situation calls for a "new" OS
| to fill the space the others have abandoned. An OS for people
| who actually understand something about computers but are not
| just trying to exploit that knowledge for money.
|
| IMO, the market these OS are targeting generally has no idea
| what "bloat" even means in the context of computers. The
| exceptions include people who do understand the concept but are
| happy to trade bloat for profit.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Nobody wins when the public isn't educated, that much I can
| agree with. Our goal needs to be shifting to a more equitable
| digital world, where people aren't "the product" so to speak.
| That begins by putting the user in control of their own
| computer, even if it isn't something they're fully capable of
| understanding or managing themselves. It's always safer for
| someone to blindly use open source software instead of
| proprietary software. If the end user truly "doesn't care",
| then they ultimately won't notice the difference. Eliminating
| the silly social pressures around computing will hopefully
| pave the way for a more empowered, creative and effective
| user.
| alfiedotwtf wrote:
| Same feeling here. I reinstalled yesterday and sold my MacBook
| Pro last night. Feels so refreshing to be going back to Linux
| after all this time.
|
| "Freedom as in liberty"
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| Worth noting that Xcode doesn't just include the IDE, but also
| an entire LLVM/clang toolchain as well as SDKs and simulator OS
| disk images for macOS, iOS, watchOS, and tvOS.
|
| It probably wouldn't hurt to split that up a bit -- perhaps
| Xcode could install only the toolchain and macOS SDKs by
| default with the rest being downloadable on demand, but there's
| definitely a lot more going on there than just IDE/text editor.
| It's an all-in-one appleOS development kit.
| bombcar wrote:
| It is possible to install just the tool chain - brew asks you
| to do so if you don't have Xcode installed.
| anaerobicover wrote:
| I'd even (somewhat tongue in cheek) say that the text editor
| is the worst and least important part of Xcode. :)
|
| (In fairness it's been improving in recent years but it's
| still not flexible/customizable to my TextMate taste.)
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| > In fairness it's been improving in recent years
|
| Has it? In my experience, the Swift rewrite of Xcode source
| editing has made it vastly more buggy. I forget exactly
| when this happened, Xcode 8? 9?
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| It's definitely been improving since that initial
| rewrite. There's still a few rough spots, but they can be
| avoided almost entirely by writing idiomatic Swift -- the
| stuff that trips SourceKit up tends to be things like
| nesting closures deeply and ridiculously long optional
| chains.
|
| SwiftUI has done well to expose SourceKit/Xcode's weak
| spots. Nearly all of the performance improvements brought
| to both in the last major release were a result of
| SwiftUI applying pressure in the previous release.
| josephg wrote:
| I was playing with swift a few months ago on my 2016
| MacBook Pro and Sourcekit sat on 100% cpu for hundreds of
| milliseconds whenever I typed a keystroke for some
| reason. There's also a bug / horrible design choice in
| the macos kernel from the last couple of years where if
| the cpu is pegged, the computer drops keystrokes. These
| two bugs combined to make my computer lose keystrokes
| while typing function names - they came out garbled
| unless I purposefully typed really slowly. I was
| gobsmacked. It was the worst code editing experience I've
| ever had. Maybe I'm "using the wrong swift features" but
| it really just feels like its amateur hour at Apple. Did
| all the senior engineers leave in the last few years?
| Xcode as a whole has sort of felt like beta software
| since Xcode 3. Every version they fix one bug, add a
| headline feature and add 3 new bugs to work around. And
| everything gets 20% slower. It seems like they keep
| rushing releases out the door for wwdc then they never
| fix it properly afterwards.
|
| Swift is a lovely language but the experience is
| thoroughly and totally ruined by Xcode. Xcode manages to
| make eclipse feel lightweight and snappy.
| andrekandre wrote:
| > if the cpu is pegged, the computer drops keystrokes
|
| not only that, but ive seen bluetooth stack blow up and
| loose all connections to my keyboard/mouse under those
| circumstances as well
|
| > Xcode manages to make eclipse feel lightweight and
| snappy.
|
| its been slow since xcode 4... never really recovered
| from glomming interface builder into the ide
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| > SDKs and simulator OS disk images for macOS, iOS, watchOS,
| and tvOS
|
| Yes, the vast majority of Xcode's size comes from inside the
| folder Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms
| MarkyC4 wrote:
| Android Studio is better in this regard, there's an SDK
| manager so I don't need to have watchOS/tvOS installed when
| my apps don't target it
| intricatedetail wrote:
| Did they pay for development of that toolchain or just
| "embraced" the open source?
| [deleted]
| laingc wrote:
| They most certainly paid for it, as well as financing many
| of the key contributors to related open source projects.
| intricatedetail wrote:
| So not all contributors got paid? Sounds obscene given
| how much money they have.
| kortilla wrote:
| Sounds like you're not a fan of open source software.
| eddieh wrote:
| Apple has been involved in the toolchain since nearly the
| beginning. They hired one of the original authors and
| sponsor its development:
| https://foundation.llvm.org/docs/sponsors/
|
| Not only have the paid for it, but it wouldn't likely be
| anything more than an academic project without Apple.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| In a way it's worse than Windows now. Microsoft doesn't lock
| parts of the filesystem or prevents you from editing files. As
| an example, I like to change /etc/ssh/sshd_config to permit
| only pubkey authentication. But even since Catalina it deletes
| any changes to this file with any system update.
| cproctor wrote:
| I've been a mac user since 2002. I've been getting tired of
| fighting for access to my own system with each successive OS
| update. I upgraded to Bug Sur last week, and will be switching
| permanently to Unix or Linux within a week.
| Razengan wrote:
| I'm happy with macOS and the UI/UX on Windows and Linux still
| feels crap in comparison, not to mention the mandatory spyware
| on Microsoft's side of the fence.
| fortran77 wrote:
| > _not to mention the mandatory spyware on Microsoft 's side
| of the fence._
|
| I'm curious. What does Microsoft do that Apple doesn't? I'm a
| happy Windows 10 user. What should I be worried about?
| smoldesu wrote:
| I think the Windows UX is pretty dogshit overall, but part of
| the appeal of Linux is how varied each user experience can
| be. You're expected to tailor a workflow that works for you,
| rather than adjusting an existing one to fit your needs. For
| some people, OSX just "clicks", but that's the case for every
| operating system.
| root_axis wrote:
| I take the opposite view. macOS UX sucks. A few examples off
| the top of my head: I regularly find myself frustrated that
| there is no volume mixer for applications, spotlight search
| is atrocious and often returns different results for the
| exact same query, finder is also clunky as hell and won't
| allow me to do simple things like directly input a directory
| path string, the search feature also behaves completely
| counterintuitively by performing a global search rather than
| limiting the scope of the search to the directory you're in,
| trying to get macOS to permanently show hidden files is a
| chore and resets after every update, the touch bar is horrid
| and regularly causes me to accidentally take actions I did
| not intend, updates are often very unstable and fraught with
| world breaking bugs and issues that prevent me from doing my
| work, xcode is generally a nightmare and a mandatory one...
| the list goes on and on. Linux and Windows might not look as
| _pretty_ but they are far more functional with respect to
| accomplishing my work.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| Finder can go directly to paths with Go > Go to Folder...
| (Command+Shift+G) and search scope can be changed to
| current directory in Finder preferences. Hidden file
| visibility can be toggled with Command+Shift+. in both
| Finder windows and open/save dialogs.
| threeseed wrote:
| Within Finder Preferences there is a dropdown that asks you
| when performing a search whether to use global or current
| directory.
|
| And for volume mixer this exists:
| https://github.com/kyleneideck/BackgroundMusic
|
| I have to say it really doesn't seem like you spent much
| effort trying to actually fix your issues.
| sumanthvepa wrote:
| Well 50gb for a complete SDK and compiler suite and IDE isn't
| that large. Visual Studio, the comparable IDE for windows
| starts at around 20GB but can easily exceed 100GB if you
| include all the features of the product. For Linux, a complete
| development tool chain for C++, Java, and Python with all the
| associated libraries will easily exceed 20GB. So Xcode is in
| the ball park. The difference between Xcode and Linux
| toolchains is that the latter are broken up into smaller pieces
| that can be independently updated and Linux has package
| managers that handle those updates gracefully.
| smoldesu wrote:
| You're partially correct. It's been a while since I've used
| Visual Studio, but I've heard that a "full" installation will
| occupy close to 30 gigs, and the default install uses less
| than 2. Still pretty large, but the 100gb mark might be a bit
| of a stretch. It's definitely a stretch on the Linux side of
| things though, my dev toolchains and associated libraries
| barely occupy 2 gigs, much less 20. Maybe I'm not quite
| "enterprise ready" though ;)
| mplanchard wrote:
| I have also switched back to Linux after about 8 years in Mac
| world, and have been really pleasantly surprised. Things still
| aren't perfect, but they're a far cry from where they were in
| 2010. My wife and I recently got a new Lenovo ThinkPad and Dell
| XPS, respectively, both with Linux preinstalled. The
| fingerprint readers work! The webcams work! Audio works! Wifi
| works! All with close to zero hassle (had to enable a PAM
| option to use the fingerprint reader with sudo, but otherwise
| no problems).
|
| I miss MacOS keyboard shortcuts a bit, but most of the software
| I use for work and personal projects (emacs, terminal/tmux,
| docker) runs an order of magnitude faster. I love having a real
| package manager again, and I get first class support for most
| of the developer-centric tooling I really care about (e.g.
| Nix).
|
| I like many was a little tempted by the M1 Macs, but seeing two
| coworkers have to switch away from them because critical dev
| tooling isn't functional, reading about the SSD write issues
| recently, and now this about the insane size of update files
| helps temper the temptation.
| jagger27 wrote:
| Keyboard shortcuts are a big sticking point for me switching
| away from macOS. I expected I could wrestle Linux into
| something that resembles macOS shortcuts but it's tricky and
| inconsistent. The clearest example of where macOS excels with
| shortcuts is in a terminal window: Command+C for copy,
| Control+C to kill a process. Control+Shift+C just doesn't cut
| it for me on Linux.
|
| I agree with you on software. Real package managers are
| great.
|
| I hate to say it, because it's so against what Linux has been
| for 25 years, but it would be great if there was a $99 distro
| with a heavily tweaked window manager that looks consistent
| across most apps, doesn't have huge top bars, and conforms to
| macOS keyboard shortcuts. A lightning fast Spotlight analog
| would be great too. I recognize I can probably get pretty
| close to this vision with a patchwork of already available
| software but I want someone to tie a bow on it and maintain
| it for me.
| folmar wrote:
| You have a modifier key "Super", probably with Windows
| logo, which you can remap for the shortcuts you've had with
| command.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I'm not going to use this as a platform to evangelize
| Linux, but I think you should give KDE a look. It looks
| really pretty out-of-the-box, and offers you a lot of
| control over the look and feel of your desktop. On top of
| that, it has a nearly endless list of keyboard shortcuts
| that can be rebound in the settings app painlessly. It's a
| far-cry from a lot of the other DEs I've used in the past,
| and the "batteries-included" mentality makes it a great
| analog for Mac and Windows users alike.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| KDE has a lot going for it but its customizability is so
| deep as to be daunting. Each time I've tried using it
| I've ended up burning hours trying to get every detail
| just right.
|
| I think it'd benefit quite a lot from including several
| sane sets of defaults to use as starting points.
| [deleted]
| elcritch wrote:
| I feel the pain. Unfortunately I gave up trying to get
| Firefox to understand/use super or hyper as command keys.
| Mostly however I get by fine with caps lock set as control
| with the exception of VSCode with the Vim plug-in
| overriding ctrl-c/ctrl-v and breaking copy/paste. Of course
| VSCode doesn't support super/hyper instead of control key
| on Linux.
| kps wrote:
| Firefox _used to_ handle it (ui.key.accelKey = 91) but
| it's been buggy since Quantum.
| iso1210 wrote:
| Why would I press a key to copy/paste?
|
| Highlight text, then middle click
| racingmars wrote:
| Because often I need to highlight text in the terminal,
| copy it, then highlight text somewhere else (e.g. in a
| text input field in a browser, the address bar in the
| browser, etc.) and paste over it. Selecting the specific
| destination text I want to overwrite blows away my
| previous selection.
|
| In many cases I do just highlight and right-click where I
| want the text pasted. But that workflow doesn't work a
| large portion of the time and I need a clipboard that
| isn't being wiped out almost any time I click on
| something.
| jagger27 wrote:
| Muscle memory, no middle click on most trackpads. It just
| feels weird coming from a browser after using Control+C
| to copy something and then having to use Control+Shift+V
| to paste. I never got used to the right click to paste
| paradigm. I expect a context menu.
| fsflover wrote:
| > no middle click on most trackpads
|
| If your trackpad has multitouch, triple touch should
| correspond to the middle click. Works for me on Linux by
| default.
| iso1210 wrote:
| I've never used a non-mac laptop without a middle button.
|
| Muscle memory and 'the way things work' works both ways.
| You have to jump through hoops to do basic things like
| focus-follows-mouse/raise on click, multiple desktops,
| alt-drag to move a window etc (to be honest I'm not sure
| if you can even do those on a mac)
| jagger27 wrote:
| ThinkPads are what I reach for on the PC side of things,
| and those still have a dedicated middle button for the
| most part. Otherwise I can't think of a single modern
| example of a laptop with a middle button. They're all
| click pads these days like Macs.
| folmar wrote:
| The standard unix 3rd button emulation is left+right
| click at the same time. Should work pretty much
| everywhere without configuration.
| smallstepforman wrote:
| You just described Haiku
| artificial wrote:
| Oh, what could've been. I really like what BeOS does, I'm
| sure there are analogs to this feature but it's nice that
| it's built in. https://www.haiku-
| os.org/documents/dev/node_monitoring
| mplanchard wrote:
| Mostly I get by well enough by switching alt to ctrl, meta
| to alt, and ctrl to meta, plus caps lock mapped to ctrl.
| This gives me mostly an approximation of the Mac keyboard.
| Still have to remember the shift when copying and pasting
| in the terminal, but that's not a huge deal because most of
| my terminal use is via emacs, where I have vim mode via
| evil, so copy and paste is done in normal mode with y and
| p. For me,a little bit of frustration with the keyboard is
| not so bad compared to the upsides.
| jagger27 wrote:
| I do Caps Lock to Control too, which frees up the bottom
| left key as a Function key on external keyboards.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Indeed, I switched to Mac in 2004 because Linux was a
| horrible UX mess at that point. Mac was a great POSIX system
| with a consistent UI and major first-party apps.
|
| Now Apple is becoming more and more unworkable to use as a
| unix system, and Linux is really much better now. Only gap is
| still first-party software unfortunately but luckily I don't
| really ever need stuff like photoshop and office personally.
| shrimp_emoji wrote:
| > luckily I don't really ever need stuff like ... office
|
| If you do, check out CrossOver:
| https://www.codeweavers.com/crossover
|
| It's a straight up Microsoft Office suite clone for Mac and
| Linux, which can open, save, AND create MSOffice formats
| (.docx, etc.).
| lights0123 wrote:
| Huh? CrossOver is just a Wine fork with a GUI. It's not
| an Office suite. You can install the real MS Office on
| it, but it has no actual office applications built-in.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| As someone who's mainly been a macOS user in the past couple
| decades but regularly uses Windows and Linux, I find that the
| number of papercuts, sharp edges, and lack of consistency in
| the desktop Linux experience is still too high for my taste.
| It's certainly much better than it used to be but still has a
| way to go. But then again, I have little need to tweak system
| internals.
| fsflover wrote:
| I downvoted you for the lack of details. What you are
| saying can be said about _any_ system, just change the
| name. Even about Mac.
| imwillofficial wrote:
| "Grass is green, the sky is blue"
|
| "I downvoted you for lack of details"
|
| FFS.
| lapcatsoftware wrote:
| > I downvoted you for the lack of details.
|
| Have you heard of... asking?
| fsflover wrote:
| This is HN. If you are writing something, try to say
| something meaningful or don't post at all.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| Fair enough, but if I elaborated much it'd quickly turn
| into a blogpost.
|
| In attempt to sum things up, I'd say that many of the
| woes of the modern Linux desktop stem from being stuck
| between different worlds -- one example would be with the
| X11 vs. Wayland situation. Wayland has slowly been
| improving over time, but there are still concessions that
| are being made by using either. I understand that
| transitions are difficult and that particular case is
| being made more difficult by parties like Nvidia, but the
| end result is a degraded end-user experience that won't
| be fixed until the transition is over.
| smoldesu wrote:
| The easiest fix for this issue is to not use Wayland,
| like 99% of users. I'm not sure who gave you the idea
| that Wayland is production ready, but it's certainly not
| going to see prime-time Linux for another few years.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| Ubuntu 21.04 will be using Wayland by default for non-
| Nvidia users, which would suggest that it's not far off.
|
| There are also configurations that are better supported
| by Wayland than X11, not to mention Wayland handles
| things like trackpad gestures better (which at this
| point, X11 is never going to get better at), so even if
| it's not yet production ready there are reasons why some
| might want to use it.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Such is the burden of choice. Today, however, x11 is
| still the standard.
| dehrmann wrote:
| I just tried the latest Ubuntu on an X1 Carbon and was
| disappointed. At first it was looking good, but then the
| warts started to show through. I could live with some of the
| problems, but I had to do some searching to learn that the
| reason Firefox scrolling was laggy was I was using a non-
| standard hidpi scale factor, the UI froze multiple times in
| just a few days, and it felt all around glitchier.
| mhitza wrote:
| 1. Maybe give Kubuntu a try. Have not used Gnome in many
| years now, but when I did, lag was a given.
|
| 2. Have you setup full disk encryption? Unless tweaked
| (thanks to Cloudflare kernel patches) dm-crypt will cause
| short system freezes.
|
| 3. Firefox is still an unfortunate story on Linux. Still no
| hardware acceleration enabled by default (and just in the
| last year, I think, made toggleable universally in
| about:config)
| dehrmann wrote:
| 2. Ah, I did set it up (and it had to do it by hand to
| dual boot). It's just all these things added up--they're
| table stakes for an OS.
| mhitza wrote:
| As a pro, at least, dual booting with Linux is still
| straighforward. I guess other OSes can't compete there.
|
| I have to admit that otherwise its not all roses in
| Linuxland. Fedora for example, a couple of versions ago
| switched their upgrade peocedure to the awful download
| now, reboot system and wait for updates to complete.
| Basically upgrades feel like Window upgrades now. Maybe
| that's the way they want to "force" users to swith to
| Fedora Silverblue :)
| mdoms wrote:
| > it's all just a different flavor of Windows at this point
|
| Frankly I don't think that's fair to Windows. There would be a
| shitstorm of epic proportions if Microsoft unilaterally broke
| compatibility with thousands and thousands of programs, tools
| and workflows like Big Sur has done.
|
| Big Sur has been out for 3 months now and the company I work
| for, like many others, has a blanket ban on upgrading to it
| because of mountains of compatibility problems with mission-
| critical software.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Unfortunately you have the PR of Apple to deal with too.
|
| I manage hundreds of Macs and the users are constantly
| howling about not being able to use Big Sur yet. I can
| explain there are still many dealbreaking bugs (the 11.2
| upgrade space problem caused major headaches taking hours to
| fix in my testing!), it's slower and more screenspace
| wasteful but they keep wanting it because of Apple's snazzy
| PR. There's also a major issue with AD accounts getting
| completely blocked after the upgrade.
|
| Of course what doesn't help is that new Macs come with Big
| Sur by default and can't really be downgraded. So we have to
| support it at least for new machines.
| swiley wrote:
| Dump it and run linux. Apple only wants to make instagram
| scrolling machines.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Which is why they: do WWDC, provide Xcode for free, put
| machine learning acceleration into the M1, created a
| brand new Virtualization framework, demoed Linux on the
| M1 Macs, develop their own professional software for Macs
| (Final Cut, Logic)..?
| Razengan wrote:
| > _I 'm right, everyone else is wrong._
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| No, like I'm saying there are _actual_ issues.
|
| If there were no issues I'd be very happy to let people
| upgrade.
|
| Just a grab:
|
| - Box Drive still doesn't work properly:
| https://www.macrumors.com/2021/02/01/box-drive-macos-big-
| sur... . This is our main online file storage. Edit: I
| meant Box Drive, not Box Sync, thanks _a2tech_
|
| - AD accounts get completely broken after the update
| (can't log in due to an MDM profile intended for _local_
| accounts now applies to AD mobile accounts as well).
| Confirmed by Apple support but still pending a fix
|
| - Apple keeps introducing bugs, I was close to push the
| button for mass upgrades with 11.2 but then they
| introduced the space bug which caused macs to be locked
| in a bootloop that can't be fixed without another Mac
| present with an older OS version:
| https://www.macrumors.com/2021/02/15/macos-big-
| sur-11-2-1-re... . This really should never have made it
| through QA.
|
| - Our VPN still has issues with random disconnects that
| are still being investigated (they switched over to
| network extensions so this was a big rewrite for them)
|
| - Our antivirus only supports Big Sur as of about 1 month
| ago. So this was a blocking point for a long time that's
| only just been resolved. This was also due to the system
| extension thing mainly (and yes they could have done this
| sooner as this was already on the cards with Catalina,
| absolutely)
|
| All in all this is not at a level I call "stable" and
| that's not all third-party compatibility issues either,
| some of them are pure Apple.
|
| When I say that it's slower and wastes more screen space,
| that's a matter of opinion (at least of the impact of
| these things). But these are _not a reason for me to
| block the upgrade_ , it's just something I would mention
| to explain why it's not such a big deal that they can't
| have it yet :) I will allow it when it actually works
| reliably.
|
| As the article explains, Apple's PR is not always aligned
| with reality. Updates are indeed slower and I often hear
| the fan running hard since Big Sur when it wouldn't
| before. Especially the WindowServer process uses a lot of
| CPU now for some reason.
| dawnerd wrote:
| Add to the list, screen sharing became very very spotty
| and no longer works on a headless Mac without first
| waking it up and restarting the screen share process.
| There's no way they actually qa'd this.
|
| Another fun one, refresh rates will sometimes go back to
| 60 but the drop down shows the higher rate and only fixes
| once you toggle. Never had this happen before Big Sur.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Aha I have not even noticed this issue, I will have a
| look. But we don't use the built-in screen sharing in
| production. Some of my test boxes have it though, but
| they're also on an IP KVM luckily.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Don't even get me started on my 144hz monitor. Getting it
| to work reliably on Big Sur was a neverending trainwreck.
| a2tech wrote:
| Don't hold your breath for Box Sync to be fixed--it
| wasn't working right previous to Big Sur being delivered.
| Box Drive seems to be the only software that works semi-
| reliably these days.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Oops I meant Box Drive actually, I have to update my
| post.
|
| I was never a fan of Box Sync as it doesn't have the on-
| demand feature and as such uses a LOT of disk space and
| bandwidth.
| foepys wrote:
| I have said this before but here I go again: the company I
| work for is still maintaining a program written in 1999 in
| Visual Basic 6.0 nearly unchanged on Windows in 32bit.
|
| Windows is the perfect platform for us because it makes our
| applications so much less expensive to develop. We are a
| profitable company with hundreds of B2B customers and
| thousands of users that deploy on their own hardware and we
| can deliver our software without Docker or anything because
| the application just runs on any Windows version since XP.
| It's basically write and forget (apart from a few hickups
| here and there when Windows Update accidentally breakes
| something).
|
| We have been working for years to replace parts of the VB6
| application with modern .NET libraries and while this is
| unsupported by Microsoft, it's still working. The VB
| application hosts the modern .NET libraries and integrates
| its functionalities and new functionality is exclusively
| developed in .NET. Our development speed is not impacted by
| deprecated APIs that we have to urgently address. We can take
| our time to improve things without our customers noticing.
|
| If we were supporting macOS, we would have shut down a long
| time ago. It would've been impossible for us to keep up with
| yearly macOS API changes and to add new features at the same
| time.
| no_wizard wrote:
| I feel like this is a security nightmare. How do you handle
| that consideration?
| foepys wrote:
| Everything is running in firewalled environments.
| Literally nothing written in VB6 is publicly accessible.
| We are using .NET since the release of .NET Framework 2.0
| and only very old code is VB6.
| kortilla wrote:
| Can anything that lives in that firewalled environment
| reach out to the internet or have stuff reach in? If so,
| it's only a matter of time before something gets popped
| and it's a bastion to access everything else behind the
| firewall.
|
| This isn't even nation state level attacks, it's pretty
| standard behavior for botnets and ransomware.
| spijdar wrote:
| I think the comparison is a little non-sequitur. Classic
| visual basic hasn't had a feature released since 1998 and
| supported ended in 2005 (with extended in 2008).
|
| It's not a part of Windows itself per se, but a runtime
| environment. Couldn't you just as well have written an app
| in Java, which has also kept good backwards compatibility
| and could still be run on both Windows and MacOS with
| minimal changes?
| JohnTHaller wrote:
| Windows maintains backwards compatibility to an amazing
| level compared to Macs.
|
| If there were a version of Visual Basic for Mac released
| alongside the Windows version back in 1998, it would have
| been a classic Mac app which Apple dropped support for
| after Mac OS 10.4 and never had on Intel-based Macs.
|
| If Microsoft had updated this theoretical Visual Basic
| for Intel-based Macs running Mac OS X back in 2008, Apple
| would have dropped support for it with Catalina, which
| ditched 32-bit app support.
|
| What you're hoping for just wouldn't have worked except
| for a runtime that was still being supported by the
| publisher to make the jump from Mac Classic to OS X and
| then again from 32-bit to 64-bit as Apple broke backwards
| compatibility.
|
| If Microsoft had somehow brought Mac VB out of retirement
| twice and done both of the above, Apple would be dropping
| support for it again a few years from now when they drop
| Rosetta and only support M1-based apps on Mac OS.
| wwweston wrote:
| Backward compatibility is heavily underrated. Windows isn't
| my favorite experience in some ways but I'm starting to
| realize just how compelling a long-running consistent
| execution environment really is after losing enough mac
| software to time.
| 0df8dkdf wrote:
| _> Big Sur has been out for 3 months now and the company I
| work for, like many others, has a blanket ban on upgrading to
| it because of mountains of compatibility problems with
| mission-critical software._
|
| I have being a Mac user since Apple II. All these changes
| really saddens me. Can we start some kind group similar to
| class action law suit to pressure Apple into changing this
| kind of behaviour in Big Sur. If not enough people upgrade,
| maybe they will have skip a version and come out with
| something more light weight. I think that happened with Snow
| Leopard ( don't remember the exact one).
| sbarre wrote:
| There is already a group of people applying this pressure.
| Ex-customers who have stopped buying their products. Join
| us.
|
| Along with many others it seems, Catalina is the last
| version of macOS I'll be using.
|
| I have a 2013 27" iMac and as of mid-last year I was
| considering buying a new one sometime in 2021, but I've now
| changed my mind, due to decisions Apple has made about how
| they handle their desktop operating system.
| 0df8dkdf wrote:
| Thanks, is there a group where we can join? Maybe a web
| site would be great. Please post a link or PM me if you
| know. It relates to both personal and professional usage
| of MacOS.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I really hope that something can be done, but Tim Cook's
| hostility towards the end user gives me a feeling that
| they're not interested. Don't get me wrong, though, Cook's
| grip on Apple has offered some much-needed upgrades in a
| lot of key ares, but the power-user has been ignored the
| entire time. I also get the feeling that their interest
| lies in engineering the Mac to appeal to the lowest common
| denominator. They can sell an iPhone to anyone, they can
| sell an iPad to anyone, but they can't sell a Mac to just
| anyone. The solution? Make it run iPhone and iPad apps.
| gjvc wrote:
| This reminds me of something I read here a long time ago
| "At Apple we know what users want, and we give it to them
| good and hard."
| crazygringo wrote:
| > _Apple no longer respects when the user wants to update_
|
| Huh? You set exactly if, how and when to update in System
| Preferences.
|
| You can set it to never, always, to ask, to download but not
| install, etc.
|
| It's been that way for as long as I can remember, and Big Sur
| doesn't appear to have changed anything. All the checkboxes are
| still there.
| radley wrote:
| > All the checkboxes are still there
|
| But they don't do anything. I have had all of the checkboxes
| off for years and I still get "Update Now" notifications.
|
| The only work-around is to say "Update Tonight" because it
| won't work and will buy me a few days before I get another
| pushy "Update Now".
| AlphaSite wrote:
| Those only turn off auto updating not update notifications,
| which you could argue should be an option, but I disagree
| people are entirely too good at not looking for updates if
| they don't have too (out of sight out of mind and all).
| randallsquared wrote:
| If you click on the left side of the notification, it opens
| System Preferences, which you can just close again or
| ignore. However, while this avoids setting any attempt to
| update overnight, it doesn't actually stop you from getting
| another prompt the next day or whatever.
| crazygringo wrote:
| They prevent the auto updating so they absolutely do
| something. They do exactly what they say.
|
| Notifications are another matter. And if users didn't get
| notifications how would they even know when there were
| updates?
|
| Because updates include security patches it's important to
| nudge people towards updating.
| ksec wrote:
| >it's all just a different flavor of Windows at this point.
|
| That is giving too much credit to Microsoft or Windows. Edit:
| Windows 10X [1] is quite good though.
|
| I also think the discussion completely miss the key point of
| this update -
|
| > There's a risk of damage to the notebook if you are using a
| non-compliant powered _USB-C_ hub or a dock.
|
| USB-C. For crying out loud USB-C, _Again_. Despite all the
| evidence the vocal Internet and HN still think USB-C as the
| holy grail. How they should be able to change using a single
| cable. ( Which is not true ).
|
| I really hope the rumour of MagSafe coming back is true.
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/EPirgHua2sE
| Shivetya wrote:
| I really still like my iMac and Mac OS as a whole is still very
| good. However I also experience Windows 10 daily as my work
| laptop uses that OS. That work laptop also is fully managed by my
| employer with updates pushed to me weekly mostly to cover the
| latest security issue.
|
| So I have biweekly updates at minimum to my work laptop; a
| nothing special i5 SSD based Dell; and these annoy me because I
| have to spend what feels like nearly five minutes between updates
| applied, boot, and more updates applied, before I can sign on.
|
| and there is my Mac. I have a 2019 iMac, i9, SSD, and 40g memory.
| Twenty five to forty minutes complete with a timer on screen just
| to rub it in, which doesn't show up for some time into the
| process just to add some spice.
|
| It is as long as the upgrade to Big Sur took or at least it feels
| that way. I am loathe to let my iMac update and while it claims
| it can do so overnight it always fails to do so.
|
| Apple's patch process even on iPads and to an extent my iPhone
| are abysmal too. I really don't understand systems that are
| otherwise fast take so long to do an update.
|
| PS: On a side note, Big Sur is the least stable OS from them I
| can recall in recent years. I have had hard freezes in some apps
| which they Mac three finger salute could not remedy and a few
| times I found myself signing back in as it just "rebooted"
| trevorishere wrote:
| Microsoft releases updates once per month for Windows and
| associated components (sans the rare critical RCE etc.) -- for
| Office, you may be on Current Channel which releases ~3x/month.
| This would generally be unusual in a corporate environment
| which favors the Monthly Channel or SAC, both of which get
| updates 1x per month.
| bartvk wrote:
| As for your side note, please consider a fresh install. I
| haven't had a single crash _knocks on wood_
| davidf18 wrote:
| "A fresh install a year keeps the bugs away."
|
| I do a fresh install from USB annually because computers are
| computers and it helps with a lot. I also do resets every
| couple of days for the same reason.
|
| I also reset my iPhone 12 Pro Max every few days because
| computers are computers.
| bredren wrote:
| > What this month has demonstrated, reiterated and rubbed in
| until the wounds bleed again, is how massive and debilitating
| updating Big Sur has become.
|
| This is over the top. Most users are not noticing 3gb vs 1gb
| difference per download or the delta between what was and what is
| for short updates.
|
| They are just glad it's getting done without messing with it.
| vinay_ys wrote:
| I just did this update and it took roughly 15 minutes after I
| hit 'reboot now' till I was able to login and resume my work.
| All of the download and preparation work happened in the
| background without interrupting my work.
| carlosrg wrote:
| If they haven't noticed by now, they'll notice soon that even
| minor updates like 12.2.2 takes 40+ minutes to install, no
| matter the download size difference.
| random5634 wrote:
| Seriously - my wife is on MacOS - and has never mentioned to me
| that her wounds have been rubbed until they bleed (??). Where
| does this type of language come from? If a MacOS update is so
| bad for you that you need medical treatment I don't know what
| to tell you.
| breakfastduck wrote:
| 'Not everyone is happy with the latest version of macOS'
| doesn't get clicks because I don't think there's a single OS
| update that everyone likes.
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| For a good many users, internet bandwidth doesn't grow on them
| trees. There's quite a bit of world outside of continental US,
| and even continental US got them so-called rural areas, last I
| heard.
|
| Those sure as hell gonna notice.
| viktorcode wrote:
| Many people outside of US don't know what "data cap" means.
| So, for them bandwidth do grows on them trees.
| InvertedRhodium wrote:
| I can assure you that the entire population of Australia is
| intimately familiar with the concept.
| eq1 wrote:
| I appreciate your point that not everyone has great internet
| but let's also keep in mind that services like Netflix
| consume about 1GB/hr SD and 3GB/hour HD, and Netflix has over
| 200 million customers world wide. 1GB just isn't what it used
| to be.
| oasisbob wrote:
| In the beginning of the pandemic, my living situation
| changed, and my family was dependent on mobile LTE for our
| internet connection due to being in a semi-rural area.
|
| A 1 GB security update would find me at the public library
| parking lot with a pile of devices in my car, updating all
| of them on their WiFi some weekend morning.
|
| There are still millions and millions of people in this
| world who need to change their physical behavior to work
| around issues of internet scarcity on a regular basis.
| mdoms wrote:
| Do you think that 200 million Netflix users comprises the
| same set of people that are bandwidth constrained? I don't
| see how that's relevant to the point whatsoever.
| eq1 wrote:
| I was just putting 1GB into context for 2021. My point is
| there is a substantial number of people that are
| perfectly fine using 1GB/hr for just one of the things
| they do online. So the requirement of a few GB every few
| months is not likely to even register for an even larger
| segment of the population, regardless of platform.
|
| Of course there are those that this will matter to. And
| for those perhaps Apple, a premium brand, is not the best
| solution. But of course they will need to define "best"
| for their own context.
|
| Edit: And of course there are contexts where the long
| upgrade time can matter a lot, like a help desk. They
| won't care about the data but they may care about upgrade
| latency. Again I just don't think the Magnitude of data
| is going to be an issue for Apple's target demographic.
| monocasa wrote:
| > And for those perhaps Apple, a premium brand, is not
| the best solution.
|
| It's not a question of paying for better internet. There
| are places in the US where the best internet you can get
| has a 10GB/Month cap.
| pdpi wrote:
| How likely is it that Mac users are in that bandwidth-
| constrained population either, though?
| swiley wrote:
| A lot of people I know were using macs partly because you
| can still force them to only update at the library,
| Something you haven't been able to do with Windows for a
| long time.
| nottorp wrote:
| Funny because when I read the article I thought "he's in the
| US on a metered expensive connection".
|
| 1 Gb... 3 Gb... not much of a difference for my internet
| pipe.
| crazygringo wrote:
| I'm curious if anyone definitively knows _why_ macOS updates can
| 't be differental -- why it requires a gigabyte or more to patch
| something tiny.
|
| Given the expense of bandwidth and servers needed at a global
| scale, it seems Apple would have implemented differential updates
| long ago if it were just a straightforward engineering task.
|
| So it seems pretty clear that something is making it incredibly
| difficult or essentially impossible. Does anybody know what it
| is?
| count wrote:
| In theory, its simpler to guarantee everything is exactly as it
| should be, so the 'baseline' is identical. Differential based
| systems can fail in multiple ways (e.g. do you know when it's
| all done? what if one file is missed? etc.) that are simpler
| than just a bulk replace. I'm sure they COULD be differential,
| but that's a lot of extra complexity.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| This still doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I don't
| understand the complexity of this at all:
|
| 1. Machine keeps around a baseline version of the OS install
|
| 2. A diff is downloaded and applied to the baseline version -
| that entire new version is then checksummed and validated to
| ensure it would be identical to what an entirely new version
| would look like.
|
| 3. That new version is then installed.
|
| I could see a downside here of requiring more disk space, but
| even then doesn't seem like it would be that hard for the
| system to make some heuristic decisions (e.g. incremental vs.
| full) based on the amount of free space on disk.
|
| Incremental updates are really not that hard, we've
| successfully implemented them for decades. Apple engineers
| are obviously no dummies, so would just like to understand
| what additional considerations make incremental updates more
| difficult now.
| [deleted]
| codemac wrote:
| Normally coworkers are excited to update and get new features.
|
| This time everyone was talking about how much they didn't want
| to, and how scared they were. Then the bugs and issues were a
| solid month of sadness, very rough release for Apple when looking
| from afar.
|
| Are there any big features of the OS that folks are excited
| about? The bugs will get fixed over time.
|
| Here I am on linux 5.11 with the ion window manager from forever
| ago, using emacs and firefox like I did with mozilla in the 90s.
| Happily getting less religious about the set up though.
| AmVess wrote:
| I use Windows and MacOS, and I wince every time either of them
| has an update.
|
| For one, MS doesn't test updates anymore. You may get something
| pleasant like losing the ability to print, or having all your
| network cards vanish.
|
| I had a stack of Mac Minis years ago that I used for various
| things. One update bricked half of them. I was able to fix them
| easily, but it should not have happened at all. I installed
| from scratch on one of them, and an update bricked it. I did
| nothing to the computer in between the fresh install and
| pressing the update button. Neat.
|
| The bottom line is Apple and MS have long ago stopped caring
| about the quality of their products.
| techsupporter wrote:
| Microsoft famously canned their entire group of people who do
| testing (SDETs). If the problem you hit isn't caught by an
| automated test at build, Microsoft employees running it in
| some form of "dogfood," or the people running beta builds, it
| is getting shipped.
|
| Maybe that's good enough. Maybe people are getting used to
| software coming out with multiple updates per quarter to fix
| some "random glitch."
|
| I look at it as the computing industry getting away from the
| roles and pace that made computers _reliable_ instead of just
| functional. We used to have Operations staff to keep a
| service reliable; we used to have Testing staff to make sure
| a code base was reliable. They had their own failings, but to
| cut them out entirely did wonders for stock prices and not
| much for the end user experience.
|
| But maybe being able to launch a pre-VC startup with one
| person and a stack of cloud services is a better trade-off.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| > Normally coworkers are excited to update and get new
| features.
|
| Really?? I'm a software engineer and I'm usually pretty loath
| to install major updates because there's usually a greater
| chance that something will break, costing me hours in fix time,
| than I'll actually get something super useful that will improve
| my workflow.
|
| Maybe I sound a little "old school", but I think for most
| people that at least for the past decade OS updates have been
| so minorly incremental that any individual update is more
| likely to cause pain than pleasure. This follows most "mature"
| technology patterns, e.g. in the late 90s and 00s there was
| always a pretty good reason to update your mobile phone, for
| example, but for the past 7 or 8 years the updates have been
| quite minor (slightly faster processor or better camera) - I
| really don't feel like I have any significant reason to upgrade
| until mid band and mmWave 5G become widely available.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| On the plus side compared to its main competitor, when you
| uncheck "Automatically keep my Mac up to date," it won't
| spontaneously reboot your computer and kick off an update while
| you need to use it.
|
| I had no idea updates got slower in Big Sur, because I hit the
| install button and go to bed.
|
| It could take 8 hours for all I care.
| fortran77 wrote:
| > it won't spontaneously reboot your computer and kick off an
| update while you need to use it.
|
| I've never had this happen on Windows. The worst effect is when
| I want to shut down and it installs an update before powering
| off.
| trevorishere wrote:
| Big Sur updates are as bad as applying any patch to Windows
| Server 2016. But I agree, less of an issue given it attempts to
| auto update overnight.
| will4274 wrote:
| Windows also updates overnight.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Most painful thing in Big Sur for me is all the paid major
| updates to utilities because it broke compatibility with a
| bunch of stuff.
|
| Even bigger headache for the developers of said utilities, but
| they're at least getting paid for it.
| cptskippy wrote:
| > it won't spontaneously reboot your computer and kick off an
| update while you need to use it.
|
| That only happened if you ignored and dismissed updates for
| weeks.
|
| It's amazing how much hyperbole is permitted around here as
| long as it's about Windows.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| If 5 years after release, Windows 10's "active hours" setting
| wasn't still braindead, I would be more inclined to cut them
| some slack. But it still hasn't occurred to anyone at
| Microsoft that the hours I need my home computer to be
| functional might not be the same on a Wednesday and a
| Saturday.
|
| Even with working from home during COVID where I'm using my
| Windows machine for a large chunk of every day and the
| weekday/weekend use patterns are more similar, they're still
| not the same. And not everyone is on an office worker's
| weekday/weekend schedule either.
|
| If it's so important that updates can be installed all the
| time, just give me a damn weekly calendar and let me say when
| to do it. "Active Hours" is already buried in a nested page
| of UI with mostly empty space, it's not like this would over
| complicate the settings app or take up room that they can't
| spare. https://i.imgur.com/x5I65Jx.png
|
| A $10 clock/radio has more sophisticated and user-friendly
| alarm scheduling than Microsoft has managed to create in the
| world's most popular desktop operating system.
|
| Edit to add: why does "Update and Shut Down" mean "Update and
| Shut Down then Update a Bit More When Turned Back On Later"?
|
| Even if it has to reboot a couple times before staying off,
| "Update and Shut Down" should have the updates completely
| done the next time I turn it on to use it.
|
| Edit 2: Also should point out that the "reopen apps after
| restart" feature on macOS is pretty much universally
| supported across apps and works nearly flawlessly. You can
| reboot and hardly notice it happened afterward. Not as much
| the case for Windows, where a forced reboot when you're away
| from the computer is probably going to destroy any unsaved
| changes in documents that you had open.
|
| Apple has been working on seamless reboots since 2011 (OS X
| Lion) instead of just shoving in "3 AM is update time and
| we're forcing your computer to reboot, hope you didn't need
| the stuff you left open yesterday."
| layer8 wrote:
| I fully agree. Luckily there's RebootBlocker:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25971264
| lilyball wrote:
| I have ignored and dismissed a macOS update on my laptop for
| weeks with no penalty.
| tharax wrote:
| > That only happened if you ignored and dismissed updates for
| weeks.
|
| I should be able to ignore and dismiss updates for years.
|
| I recognise I'm taking on risks, but it's my hardware and my
| data. Some of these updates are downgrades in functionality
| and behaviour. I specifically don't want to be forced to
| accept whatever patch is pushed out.
| marcinzm wrote:
| >That only happened if you ignored and dismissed updates for
| weeks.
|
| Given that some updates have caused systems to brick or
| deleted data I want a way to wait weeks or longer before
| updating.
| lawl wrote:
| > That only happened if you ignored and dismissed updates for
| weeks.
|
| Not true. I only use windows for the occasional game that
| doesn't yet work well with wine/proton. And every time I do
| boot it and start playing a game, it suddenly randomly
| reboots me.
|
| No, I haven't ignored and dismissed updates for weeks. Indeed
| I haven't updated for weeks because I haven't booted it for
| weeks. But I haven't dismissed or ignored it.
|
| And it's really annoying.
| cptskippy wrote:
| I have a PC that I use almost exclusively for gaming that
| is booted at most once a week these days. I don't recall it
| ever spontaneously rebooting.
|
| The worst I have experienced is slow downs in game because
| it chose to update in the background.
| lawl wrote:
| > that is booted at most once a week
|
| I suspect that's often enough to easily stay under that
| threshold. For me it's at most every 3ish months that i
| boot windows for one particular game that releases
| updates in 3 month cycles. Sometimes I skip one or two
| and then it's 6 or 9 month between boots.
|
| And everytime it just reboots me, no prompt, nothing,
| just in the middle of the game, good-bye.
| intricatedetail wrote:
| I think M$ did this as a favour for people who need to weasel
| out of meetings etc. "Sorry guys Windows triggered an update."
| and that will sound plausible where in reality you had to close
| the laptop to spread a line on the lid.
| whoisburbansky wrote:
| It isn't immediately clear to me from the article why these
| updates can't just be patches; it sounded like a large part of
| the problem here is that what's ostensibly a couple kilobyte
| delta to fix ends up bloated to multiple gigabytes because of
| things like each update requiring firmware for every single Intel
| mac, and a copy of the entire dyld cache for System libraries.
| What is it about the update process that makes it so you can't
| just skip out on extra fluff if it doesn't need changing?
| boopmaster wrote:
| It's not immediately clear why the update system is like this
| but agreed with author that it totally sucks. There's an OS
| update waiting on me to install, stating it contains only a fix
| for the Mac mini m1, which I do not have. It would be one of
| those "flash all ye firmware" updates if I would run it. Every
| update is. Updates are atrocious. The only upside I can think
| of is that rootkits might have trouble persisting?
| hctaw wrote:
| My uneducated guess is that they don't have a good way to keep
| the app signatures intact when patching binaries.
| williesleg wrote:
| Debian is nice. MacOS is just a data collector for Apple. They
| have all those huge datacenters, that's not for compiling code or
| doing CAD work.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-28 23:01 UTC)