Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
OS X is now macOS and gets support for Siri, auto unlock (techcrunch.com)
512 points by tilt on June 13, 2016 | hide | past | web | favorite | 564 comments

It seems like more and more of the work on MacOS is dedicated to propping up iOS instead of simply making a great desktop OS. As someone who does not use or want Apple's mobile devices, it's been hard to get excited about these last few releases.

I like Apple's mobile devices but ever since the iPad turned out to be a giant iPhone instead of a true desktop/mobile hybrid, I'm scared as hell that they will lock down their desktop/laptop ecosystem the way they do with mobile. It's clear now that iOS is absorbing everything Mac.

Now I'm trapped between MacOS, Windows 10 and maybe Google's Chrome environment. Linux, please take off. I wished the open source community had good interface/usability designers.

Designer here. I and a lot of my colleagues love open source and what it stands for, but, the truth is, it is going to be very difficult to convert designers into hardcore open source advocates like coders/engineers can be when the tools we rely on every day are all closed source. Adobe creative suite, Rhino, proprietary render engines, and a bunch of other platforms designers use simply don't have open source alternatives competitive with market leaders, making conversion to open source very difficult for working professionals.

The majority of the professional community for creating UX/UI do not have the tools to work in FOSS, so you aren't going to see many designers working for FOSS projects as result

> The majority of the professional community for creating UX/UI do not have the tools to work in FOSS, so you aren't going to see many designers working for FOSS projects as result

Then put a call out for what tools you need replaced. Maybe even back GNU to hire people to do it. As a free software developer, I have no clue what you need in order to do good design work. From my perspective, inkscape works "good enough for me". But I'm not a designer.

Free software communities require some give as well as take. The fact that there isn't a free software version of $tool is because nobody has given enough of an incentive to replace it (we're too busy replacing other proprietary tools or making our own tools better).

This sounds like a good encapsulation of the reason why Desktop Linux has died - it is good enough for engineering types who get satisfaction and value out of using it, but who have no idea how to make it useful for anyone outside of the programming community.

That's not really a fair statement. Desktop GNU/Linux works for people who don't have incredibly specific requirements (like "Inkscape isn't enough, I have this $5000 software suite that nobody has replaced with free software yet").

LibreOffice + {Gnome,KDE} + {Chrome,Firefox} is enough for quite a few users "outside of the programming community". My girlfriend uses GNU/Linux (she has to use Windows now because my university requires some proprietary CAD software that I don't want to set up with WINE), several of my non-technical friends now use GNU/Linux.

It's dishonest to claim that just because some professional designers aren't happy with the tools we have available right now on GNU/Linux that "Desktop Linux has died because programmers have no idea how to make it useful for anyone outside that community".

I would downvote you if I could.

Yeah i think the problem for Linux on the desktop is not software but hardware.

More specifically the issue of getting preinstalled Linux out on store shelves right next to Windows and OSX.

In large part because there is no marketing machine to match Apple available, nor the deep pockets to get into a war of attrition with Microsoft.

The closest we came was when Asus shipped their original EEEPC. And Microsoft wasted no time offering a specialized license for Windows XP so that OEMs could offer it instead. Keep in mind that MS had stopped offering XP, and was trying to sell Vista at the time.

On top of that most stores have gotten damn used to the Apple MS duopoly. Thus anything thats not an Apple is a MS, with all the customer support problems that entails...

FLOSS always has to start somewhere and there are definitely professional artists and designers that use the existing FLOSS tools.

During the day, do your work with the tools you are used to. During the night, share a few design tips with open source folks and try out the FLOSS tools.

> Linux, please take off.

Sorry, no can do. We have to complete the process of breaking everything with systemd, then as soon as that's done rewrite KDE and Gnome from scratch again.

I swear, I must be the only person on the planet satisfied with the current state of systemd and GNOME 3. Fedora 23 is my main workstation OS and I have the least amount of friction getting my work done on it compared to either Windows or macOS these days. Then again, I mostly spend my day in IntelliJ, DataGrip, PyCharm, Firefox, a terminal, and a Windows VM for when I'm forced to open Visual Studio.

I'm a maintainer of runC and long-term contributor to Docker. From my perspective, systemd has been nothing but a huge pain from a development perspective. Not because of the UX (which is okay, there's lots of odd stuff there too) but because systemd sets up the system in a way that is ridiculously frustrating for people using low-level kernel primitives directly.

If you want to use cgroups and don't want systemd to start messing around with your setup, then you have to go through systemd (which is bad, but it gets worse when you find out that systemd doesn't support all cgroups). Also, systemd has ridiculous defaults. I wrote the pids cgroup code in the kernel, and was surprised when systemd set the default limit for all system services to be 512 tasks and 4096 for all user tasks. Then there's the binary logging format which is such a brain-dead idea, that I'm not even sure how someone actually went through the process of writing the code without ever considering that it was a bad idea.

That's just one example of the things that annoy me with systemd. Things mostly work with it, but if you actually want to do something, using it is such a pain. If systemd had stayed as what was promised (a replacement for init scripts) and hadn't gone beyond that (managing your bootloader, binary logging, abusing cgroups and changing the kernel plans for what cgroupv2 should look like, messing around with coredumps, misusing /dev/kmem to actually spam people who are trying to debug kernel issues, an-almost-but-not-quite reimplementation of ntpd, etc).

If they didn't have such strong views that they were entitled to be the owners of my system, it might actually have turned out as a good project. Too bad that the management of the project has decided that they should "rewrite all the things, but badly".

I concur as a user of Docker. Trying to get a legacy application running on Docker went smoothly. That is until I tried to start a simple rpcbind service and discovered that during my time away from software development and linux that systemd had taken over plain old kludgy (but hackable!) sysV init scripts. Trying to get a dead simple service running took hours because systemd segfaults instead of gracefully handling and reporting errors. In this case, cgroups wasn't mounted, though why a system init system has a hard requirement on a relatively new kernel feature set not needed in this situation, I can't fathom. Eventually I found a shim for cgroups, but seriously it was a pain. I lost half a night's sleep due to shoddy system level programming you mention from systemd. I'm currently highly eager for FreeBSD 11.0 to reach code freeze. It has a new Docker / linux64 layer and _no_ systemd.

> I'm currently highly eager for FreeBSD 11.0 to reach code freeze. It has a new Docker / linux64 layer and _no_ systemd.

For what it's worth, if you find a distro that doesn't have systemd you can run Docker and runC on it -- both use the underlying kernel primitives themselves and aren't wrappers for systemd scripts.

True, that's also a good point. Alas, many of the non-systemd Linux distros have pretty small communities. Do you have any preferred distro's for this?

You should have commented at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11675129 . (-:

Here, however, your audience has launchd, and has had for over a decade, running on top of Mach IPC; and BSD APIs such as kevent() for tracking forking processes.

Hmm, my impression of Gnome 3, so far, is that it's kind of a poster boy for ambitious design gone bad, visual as well as functional. On top of that, it seems to be very unstable (every minor update knocked out most of my plugins and I had to re-scramble to get a working desktop back together) and a security train wreck waiting to happen. Who thought it was a good idea to download plugins from a website that are basically JS code mashed into the existing code? Or has that changed recently?

After approaching Gnome 3, Cinnamon, and Unity with an open mind, I'm a happy Unity user.

Well Fedora is basically systemd central, so no surprises there. Frankly if it continues the way it has, every distro becomes Fedora with the serial numbers filed off...

Count me in too. Among other reasons, because I administer both Linux and OSX systems—and the systemctl(8) utility is basically invocation-for-invocation identical to OSX's launchctl(8), so I never really have to context-switch.

You are not alone. I've been running Arch with GNOME as my main workhorse and I couldn't be happier. It just works.

There are some really great UI/UI designers out there for Linux distros. Check out https://numixproject.org/.

Just because some UI looks pretty doesn't mean it's well-designed. I sat there staring at that page for like 2 minutes, trying to figure out where I was supposed to click to get more information, before I realized I had to scroll down. Perhaps I'm old-fashioned, but I don't consider that good UI.

It's not a solution to all of Linux's problems, but elementaryOS has good usability for me.

try KDE 5 you might like it

Someone's never used KDE.

It's already a great desktop OS. And they did announce some things (file system) that will make it even better.

OSX used to be ahead of the curve though compared to Windows, now...it's falling behind. I think that's where people's frustrations come from.

I dislike Windows so much. It feels pieced together from so many kludgy parts... Anyway, I just don't see it. :)

It feels like a lot of Microsoft software has a very "eh, fuck it, whatever" kind of attitude, especially when it comes to troubleshooting. Lots of good intentions that just never get finished.

Case in point, the "Do you want Windows to search for a solution?" Since the day this feature was added I've never once had Windows figure anything out; I always get "Windows was unable…". In the Win2K/XP days, you could right-click on a network adapter and choose 'repair' to do all the standard stuff (flush DNS, release/renew DHCP lease, etc.) which would solve most problems. They took that out in Vista in favour of the "idk man" wizard, and now you have to do it by hand.

Windows is also full of catch-all error messages, where it says "We couldn't copy the file. Check file permissions, make sure there's free space, and if it's a network drive make sure you're still on the network", as if those weren't things that the computer couldn't check for me in milliseconds.

When people say that macOS is falling behind Windows, it seems to be, at best, a superficial judgement from people who don't use both of them for productive work. Windows 10 has a lot of polish, but it also has two separate control panels for changing settings, apps which don't seem to know what kind of apps they are, and more and more new APIs and features that only store apps can use, in exchange for extremely limited access to the system.

Windows is great for playing games, but for any serious work the overhead of making it work and keeping it working is just ridiculous.

> Windows 10 has a lot of polish, but it also has two separate control panels for changing settings...

I've seen this with every new version of Windows (except Windows 8.x, which I haven't used and instead jumped from Windows 7 to Windows 10). With each new introduction and addition of polish, you still see old dialogs and methods of doing things underneath once you go one or two levels in. Control Panel is the best example of this. Windows 10 isn't even a complete OS yet. As an example, if I go to Settings and search for "proxy", nothing would show up. If I drill down into Network manually, then I can see and change the proxy settings. I'm sure there are many other unfinished things in it. It's as if they released an in-progress OS right in the middle of a development cycle, and I find it both frustrating to use and ridiculous!

Falling behind how?

> As someone who does not use or want Apple's mobile devices

My guess is that most of Mac users do want/use Apple mobile devices, and that in fact the majority of their computing time is now on those devices so it makes sense that the team would focus heavily on the interface and overlap between iOS / MacOS.

Huh, in most of the world the mapping between iOS and macOS users is nowhere 1-to-1. There's huge amount of users who use either one or the other.

Which doesn't really change the fact that even Windows 10 has been starting to pass them by with significant new features.

You'd be surprised.

Actually there are indeed more iOS users than OS X -- but OS X users almost all have an iOS device, which is what's important here.

I would be, because most of the workplaces and other places didn't confirm your observation. With perhaps the exception of SV, which is filled with Apple hardware. Can we conjure any statistics from somewhere to confirm / deny our observations?

I'd think devs would be kin to have a macos computer but no iOS device (android devs would be the obvious pattern, but web devs would also easily be on android)

Out of that demographic, I don't see much people that care enough to buy a mac but choose an android or windows phone.

The macOS users of the past have adopted iOS for its good macOS integration, the iOS users of the current and future will go with macOS for its good iOS integration.

Apple is tying all it's devices strongly together through software and services. This way you have a huge incentive to completely buy into the Apple ecosystem.

This matters far more than something like a new filesystem - a term most Apple customers have never even heard.

Only reason I use OSX is that's what I was issued at work.

I don't own an iOS device, never have, and don't see myself ever getting one in the future.

All of my personal mobile devices are Android, and all my desktops/laptops are Windows.

As someone who has used Windows, Mac and Linux as both personal and work OS for > 5 years each, I'm curious to know how come (you don't see yourself getting one in the future). The two things I have against the Apple platform compared to Microsoft and Google are Apple's bias toward lock-in and their aversion to tinkering. Other than that, I think what they are offering is rather good.

I got a Macbook Pro as work machine in late 2014, having used a Thinkpad before.

1. Mac OS is just too unfamiliar. It starts with the keyboard layout, which I reverted to Windows-style after I went crazy trying to find the square brackets. (Which, probably for aesthetics, they didn't bother to print ont he keyboard.)

2. Mac OS's poor multi-monitor support regularly drives me crazy. To their credit, they have ironed out a lot of the bugs in Mavericks, but there is still plenty of stupid behavior (e.g. screen 1 sliding back to the desktop from a fullscreen app when a new window opens on screen 2, or a messagebox from an app on screen 3 opening on screen 1, completely out of my sight). Windows is somehow much better in this regard (at least, I was not annoyed by it that often), and even Linux has very solid multi-monitor support these days (at least for me, YMMV).

3. The userland is UNIX, but does not match my expectations well enough. It's basically in the creepy valley. For example, I was using units(1) one day and wondering why it gave a syntax error when I tried to use a power operator (like "2^64"). Then I noticed that I was in the Mac terminal, not in my Linux VM (where I usually work), and upon inspecting the manpage, I found that they hadn't updated their units(1) since 1991 (wtf).

4. The company where I work is mostly a Windows shop, so corporate IT is based on Microsoft products (AD, Exchange, Lync aka Skype for Business) all the way through. While there are Office for Mac, Outlook for Mac, and Lync for Mac, these are still no match to their Windows counterparts in terms of polish and OS-level integration.

All in all, I'm already set on going back to a Windows notebook when it is time to get a new machine. (It's not like my Linux VM cares which host OS it runs on, anyway.)

The multimonitor support has fairly recently become passable. It's hard to imagine that it took more than a decade to do that. It used to be almost entirely useless. I think it's a case of overthinking it and trying not-to-be-windows that made it take so long.

I'm not sure it's correct now, but at least it's useful.

The Unix outdatedness is really annoying sometimes. I wouldn't even mind running some kind of big update after getting a new machine and waiting a couple hours for things to improve. The number of Macs I've seen with Linux VMs running on them just to get up-to-date things on them is really unfortunate.

brew install <whatever you want>. I have about 100 packages installed and haven't had a problem in months. Anything somewhat popular is updated within day.

But I don't get the complaint about multiple screens either. It's always been plug in -> desktop extended. I wouldn't even know what to get wrong.

Only since maybe Yosemite has multi monitor support been what I'd call well modeled and decent. It's quite often been plug in -> useless grey screen on the other monitor you can't use, or some other nonsense. It took, what 3 entire revisions of the OS just for that not to happen? For a while, I had apps where I couldn't put different windows of the same app on different monitors, or one of the windows would randomly go away never to be seen again. Other apps would resize to 0,0 when disconnecting and then save the window position so I'd have to either reconnect to the same monitor I was no longer near, or uninstall, reinstall the app.

There was always weirdness about the dock and menu bar that's sort of now settling down, but the dock used to display all sorts of bizarreness, especially when it was set to autohide.

Fundamentally it came down to issues with Apple's way of thinking about workspaces, monitors, desktops, applications and windows. Even now I still have to spend far too much time hunting down things across multiple desktops and monitors. It seemed like Apple was dancing around what should probably just happen in an effort not to too closely mimic Microsoft.

But to get at the heart of it, what happens when you full-screen an app? Apple had no idea what that meant when it was launched in 2011. However, what Apple chose to do in the case of full-screening an app on multiple monitors made absolutely no sense and was absolutely useless: the app would take on the role in the hierarchy of a desktop, and the other monitor would go grey. Why? nobody outside of Apple knows, but it took until 2013/2014 to fix.

"Fundamentally it came down to issues with Apple's way of thinking about workspaces, monitors, desktops, applications and windows. Even now I still have to spend far too much time hunting down things across multiple desktops and monitors. It seemed like Apple was dancing around what should probably just happen in an effort not to too closely mimic Microsoft."

Everything you need to know can be summed up in the fact that, in OSX, you can click the green button with a '+' in it, and that window can get smaller.

> I went crazy trying to find the square brackets.

Apple's US keyboards have them in a good place: on dedicated keys to the right of the 'p' key.

Scroll down a bit here:


Like you, I am baffled as to why some of their BSD userland programs are so very out of date.

Apples US keyboards are fine, the problem is their international keyboards are usually bizarre hybrids of the local layout and US layout.

Standard UK layout: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:KB_United_Kingdom.svg

Apple "UK" layout: http://i.imgur.com/pIGiilv.jpg (@€#@|\`~ are all wrong)

The worst part is not that they have a "unique" UK keyboard layout, but that they don't support the standard UK layout at all with the built-in keymaps, which is frankly incredible given that every single keyboard other than Apple ones uses it since it's a British Standard and that's what everyone uses and expects.

Yup, after my first Macbook with a german layout in 2009 i only got them with US keyboards ever since.

How are those UK keys 'wrong'? Do you just mean you'd chose to put them somewhere else if you were designing a keyboard?

As has already been said here, there are British Standards covering computer keyboard layouts. There are the several parts of BS ISO/IEC 9995 (parts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 11), there is BS 4822, and the BSI also publishes ISO/IEC 15412.

Those standards are just someone else's opinion though. As long as they don't claim to meet those standards then they aren't 'wrong', they just have a different opinion on what's best compared to the standard.

> 3. The userland is UNIX, but does not match my expectations well enough. It's basically in the creepy valley. For example, I was using units(1) one day and wondering why it gave a syntax error when I tried to use a power operator (like "2^64"). Then I noticed that I was in the Mac terminal, not in my Linux VM (where I usually work), and upon inspecting the manpage, I found that they hadn't updated their units(1) since 1991 (wtf).

That's an interesting one. OS X has a BSD user land (FreeBSD to be specific), while Linux is traditionally used with the GNU user land. Looking at the FreeBSD site, they ship the same units version from 1993: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=units&sektion=1

> 1. Mac OS is just too unfamiliar. It starts with the keyboard layout, which I reverted to Windows-style after I went crazy trying to find the square brackets. (Which, probably for aesthetics, they didn't bother to print ont he keyboard.)

I assume you're using a non-US keyboard? I've been using Macs for programming for 15 years, and I haven't seen this, and I have MacBooks Pro from 2010 through 2016 in our office and they all have square brackets on the keyboard.

> aversion to tinkering

That is my biggest (and really only) complaint against Apple. Sometimes you have to go under the hood and do a few things. I don't know what Apple has against this way of thinking though.

"My guess is that most of Mac users do want/use Apple mobile device"

That's what it is... a guess. Unless you can produce some data to back it up.

There's a huge community (especially outside of US) who use Macs for day-to-day work but use android mobile devices as that's the most sensible choice for a majority of the world.

> use android mobile devices as that's the most sensible choice

That is a highly subjective statement at best.

It's not even a preference thing though. Android phones are absolutely killing the low-end smartphone market and international users are very heavily Android locked-in. I can buy a pretty solid Android phone for 200-300 dollars, even less these days. The cheapest iPhones are 400-500 dollars. It's why Android dominates iOS globally.(https://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp). Outside of SV, Android is still the most common mobile OS (including in the US).

> Outside of SV, Android is still the most common mobile OS (including in the US).

And as a result, the app and services ecosystem supports Android as the main platform in large ecosystems outside the US like China, India and Brazil.

Yep. Macbook + Android here.

What does it not have that you want (and think a lot of other people also want)?

Consider what it does have that you dont want it to have (iTunes Syncing, locked filedrive, etc).

Can't you turn off iTunes syncing? And what is "locked filedrive"?

I'm disappointed. After them announcing the subscription pricing changes, paid search results, etc. in a press conference because "we can't fit all into the keynote" I expected more. Instead we got 20 minutes of adults playing with emojis.

Not what I would expect from a developer conference keynote.

/edit: Thanks for the hint to watch the State of the Union video.

Wait for the Platforms State of the Union video, it will be probably available in few hours on Apple's developers website [1]. It's basically another keynote, but more developer oriented.


Edit: mayoff beat me to it :)


Not available yet, but when it is, it will be at this link.

The stuff announced last week is mainly of interest to developers, not end users. Most of what was in the keynote was for end users.

That said, I'd be surprised if they couldn't fit last week's stuff into the Platforms State of the Union (later today), which is basically the developer-oriented keynote.

Copy/paste across iPhone and Mac is very useful. All the other features are Meh. I really don't want to be that guy talking to my Mac at work. I can't be sure that all my questions to Siri are not awkward to speak out. Would have been great to have a textual interface though. You know that Keyboard thingy that is always with a Mac?!

> Copy/paste across iPhone and Mac is very useful.

I don't use a Mac or an iPhone, but I applaud this sort of device harmony.

That said, I am worried that it would unnecessarily leverage the cloud. My guess is that instead of the two devices directly communicating with one another—that is, instead of leveraging the fact that they are probably on the same local network and should just work in concert—the clipboard data will be sent via a cloud intermediary. That is, it will be exfiltrated from the local network, sent through Apple, and then back into the local network.

If I am wrong about that, I am happy to hear it.

Yes, the Hand-off mechanism works without iCloud involvement or even using your active internet connection. I just tried by disabling Wifi on my Mac and opening up message to continue on a semi written message from my iPhone.

Now, there could always be a iCloud fallback that says if there is internet, just use it. Perks of using non-free software is that it will almost always non-verifiable.

> I just tried by disabling Wifi on my Mac and opening up message to continue on a semi written message from my iPhone.

How is this possible? Bluetooth? USB? Or are we talking about a previously synced draft that's still there when you turn your internet off? Sounds like a basic iCloud cache to me.

The original Continuity used bluetooth, p2p wifi (which is also what AirDrop uses), regular wifi and iCloud, some features would depend on a specific substrate but for others it could use several at the same time or switch between them.

Continuity/Handoff works over Bluetooth 4/LE.

In the presentation they said that it used Handoff, which is direct device to device communication.

This enables an interesting new kind of attack.

1. Attach an attack device to someone’s account.

2. ‘Poll’ the clipboard by pasting every ~5 seconds.

3. If the contents of the clipboard appear to be ‘secure’ (looks like shellcode, bitcoin address, url, etc), quickly replace the contents with an attack string with same datatype.

If you have an untrusted device attached to your Apple account, your local clipboard can no longer be trusted.

Indeed, WHATWG is currently considering [1] a related scenario where rogue websites with access to the clipboard will inject formats with dodgy payload to exploit flaws in some app if the user pastes.

[1] https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/1244

It's unrelated to "apple account" it works over Bluetooth LE.

To my knowledge, existing continuity features already do one better and communicate directly between devices, not even requiring them to be on the same network. (AirDrop is a good example.) But obviously we have no way of knowing if this will be the case here, or if there is a cloud-based fallback.

P2P connections is a place that's generally terrible for mobile. You have to keep connections open to more devices, which is generally bad for battery.

You could imagine a copy/paste that waits for a message from the cloud (because Apple push notifications are pretty solid), then opens the new connection to the local device, so the data never leaves your network. At least to me, that sounds needless complex when the typical use case could just send the entire payload with the "go look for this device" message.

This sort of thing is exactly what Bluetooth Low Energy is for.

> I really don't want to be that guy talking to my Mac at work

What about your disabled colleague?

Now, I'm all for making Siri better as an "Accessibility feature". I was just referring to myself talking to my Mac for doing my basic activities. It might be annoying at best to my co-worker so would he be to me when he does talk to his Mac all the time.

I think clipboard permissions for applications is going to become an issue with features like this. I may be incorrect but I'm pretty sure that clipboard access is unrestricted on both OS X (ugh, macOS) and iOS.

I think I'm gonna stick with calling it OS X, marketers be d*ed.

Frankly, I much preferred when they called it Mac OS X. The change to OS X just seemed stupid to me—with a name like 'Operating System Ten', it was as if it didn’t even have a name anymore!

…which is why (in my opinion) macOS ('Mac Operating System') is far better than what it’s replacing.

It was called Mac OS for years (1)

I also remember when it was just called "System"

(1) Yeah yeah I know all about NeXT, but OS X isn't NeXT as anyone who used Rhapsody will remember

Sometimes I copy my private keys to the clipboard.

cat privatekey > pbcopy

Scary if it ends up on my mobile device clipboard.

I use iOS and a password manager, and maybe 5-10% of apps I use have an integration for it (and I place the blame on Apple for this, imo if they actually care about user security as much as they want everyone to believe they do, they should have an app store review policy that forbids having a password field without using the password manager extension).

Anyway, the effect is that almost every time I sign into an iOS app, I'm copy & pasting my password into the password field. So now my passwords will all be synced via bluetooth and/or to icloud whenever I sign into an app.

At this point, is using a password manager actually less secure than just re-using the same password everywhere like everyone else does?

Your alternative is simply copy-pasting without using the system clipboard (old-fashioned style). I imagine there's a lot less attack vectors by doing it that way, at a small time cost.

Is there no option for a "local only" clipboard with this?

We at CopyCopy (a cross-platform cloud clipboard) solve this problem by only universally copying stuff that you copy twice.


copy once -> not sent to cloud/devices

copy twice (or click floating button) -> sent to all your devices and cloud account

Spotlight is already incredibly useful, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's getting some of these improvements. We should know soon since Developer Preview of Sierra should be available today.

The definitely said it wont be available today.

The developer previews will be available today, already have iOS 10 running on one device.


For registered developers yes, the public beta is July though.

Well that's what I said:

> Developer Preview of Sierra should be available today.

Which you disagreed with. So, you were factually wrong.

>I really don't want to be that guy talking to my Mac at work.

If Siri might bring an end to shared offices, I am all for it! But joking aside, yes, there are surroundings, where you don't want to talk to your device - in which I also prefer text messages to phone conversations.

But well-done voice integration can vastly improve usability. Just think of not having to grab your mouse and look for that music/video player control just to mute/stop things, but being able to do it with a short voice command without leaving your editor.

As someone who uses KDE Connect for copy/paste between my Android phone and my Linux desktop I can say that this feature is _amazing_.

I loved that I could hear the audience audibly gasp when the presenter brought that up and that the presenter was caught off-guard.

I thought I had at least 20 years before being scared of new technology. Still sitting on OS X 10.10 scared to update, and completely disinterested in most cloud stuff except for my OneDrive folder.

Time to look into Linux, I suppose, since I'm about to become one of those people.

I can feel you. (Even though I am already on Linux.) It's always weird to be sitting there at 26, wondering about how "kids these days" use the internet.

I'm doing the same thing. Two years ago I started to do most of my work in a Virtual Machine in Debian Linux. Looks like my gut was right - I'll wait until 10.10 or my MBP doesn't work anymore and then I'll have to do a painful switch.

Actually I already migrated most of my things (Evernote, Things, Mail.app) already into Emacs and must say that this old Lisp machine is the best OS of the three^^ So I take the world becoming closed and proprietary as a chance to go back to sanity.

Out of curiosity, what scared you away from 10.11?

That Apple doesn't do quality anymore? For Mac OS, system bugs are increasing release after release, kernel panics were introduced in Mavericks and didn't go away with El Capitan even though it was supposed to be a bugfix-centric release. I also have deactivated upgrades.

If you are scared of updates breaking stuff, Linux is not the best choice either.

Updates to OS regularly breaks graphics and Wi-Fi drivers for me; after every second update I have to solve "why is everything black" and "why are all videos green".

Of all the things I disliked on OS X when I moved to Linux, instability with updates is even worse here.

This depends a lot on which distribution you go with.

Gentoo is notorious for regularly breaking things. Debian has a reputation for constantly being two years out of date because because of their QA process.

Ubuntu is somewhere in between, though lately it has been leaning towards the "Let's change everything every six months!" end of the spectrum. You can mitigate this a bit by sticking to their LTS releases, though. (This is what I'm doing currently.)

Yeah, I am at ubuntu, since that seemed like the easiest distro to get started, but now I am afraid of switching and setting up all the graphic drivers again. (and working around bugs in Network Manager again. Come on guys, it's software with which people connect to Internet, why is so important thing so buggy.)

Just stick with Ubuntu LTS releases.

I barely see the difference with newer releases anyway, most of the innovation I care is on the web or in high-level applications that run on LTS.

Are you sure this isn't a hardware problem? I've been running El Capitan on really quite unsupported hardware (Skylake K6700 / Samsung 950 Pro SSD) and haven't had a single kernel panic – nor on the Macbook Pro.

Also if you're looking for quality (opposed to freedom or configurability) Linux on the Desktop really doesn't fit. I adore it on the server, but there isn't a distribution/hardware combination where essentials sleep/wifi/graphics/sound work out of the box. UI inconsistencies are a constant annoyance, dist-updates will always break something etc. It's not an indictment of Linux, it's just that GUIs are terribly hard to get right.

I'm absolutely certain it isn't hardware: It started to happen the same week I upgraded to Mavericks. Besides, it's a Macbook Pro 2013. I had noticed several comments on HN about kernel panics in Mavericks, I didn't want to give them credit when I upgraded.

As you note: I reckon Linux isn't much better. I switched to Mac when Ubuntu dropped a bugfix for Ethernet encryption in 13.04 which prevented me from working for my employer (and reduced mouse controls in the UI since 12.04).

I'd pay $200/yr for a maintained OS.

For whatever it's worth, El Capitan hasn't been any worse than previous versions of OS X that I've used over the past 6 years.

For one thing, it breaks nearly every audio application (Serato, Ableton, etc.)

So nothing in Linux is new technology?

Will they update the unix layer? A lot of the CLI tools there are positively prehistoric.

Maybe while they're at it they can add a real package manager too.

Some may prefer Nix: http://nixos.org/nix/

nix seems really interesting & the 'right way' to do things. but strangely, i don't really* have problems with homebrew -- maybe because it has the luxury of being built on top of a stable, known system.

*i have had problems with python. i always have problems with python.

Does anyone know if this is a bad idea? Like do any of the system provided utilities do anything special in OS X that will be broken if they are replaced? I'd like to do install these replacements, but am concerned about possible side effects.

In the case of Homebrew, it'll install things to 'usr/local/Cellar', and symlink them from /usr/local, leaving the OS X tools in place in /usr/bin

By default, it will append a "g" to all the coreutils at least, like ls -> gls, sed -> gsed, etc. And things that are already default on OS X, like curl, perl etc, will not be symlinked into /usr/local unless you force it.

But personally, I changed my coreutils over a year ago to the GNU ones (via symlinks), and I force link every single package, I've never had a single issue.

Though our use cases may be different, and you may have issues. In which case you can just `brew unlink $package`.

Is there a way to replace all of them in one move?

Yes you can do. use "brew install coreutils"

This is not the same thing.

Excellent, thanks!

You can't really replace the underlying tools, you'd want to install the new versions in a different folder and update your Environment to point to those executables.

EDIT: I'm wrong, didn't realize homebrew-dupes actually is meant to replace the OS X utils.

So effectively, it's only one step better than installing Cygwin on a Windows machine?

Can someone please remind me again why the MacBook is such a preffered machine for software development? For years I've been told, "You get a shell!", and "It's UNIX under the covers", etc.

Except that the shell userspace is antiquated, and the UNIX flavor is BSD rather than Linux. Meaning that I'm just as out-of-sync with my target server as if I were on a Windows machine, I still have to run Docker through a VM layer, etc.

Don't get me wrong, the hardware is excellant. But the software is even more locked-down and less customizable than the MS world... and just skipping the middle man and installing Linux directly is a 10x better developer experience than both.

I just don't get this complaint. Run brew install <package>, add a folder to PATH. Done. Anything somewhat popular (vim/git/python/ruby/graphviz, imagemagick...) is usually updated after a day and I don't remember the last time it gave me any trouble.

The comparison with Windows simply doesn't work. Unix software compiles on OS X out-of-the-box. It doesn't on Windows. The conventions (pathnames, line endings, CLIs, time zones) are either the same or compatible, on Windows they're not.

You're underestimating how helpful POSIX compliance is.

Also, OS X/macOS meets the Single Unix Spec: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#Curr...

I agree with most of your grumbles.

> Can someone please remind me again why the MacBook is such a preffered machine for software development?

For me, the greatest battery life and trackpad money can buy.

100x this. I actually could not imagine going back to mouse anymore.

If your complaint is that the UNIX layer of Mac OS X isn't ~exactly~ like Linux, then the only way you're going to solve that problem is by running Linux instead.

It's easy to get more up-to-date software with package managers.

> Except that the shell userspace is antiquated, and the UNIX flavor is BSD rather than Linux.

Few people use advanced features of those utilities. As a result, these two points don't make any difference. At least for me.

> Except that the shell userspace is antiquated, and the UNIX flavor is BSD rather than Linux.

Nit: GNU. Linux doesn't have a userspace. It's a kernel.

Why not replace? If there's a security flaw, I want those versions gone.

EDIT: you edited :)

Just install all the formulae from that repository, I'd assume. They all replace some system-provided tool. I believe they install the binaries to a separate directory that you need to prepend to your $PATH in order to get your shell to default to the updated versions.

> Will they update the unix layer? A lot of the CLI tools there are positively prehistoric.

They won't, they don't want to touch any GPLv3 code.

Why would they touch GPLv3 code when perfectly good BSD tools available from FreeBSD?

If you're being serious here: bash is IMO the most glaringly old utility you get in an OSX install, and it's GPLv3.

There's more to a userland than the shell, and there are plenty of shells out there that are not encumbered by GPLv3.

Actually bash 3.2 is GPL v2.0. Later versions switched to GPL v3 and this is why Apple is not updating to newer version.

Give it a few more years and there will be no one left at Apple that has any clue what bash is.

What do BSD distros use?

By default, FreeBSD uses Almquist Shell for root, and Tenex C Shell for users. OpenBSD uses a modified pdksh for users, which is simlinked to /bin/sh for root, and NetBSD uses Almquist shell for users and root.

It's the other way around on FreeBSD: csh is the default for root and sh for users.

You got to be a bit more specific.

--- edit ---

They all have their own version of the "GNU core utilities". BSD make instead of GNU make. less(1) is dual-licensed (I think) so everybody uses the same (OpenBSD has forked it recently though). FreeBSD's default shell is tcsh, OpenBSD uses a fork of pdksh. If you want bash then you have to install it from ports.

Most of OS X's userland comes from FreeBSD (except for bash and make) and I think they keep it reasonably up to date.

Sorry, I meant two things: License used for their tools and if they used any tools that aren't 'GNU specific' at all.

Most of it is BSD-style licensed, some (less and ssh for example) are dual-licensed, and very few are GPLv2 (the old versions of make, bash, and emacs; but also current git). vim is licensed under a custom GPLv2-style license.

A lot of GPLv2 code now uses GPLv3 (all the GNU tools obviously) and Apple (and others too) doesn't want to ship GPLv3 code.

Almost all of the userland comes from FreeBSD. Even stuff that Apple could take directly from OpenBSD for example.

For stuff in ports, GPLv3 code, because they don't have Apple's legal team that's worried about GPLv3. FreeBSD ports' bash is at 4.3.

    titan:~/src/bsd/freebsd-ports geofft$ find . -name Makefile -exec grep LICENSE.*=.*GPLv3 {} + | wc -l


They are able to distribute GPL v3 code because they way it is packaged complies with the terms of the license.

Well the tools are 'stand-alone' for the most part, and they do provide the code for them, I believe the issue would be if they integrated any tools into BSD licensed software that it would have to be GPL licensed. I was hoping BSD to some degree maintained their own versions, that could of been useful for Apple, not saying they can't maintain their own, but at least they could help fund BSD and maintain their OS' CLI toolset.

Ditto, this is supposed to be a Developers' event.

The keynote almost always has loads of end-user stuff, that's not new.

> Maybe while they're at it they can add a real package manager too.

Contrary to those who suggested Brew, I stand by your request: de-installing anything that went in as a .pkg is a .pita and Apple doesn't provide, as best I can tell, any mechanism short of the author providing its own "Uninstall.app" to remove software.

I've gotten very close by scripting some of the `pkgutil` output, but it's nowhere near `apt-get remove` and friends.

I think Apple's idea of a package manager is the App Store. Since they do not screw with /usr/local in any way stuff like brew and ports is a quite good alternative to a first party solution.

I just hope they will not start screwing with /usr/local

I definitely feel this pain too, but:

They can't upgrade to recent GNU tools (bash is the one most people complain about) because of the GPLv3. And I feel their developer manpower is better spent on fixing OS bugs at this point. These issues are better fixed by developers less encumbered by the closed-sourceness of OS X.

> They can't upgrade to recent GNU tools because of the GPLv3.

They can but it is their choice not to use GPLv3 tools.

Doesn't SIP cause issues with the TiVoization clause? I guess I'm not an expert on this, but it's possible Apple wants to leave the possibility open of making SIP mandatory.

The decision of not shipping GPLv3 user space tools predates SIP by several years, far more than I would bet SIP has been in development. I think it's just a legal issue as in lawyers don't want to touch it period

An OS with mandatory SIP will be the point I stop upgrading. I'm fine with optional features like this, but the instant it becomes mandatory and can't be bypassed I'm gone.

What about the GPLv3 prevents them from using GNU user space tools?

Nothing prevents them, they chose not to. It would restrict them from shipping GPLv3 versions in the future if they tivoize the platform further, which they almost certainly intend to do, its kind of Apple's thing nowadays.

The GPLv3 has clauses in it that opens up a new load of legal questions for Apple that they'd rather avoid. I just wish that Apple would move to using less encumbered shell that is actively being developed, like pdksh or zsh.

If Microsoft is willing to ship GNU tools as a officially sanctioned extension to Windows, then Apple definitely has no valid excuse to avoid GPL v3.

> If Microsoft is willing to ship GNU tools

They're not. After you enable the Linux subsystem you get the userland from Canonical under Ubuntu's license, Microsoft ships WSL and CLI shims triggering the download of the Ubuntu userland.

Apple and Microsoft have different legal departments. Apple's still has questions over GPLv3, for better or for worse.

They really don't. They know exactly what they can and can't do. They don't think it's vague or ambiguous.

They just don't see it as worth the energy for them to use it.

I can't disagree with that strategy (if no one is really pushing you to do X, why bother), at Google we do the same with android mostly, but for different reasons:

We don't use GPLv3 because the OEMs/etc don't want it, and rip it out anyway :)

Similarly, i expect in Apple's case, they don't use it in parts they may keep common to ios/macos because then they can't keep them common.

In any case, the TL;DR is that there aren't open legal questions or magic things they are waiting to play out. They've made their choice and have been sticking by it.

Microsoft does not ship any GPL code at all on the operating system.

"The GPLv3 has clauses in it that opens up a new load of legal questions for Apple that they'd rather avoid."

I'm curious why you think it opens up legal questions, etc. They've pretty definitively stated they just don't want to use it. There are no vague or mysterious questions they are waiting to get answers to or anything like that.

They can't find or build alternatives? they could have the same impact at the Unix level that they've had on the high-level GUI. It could certainly use it.

But an updated cp(1) that has all the same options as the GNU one has a much lower return-on-investment as 3x emojis (which I chose for this example since it could be around the same amount of work).

Mostly not, due to licensing. The GNU utils that transitioned to GPL v3 (eg Bash) are kind of stuck there in 2007.

I don't understand. What is it about the licensing of _user space_ tools that prevent their being used?

Nothing. Apple is just being overly paranoid or hoping to some day do things that GPLv3 won't allow them to do. Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Intel, IBM; all of these companies have some interaction with GPLv3, but Apple staunchly refuses to even touch it.

It's a real pity, because Apple's popularity is sending some message that GPLv3 is poisonous, when it reality it's only a problem for them because they chose to make it a problem for themselves.

> because Apple's popularity is sending some message that GPLv3 is poisonous

Doesn't Linus' refusal of GPL3 damage its reputation much greater than Apple?

The Linux devs publicly denounced an early draft of GPLv3 and never reconsidered the question. Yeah, I think they just didn't feel like trying to understand it, and Linus's own anti-FSF attitude spreads to his followers.

Actually Linus didn't have any big problems with one of the GPLv3 drafts[1]. And many bits of the Linux kernel are individually licensed as GPLv2+. Not to mention that Linus used to have in COPYING that they were considering updating. Very few kernel developers hate GPLv3.

[1] http://www.computerworld.com/article/2544276/network-softwar...

I was thinking of this position statement, which is signed by prominent Linux devs. I don't think they ever reconsidered their position after the final draft:


The new clauses in the GPLv3 bring up legal questions that some teams would rather just not deal with, even as user space tools. As such, Apple has decided to avoid potential legal headaches and stick with tools under better understood licenses. Most of the BSDs have stuck with GPLv2 stuff, with FreeBSD actively working to replace the few bits and pieces of GPLed code in their base system with code that is under the BSD or other liberal licenses.

Their tools are up to date with POSIX UNIX certification, just not with GNU extra goodies.

Am I the only one who was really disappointed when the were talking about 'getting back disk space' and by the meant 'move stuff to the cloud' and not 'LZ4 in HFS+'? (I've given up on ZFS on OS X by default.)

Edit: Oh, wow! Apple File System! (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11896785 for discussion)

HFS+ already supports file compression, and all system files already are. You can use it yourself depending on how much you trust it.


> if you use multiple macOS machines, Apple will now sync your desktops between them, too

Oh No. Please no.

If I had to come up with a list of 5 things Apple is really bad at, sync would be one of them.

I've basically stopped syncing my phone and desktop because of all the duplicated calendar entries syncing creates.

It's something I have absolutely zero trust in them to do properly.

See, the thing is - I use sync across multiple Apple devices. I have had zero problems with duplicated or missing entries, and it's one of the absolute killer features of the ecosystem for me.

It's hard to get a real impression of what problems may or may not exist, unfortunately.

It works great - until it doesn't, and then you find all your music is deleted or something [0]

They don't exactly have a stellar record on this sort of thing.

0 - http://9to5mac.com/2016/05/13/apple-officially-acknowledges-...

One random user? Which they officially acknowledged even?

This might be a less than a stellar record, but not because of that link.

That was just the first link from a Google search.

Internet forums are full of other users complaining of the same problem.

Even if it only affects 0.1% of users, multiply that by the tens of millions, and that's a large number of people having a horrible experience.

It works great for you, until you're in the 0.1% then it's a bitch.

Edit: and it's not just music, it's a mulit-year history of botching up sync across multiple different technologies - some of which I've experienced first hand, some of which I've had friends complain of. Either way, Apple have zero credibility with me and syncing.

>Even if it only affects 0.1% of users, multiply that by the tens of millions, and that's a large number of people having a horrible experience.

Still nothing for the remaining 99.9% of them.

Schadenfreude is not a problem solving strategy.

10-12 years ago (wow...), stories like that were a lot more common. I lost thousands of MP3s to iTunes on my first Mac, a PowerBook 17.

Happened to me and many people I know. It's a very widespread issue.

Apple is bad at cloud syncing. And "cloud" stuff in general, really. That's just not the scale they think on naturally.

Apple has always done "workgroup"-size sharing pretty well, though. See: early AppleTalk; Bonjour; AirPlay; Time Machine with a Time Capsule; etc. (Though I won't include iTunes Home Sharing in that list; it's garbage.)

But, I was surprised to learn, OSX Server.app is actually supposed to be part of that "workgroup-sized solutions" list, too. It's basically "Active Directory Controller - Home Edition"—an actually not-insane thing to use to manage ~3-8 devices for your family. Stick it on a Mac Mini, forward some ports through your router, set up dynamic DNS and a LetsEncrypt cert, and suddenly everyone can consume regular old CalDAV calendars and LDAP contacts. (Plus some cute other things, like putting all your family's devices under Profile Management so you can push an update to them whenever you are about to e.g. change the wi-fi password, instead of having to go around to everything and change it.)

I've used Apple sync between my laptop and phone for my calendars for over a year with no issues. I have several friends with Apple devices who depend on reliable calendars and none have complained about this aspect. YMMV.

Same here. I've had multiple problems with sync. Specially with Notes. I've lost notes, I've had notes duplicated, etc. The best decision I had was to switch to Simplenote.

It was under the impression that it's not one desktop being synced across all your computers, but rather your desktop on other machines are accessible anywhere. Akin to iCloud tabs, or Chrome tab syncing.

Basically you open Finder on your MacBook and there's a new sidebar entry: "Desktop on imron's iMac"

I haven't read enough about it to corroborate, but I very much hope this to be the case. My personal machine and my work machine have very different use profiles (not to mention monitor setups), and I would not want actual automated syncing of everything, but being able to grab something from my home machine would be useful (which I already do with iCloud browsing history).

Remote Desktop with the ability to copy/paste text and files would be useful. Sync would be dreadful.

You can already sort of do this. But it is done with drag-n-drop. Pick a file on your Desktop and drop it into a Screen Sharing window! Drag a file from a Screen Sharing session onto your desktop.

I really hope this is an Opt-In feature rather than Opt-Out. Out-of-sync iMessage threads, bizarre chicken-or-egg "Approve Keychain for this device from your other device" (what device? I never approved it in the first place - JUST STAY AWAY FROM MY PASSWORDS, I'm perfectly happy with 1Password + Dropbox sync), and my personal pet peeve is Spaces. I used to love OS X Spaces as with really easy to use keyboard shortcuts, Apple got rid of around Lion and replaced it with mediocre "workspaces" with very little keyboard friendly-ness - TotalSpaces helps fill the void, but once has to disable sip in order to use it.


Completely agree. Apple's unstated policy regarding sync is that customer data loss is acceptable, and for that reason I avoid any form of sync from Apple.

I don't have a problem with syncing, so long as it is not turned on by default. I also wouldn't use it if it depends on iCloud.

Dropbox + symlinks works great already.

nice idea!

This will finally alleviate the awkward pronunciation ambiguity. To this day, I'm not sure whether to say "OS ex" or "OS ten".

If you use the say command in the Terminal you get the definitive answer.

Spoiler alert for anybody without access to a mac right now: $ say "OS X" pronounces it as "OS Ten".

Mine says "os ex". (10.11.5)

There has to be a space between the OS and X for it to work for me.

All caps.

Its rules for pronouncing "X" are also distinct in these cases:

  say "Malcolm X"
  say "Louis X"

Hah, it does roman numerals up to 49

say Louis XLIX = Louis the 49th say Louis L = Louis L

That's true for macOS Sierra, but will Mac OS X 10.11 El Capitan and earlier be retroactively rebranded as macOS? Now we will have to listen to people say things like "I upgraded my Mac from Mac OS X 10.10 to macOS Siera". :)

It was called "OS X", not "Mac OS X" since 10.8.

Minor correction. The switch from "Mac OS X" to "OS X" happened with OS X 10.7 Lion, not with OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. The last release with the "Mac OS X" name was "Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard".

Thanks! I forgot about that name change. We've come full circle:

Mac OS 9 -> Mac OS X 10.0 -> OS X 10.8 -> macOS 10.12

Is it Mac Oh Ess or does it rhyme with GladOS?

Mac Oh Ess, like iOS, tvOS, and watchOS.

You need to listen to Gruber shred Roman numerals - it's pretty funny. Episode 155 of The Talk Show.

The good news is that I might not have to listen to people call it "Mac OS Ex" anymore.

I'm hoping there's a bunch of new APIs hiding in there allowing ISVs to do cool stuff. Because the new version, meh, don't care about Siri much and the rest of the stuff is window dressing, IMO. Maybe some improvements for Xcode, testing tools?

I have never in RL heard anyone call it "OS ten"

Just curious what age range you are in. From what I've personally noticed, younger folks tend to almost all pronounce it "O-S-ecks" and most in my generation (~40) tend to pronounce it "O-S-ten".

I am close to your age, and I have always called it "O-S-ecks" because I hate roman numbers (there's a book that I call D-S-M-eye-vee) and because "O-S-ex ten point nine" sounds better than the alternative.

24 year old here. I exclusively call it "O-S-ten" and cringe every time someone says "O-S-ecks". Only particular reason I can think of is that we had OS 9 machines in grade school that slowly got replaced by OS X machines. Seemed natural I guess.

Plus, "O-S-ecks" gets too close to "O-S-sex". I was a kid...

Yeah, 9->10 seemed natural, and I remember articles when it was first released along the lines of "OS X (pronounced O-S-Ten)". I used to cringe when I heard "ecks", but it's become so common it doesn't have an effect anymore.

Apple has always said it's "OS Ten"


Yeah, now you can take sides between "macahss" and "mac-oh-ess".

And, we could use some more window dressing! The Mac's weird window management now feels extremely dated compared to Win10 and KDE/Gnome.

And, we could use some more window dressing!

Okay, I could get on board with that. Though I'm not one of those loading every window manager out there in search of perfection, Mac OS is looking a bit dated. I'm not even sure what I'm looking for (well, except I've figure out that I'm not a tiling WM kind of guy), but some sprucing up would be appreciated.

> I'm not even sure what I'm looking for

I'm after Windows that remember how I set my defaults and keeps them.

> Also new is what Apple calls the universal clipboard. This gives users access to a single clipboard that works across iOS and macOS

I hope this only works when the 2 devices are on the same wifi network or have bluetooth enabled, rather than by sending every single thing I copy to an Apple server...

Complete and utter speculation, but if this is implemented well I imagine it is done the same as iMessages, with end to end encryption to all your devices. (Which, last I read about it, has its flaws and isn't a perfect system against state level actors, but it's not the worst.)

Handoff is direct between devices, and this is apparently an extension of Handoff.

Yeah, that would make sense.

Will this make the OS suck less? Seriously, at least for my use case, and in my opinion, OS X has been on a downward trend for a while (since 10.6). They need to fix the bugs, and get back to a nice stable OS that "just works." That's all I'm interested in.

I had kept my Macs at 10.6 for a long time but had to "upgrade" one of them to help my daughter with an iPhone problem (really annoying that you have to update your Mac just to copy files to a phone, but whatever). Everything was worse. Search was terrible. Mail was in the crapper. The weirdest shock was when I was using Apple apps and discovered they'd changed Shift-Command-S from "Save As" to "Duplicate." That move is really emblematic of Apple's direction with the Mac — arbitrary changes that either eliminate features or make everyday workflow more cumbersome.

I bought my first Mac in 1989. I bought my first non-Mac PC in 2015 and stopped using Mac altogether.

> Shift-Command-S

Basically at this point I'm recommending everyone to forget about iWorks apps (even though I brought a few people onto them earlier). I'm still holding on to Keynote even though the version compatibility issues are absolutely horrible, but it still produces the best presentations with the least effort, so I'm biting that bullet. To everyone else who's still using the old Keynote: Don't even think about trying out the redesigned one, nothing will be compatible anymore, just stick with it as long as you can!.

Meanwhile Google Docs impress me more and more.

Apple really needs to improve OpenGL support at least. Bump version to 4.4. They should also fix any OpenGL bugs in a timely manner.

Windows file sharing (at least with Windows 10 Pro) is pretty broken as well. Transferring multiple large files (especially 2 GB+) from OS X to a win10 file share seems to fail every time.

> Apple really needs to improve OpenGL support at least. Bump version to 4.4. They should also fix any OpenGL bugs in a timely manner.

Not going to happen. Metal is the One True Way now.

out of interest, what are the OpenGL bugs?

I was really hoping for a Macbook pro with a more up-to-date CPU. Or an upgrade of the non-pro iPad. Really disappointed.

WWDC is about software. Hardware updates mostly happen later in the year.

Actually, a number of hardware announcements and unveilings have happened at WWDC over the years. A couple of iPhones unveiled, a few Macbook Pros (including last year, I believe, as well as 2012 with the first retina MBP), and a few others.

Maybe WWDC will have less hardware given Apple have so much software now, though.

It's been a while since the Macbook air and pros have been refreshed (no Skylake!), that's why people were thinking it might happen here.

I foresee a lot of trouble as a MBP user with no other Apple products (MBP=work machine). Interoperability with Android phones is already sucky and they seem to bundle their product line even more.

Siri for MBP will be annoying, hope it can be disabled completely...which of course won't stop my co-workers from using it all day :(

It also sounds like there will be a few new attack vectors. The log in when close by sounds like a pretty horrible idea and I have a feeling the copy/paste feature will turn out to cause some issues as well.

What is sucky with Android phones and OS X? You want Universal Clipboard use something like Pushbullet or alternatives http://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/26495/univer... you want cloud sync use the existing cloudservices or use Syncthing which lets you sync even without a cloud. You can get nearly all features today also with Android ( even unlocking the Mac with Android Wear https://www.gadgetish.com/index.html ). Of course you will not get them from Apple ;)

There are many of of OSX-iOS only apps that I would buy have it been available in Android.

"Siri, a coworker is complaining next to me. What should I do?"

As an owner of still-functioning early-2008 hardware, it stings a little to see the machine suddenly unable to “support” such a minor-looking OS update. It was easier to handle back when you saw something like a complete transformation of the OS from one version to another. There are many reasons to want a more layered software architecture, and this is one of them: I would like to be able to continue improving the core of old machines without necessarily having to support whatever else they feel like building on top.

On the other hand, Apple has always done this: it blasts forward, and it always finds ways to make you just a little dissatisfied with what you have. They’re sort of brilliant at it, actually.

Your complaint is that an eight year old computer should run a just announced os.

Most people would be fucking ecstatic that their 8 year old computer still works and runs a current OS.

I hope all the cloud storage can be turned off. Depending on your job (e.g. confidential data) or how much you pay for bandwidth, these are some really bad features.

Those are not the only reasons to want the cloud features turned off. I don't want my phone and computer tied together, and it already annoys me how integrated the iPhone is to iTunes. I also don't want Apple cloud data storage. It's not a feature I need very often, and for the times I do, I have dropbox. I am not interested in having cloud storage integrated into the operating system like that.

I will not be upgrading to this version until it has been verified that all of this crap can be turned off completely.

It's not like iOS where everything is locked down. You are root and can do anything you want on your machine. It should be pretty trivial to prevent the cloud storage stuff from running.

I have to disable security by typing commands at a reboot to change system icons, so I'm not really root in the traditional sense on my Mac.

Unless they remove the ability to turn off SIP, you have full control over your machine. This is very different from iOS where you have to wait for some team of Chinese hackers to discover a security vulnerability in order to get access to your own device.

Not sure why this is not "root in the traditional sense", unless you're in some environment where you don't have physical access to the machine and can't reboot for some reason.

I meant with SIP, root is not the all powerful account it is traditionally. I'm also sick of the idea of disabling security to do simple things that shouldn't be covered by the security.

You can be sick of that if you want, but it doesn't really have anything to do with the point I was making, which is that it should be possible to disable cloud storage on your Mac, since you can do anything on your own device.

Whether you can do that with a reboot or not, whether you need to disable SIP, etc., isn't really germane to what I was talking about and I feel like you just wanted to take the opportunity to rant.

I don't think I should have to disable security to do things that are not security concerns. I also doubt the average user regards root as a solution. I am not hopeful given what was said during the prior beta, that disabling SIP will always be an option.

> I feel like you just wanted to take the opportunity to rant.

Was this line necessary?

How is running an account as true root not a security concern?

I have to dispute that changing core system files is something that 'shouldn't be covered by the security'. It's exactly what this sort of feature is for.

> You are root and can do anything you want on your machine.

That was never my experience on an Apple device. Now my Linux boxes yes, but Apple and Windows no way. Especially with the Mac App Store and the user Interface being so locked down by Apple. Many things are hidden by Apple.

What specifically have you tried to do on an OS X computer that you couldn't?

The only thing I have found that couldn't be done on an OS X device was run a custom kernel without breaking power management. Do you have any other examples of things that you can't do?

Can you modify system files and resign them so you can keep SIP working?

Probably, if you boot the kernel with boot flags that tell it to accept any signature. I haven't tested this.

Ya that cloud storage thing needs to be able to be turned off for my personal use because I don't want that feature and for work otherwise I can never upgrade past 10.11 and will basically have to go back to a Windows machine when it comes time to replace my work machine.

Apple Pay in Safari seems very interesting. I wish they had come up with something that would have worked with any browser as my personal primary machine is Linux, but I can probably upgrade my old macbook to use that.

There are also people who simply don't have access to sufficient bandwidth to make use of cloud storage. Forcing it on would make the OS and my internet connection useless to me.

You can turn them off in the setup process of macOS Sierra

Why should it not be? It's been a single checkbox in settings since it was introduced.

Registration is open for Startup School 2019. Classes start July 22nd.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact