Remix.run Logo
seanparsons 10 hours ago

My longstanding prediction that Gatekeeper will ever so slowly tighten so that people don't realise like a frog boiled in water is continuing to be true.

armchairhacker 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

People did realize when the actual Gatekeeper change happened a year ago [1]. But your prediction still holds because frogs do realize when they're boiled in water [2].

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/macos-15-sequoia-mak..., https://www.macrumors.com/2024/08/06/macos-sequoia-gatekeepe..., https://daringfireball.net/linked/2024/08/07/mac-os-15-sequo.... Top HN comment on Sequoia's announcement mentions it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41559761

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog#Experiments_and_a...

seanparsons 9 hours ago | parent [-]

The point is that by the time Gatekeeper closes tight enough that everything must run through Apple and it can't be disabled, most people wont notice and will be stuck with it.

danudey 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Your assertion seems to imply that there will be a point of no return where users are no longer able to stop buying apple hardware to run the software they want, and that therefore people should do so now.

If that's not what you're saying then your point is effectively moot, because if indeed Apple's platform control gets too egregious for some individuals then those people will switch at that point so there's no point in panic-switching now just in case.

In other words, users will switch when what Apple is offering does not meet what those users require. Some users will literally never care because all the software they use is signed and gatekept and so on; some users have jumped ship already because they want to be able to change whatever they want whenever they want. If things continue to "slippery slope" then more people will hit their own tipping point but asserting that it's going to happen all at once and apply to everyone is nonsense.

bbkane 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Fortunately, Linux laptops are getting better and better. I'm hopeful that by the time my M1 macBook Air gets slow enough to annoy me (maybe a year or two from now?), I'll be able to smoothly transition to Linux. I've already done it on the desktop!

JCattheATM 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> by the time my M1 macBook Air gets slow enough to annoy me (maybe a year or two from now?)

It should be good for at least 5 years from now, if not more.

abnercoimbre 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Finger crossed for mine as well!

zackb 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Just did this. I am so much happier. As a lifelong Apple user, and side-quest Linux user the choice is a no-brainer nowadays. Desktop Linux is honestly great now. I love(d) Apple but Tahoe was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

i use arch btw

spaceribs 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My family have bought macs and been apple fanboys since the "Pizzabox" 6100 PowerPC. My dad handed me down a DuoDock when I was in middle school. We bought a G4 Cube, I had an iBook and Powerbook throughout college and throughout the 2010s.

In 2017 I built my first desktop PC from the ground up and got it running Windows/Linux. I just removed Windows after the 11 upgrade required TPM, and I bought a brand new Framework laptop which I love.

This is to say that Apple used to represent a sort of freedom to escape what used to be Microsoft's walled garden. Now it's just another dead-end closed ecosystem that I'm happy to leave behind.

marcodiego 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Apple does not support running other OS's on their hardware. This is bad in many senses but it is specially bad since it weakens competition and reduces incentives for Apple to improve their own OS, meaning it is bad even for their users in the long run.

If you choose to buy hardware from apple, you must consider that you're encouraging a behaviour that is bad for everyone, including yourself.

cweagans 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Their bootloader explicitly supports other OSes. They make it easy to run Windows (even through a built-in app that helps you set it up). There are plenty of reasons to criticize Apple, but they literally don't do anything to prevent you from running another OS.

pjerem 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Their bootloader explicitly supports other OSes

That’s true but that’s probably only so that it wouldn’t have been a subject when Apple Silicon Macs were released because Intel Macs weren’t locked.

In reality, the bootloader isn’t closed (yet) but the hardware is so much undocumented that it’s easy to understand that Apple doesn’t want anything else than their OS on your mac. The « alternative os » situation is actually worse than it used to be with Intel Macs and Apple is paying a lot of attention in never talking about this "feature".

IMO, they will just quietly remove this possibility on new generations when everyone will have forgotten that boot camp used to be a thing.

zbentley 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Eh, you may be right, but there's a big difference between "they are going to forbid other OSes by placing a software restriction where they explicitly permit things now" and "they already effectively forbid other OSes by not publishing developer documentation for proprietary hardware"--that's a tall order, and not a bar that many other hardware manufacturers meet either.

Like, could they lock down the bootloader? Sure. But that's effort they'd have to put in for minimal benefit at the moment. Opening up their hardware would be a lot more effort for questionable benefits (to Apple).

marcodiego 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> they literally don't do anything to prevent you from running another OS.

Like not documenting their hardware? Like making Asahi Linux becoming a multi-year reverse engineering project that may possibly never achieve perfect compatibility?

> They make it easy to run Windows

On apple silicon without virtualisation? Sorry, didn't know that.

cweagans 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Like not documenting their hardware?

They aren't actively hindering that reverse engineering effort. They aren't _helping_ either, but I didn't claim that they were helping. For as long as I can remember, Apple's stance with Mac computers has been "We sell the computers to you in the way we think is best. If you want to tinker, that's on you." and I don't think that has materially changed.

dangus 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The point is that Apple could have easily locked down the bootloader and made it not possible at all to install something else. In designing the M1 hardware they explicitly went out of their way to make sure other operating systems could be installed and they’ve said as much. They took their smartphone SoCs and bootloader that never allowed alternate operating systems and added that feature in actively.

Technically Asahi Linux isn’t facing a much different situation than standard Linux distributions as they relate to x86 hardware. There are thousands of PC components that don’t provide any sort of Linux driver where contributors reverse engineer those drivers.

Sure, in the PC world a lot more vendors do voluntarily provide Linux drivers, and Apple will never to that for its hardware, and that specific point is a valid criticism.

As far as assisting in running Windows, my understanding is that the company that makes Parallels and Apple have some kind of relationship. Microsoft officially endorses Parallels.

You can complain about it being virtualization but it’s perfectly fine for desktop apps or even some more intensive apps. And it’s not really a very valid complaint considering that Microsoft doesn’t distribute a general purpose ARM distribution of Windows.

marcodiego 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> Technically Asahi Linux isn’t facing a much different situation than standard Linux distributions as they relate to x86 hardware.

Very very different.

> There are thousands of PC components that don’t provide any sort of Linux driver where contributors reverse engineer those drivers.

Increasingly more rare. Maybe that only happens thèse d'ays on extremely specialized hardware.

dangus 5 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s only rare these days because Linux spent decades clawing its way into data centers and workstations.

You can find a somewhat similar situation on Linux, with other non-Apple ARM hardware.

queenkjuul 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Apple Silicon cannot boot Windows ARM and Apple is dropping boot camp support alongside x86 support in the near future.

alwillis 5 hours ago | parent [-]

> Apple Silicon cannot boot Windows ARM

That's totally up to Microsoft… they could done a licensing deal with Apple years ago to enable Windows ARM to run natively on Apple Silicon hardware.

zackb 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Asahi Linux[1] is unbelievably great on Apple Silicon. It's honestly the best Linux install experience I've ever had.

1. https://asahilinux.org/

Jnr 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yes, but only on M1 and maybe M2 devices. Doesn't work at all on M4.

Stability is an issue (as I tested it with M1 Pro throughout the years).

Not all of the hardware features are supported. For example no external monitors through the usb-c port.

Also the project seems somewhat dead, having some core developers leave the project.

I had high hopes for Asahi but currently it doesn't seem like it will ever be fully production ready for currently relevant hardware.

JumpCrisscross 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Gatekeeper will ever so slowly tighten so that people don't realise like a frog boiled in water is continuing to be true

Gatekeeper can be disabled. Given Cupertino’s pivot to services and the Mac’s limited install base relative to iPhones (and high penetration among developers) I’m doubtful they’d remove that option in the foreseeable future.

ewoodrich 6 hours ago | parent [-]

It really bothers me that Apple removed any convenient shortcut to bypass Gatekeeper like the old Control-click [1] hotkey. Apple's relentless ratcheting of the difficulty/annoyance of Gatekeeper has just about pushed me over the edge to completely disable it, despite the risk.

The ridiculous song and dance of "File is dangerous, delete it?"->No->Settings->Security->Open Anyway->"File is dangerous, delete it?"->No is getting ridiculously old after literally doing it a hundred times at this point. And soon enough Apple will inevitably come up with some additional hurdle like, idk, closing Settings three times in a row while reading a fingerprint during an odd numbered minute.

So in the name of "increased security" they've needlessly turned it into a binary thing where it's completely unprotected or accept my own computer that I paid for will deliberately waste my time constantly. It makes Windows 11 seem elegant in comparison where all I need to do is run Win11Debloat once on install and it gets out of my way.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=saqachfa

wpm 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Open Automator and make a droplet or service that runs `xattr -d com.apple.quarantine` on whatever file you give it. There’s a recursive option for xattr that I can’t remember but I add that one on too; I’ve unzipped stuff that had the flag and somehow ended up with hundreds of files I couldn’t open without GK prompts.

ewoodrich 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Thanks! I'll give that a try.

JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> in the name of "increased security" they've needlessly turned it into a binary thing where it's completely unprotected

Why isn't a binary condition valid? Isn't that the ethos inherent to a literal walled garden?

If you're inside, trust us. If you're outside, you don't, but don't expect us to bail you out.

ewoodrich 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I didn’t say it was invalid, just that it was needless. When I bought the laptop Gatekeeper was a tolerable nuisance and I was fine with the tradeoff given the security benefits.

The removal of the hotkey (which also required changing a setting before it worked at all) didn’t actually make it harder for a regular user to access, just 5x as aggravating every time it's necessary.

If they made developers go through some long and tedious process to re-enable it I would grumble but understand, but the only solution to get back to the 2024 status quo being entirely disabling a critical security feature certainly doesn't benefit me in any way.

jdxcode 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I hate that analogy—frogs jump out.

JohnTHaller 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The writing was on the wall from the first implementation. But we all kept getting downvoted when pointing out the road ahead.

4ndrewl 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Shut up and buy the sock.