> As a general principle, application developers should not have free rein to modify my system's configuration, and OS's should do their part to make it very difficult for developers.

Funny enough macOS, iOS, iPadOS and Android do this and they are constantly attacked for it.

I do think there needs to be more strict adherence by developers to standards like XDG but I don’t know how it could be enforced.

▲

nulld3v 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They are constantly attacked because they prevent users from modifying the system configuration, not just app developers.

▲

simondotau an hour ago | parent [-]

From the operating system’s perspective, everything is the user. Or everything is an app developer. Depends on perspective. Disambiguating reliably, in a way you’d consider reasonable, is not trivial (and arguably impossible).

	▲	nulld3v 29 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not sure I fully understand you. All those OSes try very, very hard to disambiguate between apps and the user itself?

▲

gjsman-1000 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I do think there needs to be more strict adherence by developers to standards like XDG but I don’t know how it could be enforced.

It can't be enforced. Developers can and will always do whatever they want with the tools available. For good ends (Adobe) or for ill (malware).

If you try to fix it with sandboxing and closed app stores (Apple forcing sandboxing and using SIP), you get attacked. If you don't try to fix it and let devs do as they please (Microsoft allowing host file editing), you get attacked. The conclusion of these incompatible goals? HN and nerds have zero relevance in policy discussions, because they don't have a consistent policy to offer [1].

[1] Unless, of course, you define "devs shouldn't be able to do anything bad even if they choose" and "users should be able to anything bad if they choose" and "users should be able to write their own software capable of bad things while simultaneously not being held to the standard of devs" as a compatible principled position.

▲

anfilt an hour ago | parent [-]

I think somewhat sand boxed is fine, but the user should at the end of the day be allowed to let things out or get out if it.

The problem with things like iOS is the user can't make that choice. Also what you call 'bad' is up to the user. At the end of the day a user should be able to adjust things even at root level or request other software to do that on their behalf. Heck for iDevices owners should be able to load their own signing keys at a minimum for the Boot-ROM.

As for Adobe most people would not expect their software to touch the host file, so it's fine to call them out here. Someone using a utility or tool that you would expect to edit the host file that's fine, and people should be able to use or make such a tool. (The os should not prevent the user/owner if that's what they want).

	▲	ryandrake an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yea, that's what I was getting at. The user should be king. Not the application developer, not the OS vendor. The user should be able to easily say yes/no to these things and have the final say.