macOS Catalina 10.15 Beta

#22
Hmmmmm. I wonder how notarised will affect the Java apps I use, not to mention the other command line tools I use on occasion.

I was just reading short story in last Christmas' New Scientist, the basic idea was a user couldn't user their toaster to toast their approved bread because the maker of the toast went bust (it couldn't connect to the servers to verify the authenticity of the bread), their dish washer wouldn't wash third party dishes for similar reasons.
I was just thinking we couldn't possible let that become a reality, we are too intelligent for that to happen right?
I forgot about Apple.

While I don't have a problem with the iOS App Store, I don't see why I can't run what software I choose on my computer (I see them as too very different platforms with different use cases). That said we seem to be getting even dumber and pointless features in iOS too, for example FaceTime using AR to correct where you yes are looking when you look at the callers video stream, I will stop ranting now.

I can see myself and Apple parting ways (at least for Macs and laptops), at least my last iMac lasted 8 years... that should give me plenty of time to prepare myself for windows or linux.
 
#23
I was just thinking we couldn't possible let that become a reality, we are too intelligent for that to happen right?
Good joke. Single human beings, at least occasionally, are very bright. As a species we have reached a point where I sometimes, reading the paper, stare in awe at the sheer monstrosity of our monumental stupidity.

I can see myself and Apple parting ways (at least for Macs and laptops), at least my last iMac lasted 8 years... that should give me plenty of time to prepare myself for windows or linux.
Think about that twice or more. You will still be able to get 3rd party software from outside the app store. No problem there for us (only for the developers).

I would like Linux. It's maybe sometimes not that user friendly, but at least they are not out to get more of your money (or even more important: your personal data). On the downside you have very few apps to choose from, very often such that are not that good for professional use. Some software I need I just can't get.

With Windows it's another thing. 10 is a good OS, no doubt about it, but you can't stop the spying even on Enterprise edition. It still sends some data home. Most people don't care, but from your post I got the feeling, you belong to those that do understand, what it can mean if microsoft, google, facebook et al. get too much data and to much power. In the worst case they control the lives (if they know enough about you, they can influence your decisions very much. We're not immune against psychological tricks (they try it for many years, especially to make us buy things. Most of it doesn't work that well. But you can see it at your local supermarket, where everything is made to make you buy: Vegetables usually in the first part of the place, special light colors for example for meat or vegetables and fruit (so it looks fresh), the way the goods are stacked and so on). If they really know enough about us, they will try to do a lot more (and will be successfull).

With Windows 10 Microsoft started officially, quite open about it, to use the customer as product.

Apple could try the same, but at least they don't (it's not because they are better. It's marketing).

And really good hardware for pcs, with screens as good and so on, isn't much cheaper here around for windows machines as soon as you enter the high end part. At least as long as you don't build your computer yourself. Could be completely different in your country (I looked just today to see the relations).

Another concern, still valid at the moment, could be security. Windows machines are just a bigger target. We're not carefree on Macs today, but the assorted virae, worms and trojans for windows are uncountable. And not everything anymore was installed because of an error made by the user. Some find their ways into the systems without someone clicking at or opening something he or she shouldn't have.

There is one big advantage for 3d in MS and Linux machines, though: Nvidia cards.
 

Helmut

Well-known member
#24
* @Jeanny
* I greatly appreciate your comment on your familiar relations to Rose Nylund from Golden Girls. I have not watched TV for some 20 years (having decided it was just too stupid a pastime), but I enjoyed some of the tight and subtle scripts of this particular series of sitcoms of the 1980s.

* We all could do with many more rambling nihilistic tales relating to utterly obscure and inconsequential events in St Olaf, MN.

* If I remember correctly, some years ago we briefly mused about Garrison Keillor´s "News from Lake Wobegone", a master of seemingly unstructured waffle. I also guess that Charles Schultz´s "Peanuts" was an example of a specific Minnesotan weird culture of minimalism which packs a universe of existential fear into 4 sparse frames.
* Great stuff, Jeanny, and thank you.
 
#25
@Helmut
By the way, I forgot to mention the part about design methodology. There I do fully agree with you. Usually, I do work top down, sometimes bottom up, when I'm not sure of my skills or do know that I probably can't reach the goals in a certain time or don't have the ressources (at least for me very seldom possible with work I do for others). That already can sometimes lead to a strange evolution of a project.

But I have to admit, too often, I do work not structured enough (at least in 3d and with some texts), without a plan, often personal projects where the part of collecting ideas leads to 'can I do this part or not?', which leads to testing which sometimes leads to some result or even a new prject, when I start structuring some parts. Somehow. This is not recommended in any way because it most of the time leads to nothing else than a learning experience (which is sometimes just what I wanted). And it's time consuming. (if you have the rare occasion to work for or with somebody like this, the most important thing is to look as if you knew what you're doing).

Actually it's a bit like Free Jazz, where you have to know the harmonies and stuff so somehow all the parts fit together into something beautiful. I sometimes cook this way, without a clue, what the results will be, not even knowing if it will be potatoes or pasta when I start with cooking the water or cutting an onion. I just know what fits together, what not. Most of the time I have some vague plan, but I never can quite reproduce the same dish another day. I never used a recipe. This works with cooking (for my spouse I'm the best cook in the world. I know exactly what we like). At least sometimes it's pure Zen. And I wish I could do the same in 3d. I'm still far away from being there but it's what I would want to accomplish (it needs a profound skill set I still don't have).
 
#26
Catalina has nixed iTunes, right?
As I prefer to not use any cloud service with simple things like listening to music, I will probably never go there.
And on Windows iTunes is continued, hmmm.....
 

Helmut

Well-known member
#27
* @Hasdubal:
* Well, your cooking algorithms seem identical to the principles of my logistics:

1 Big Bang
2 Quark Gluon soup
3 Thence proceed in a suitable chaotic / stochastic manner adding random noodles (see string theory), exotic condiments (see dark matter) and spots of energy (see Maillard reaction)
4 Plop into a dish and call it universe
5 Repeat for parallel universes if in an experimental frame of mind
 

Helmut

Well-known member
#28
* @Ms OverSaturated:
* If I understand correctly, macOS Catalina has split iTunes into 3 (?) components, one of those being Apple Music. Having been a minimal iTunes user, I can not comment on this aspect.
 
#29
@misoversaturated
Actually you don't need iTunes nor Apple Music to listen music on a mac. There are several apps to chose from, some of them free. Even without a dedicated app you can play a tune (which I use sometimes for things I created).

I do use it very seldom, but the free app I got installed on the mac here is named Kodi. It is able to play the flac-format, which is lossless, the same quality as wave but compressed (I can't hear a difference). We do use flac because I don't like mp3. This may be ok for electronic music and even some rock, but we listen almost exclusively to Jazz or Classic, where mp3 just plain cuts too much (at least if the tune has a good recording quality or is well restored). Of course I can hear this difference only on good stereo equipment.

So we never buy music as downloads, but still good old cds. Those get ripped, saved as flac and are put on a server (NAS) for listening through the network (for the stereo I have a good network receiver that streams from the NAS and for other rooms network speakers that can stream directly from the nas). Controlled is all this through IOS apps (coming with the Synology NAS). For outside use the spouse owns a high end sony walkman which can be connected to stereos that don't have a network receiver. Only for the car radio we do use mp3s on a stick). The expensive things are only the walkman and the network receiver for the stereo. All the rest is could be done rather on the cheap side, especially as you could use any computer as a server. It doesn't need any special software there, only one for streaming.

iTunes I never liked since my pc days. It's only neccessary if you actually bought songs from apple.

Notice: In my country all this is completely legal. It's probably not in the EU and maybe in some other countries.


@Helmut Sounds delicious!
 

Jeanny

Active member
#30
"BACK BY POPULAR DEMAND":eek:o_O
The post I deleted:

@ Helmut
It has been my experience that I learn much more from mistakes :poop: than from successes.
Thanks! That is Very Encouraging!
but all of evolution is just a lengthy one night stand
Great Profound Philosophy poetically stated!

Thanks!
 

Jeanny

Active member
#31
@ ZooHead, Helmut Hasdrubal
Thank you for your fun & kind words.

Probably because I try to quickly make statements without taking up too much space my statements have understandably been misconstrued.

RE: Rose Nylund:
I should have stated that I can relate to SOME not ALL of her character traits. I relate more to her desire to respect others and refrain from upsetting anyone. I relate to her more simple minded unworldly ways.

RE: Helmut's statement of taking a chance: (Recent changed are underlined)
My original intent was to only agree with Helmut that I learn more from my mistakes than my successes. As the thread enlarged I could see my statement could be more of a paradox and wishful thinking on my part: I'm afraid of using pay-pal thus I miss out on a lot of good scripts and plug ins. . . and there are people on this forum that I would like to compensate for their help but when Pay-Pal asked for my SS# I withdrew.
Taking chances depends on what it will cost me (not just monetarily) in the end. Although I mostly think "In medio stat virtus" which is a grey zone; to ONLY believe that philosophy would actuality be black and white thinking and things are rarely black or white.

RE: Hasdrubal's statement of wanting to expound more on post's extended issues:
I know he meant no harm to me. I was just trying to make sure I didn't upset anyone.

I wish we had a safe place that we could link to in order to elaborate and expound on topics that have 'evolved’ from the original intent of a post or thread ... A place to further discuss extraneous Beliefs, Philosophies and Musings on matters that have branched out from the original Thread's subject matter.

Not all those who wonder are lost. ~ JRR Tolkien

It is good to wonder.:)

My Best
Jeanny
 
Last edited:
#32
@Jeanny
You shouldn't be afraid of paypal. It's probably safer than a credit card, at least you can control the risk with having just a very small amount of money in your paypal account.

And actually you shouldn't mind upsetting anyone. You don't do anything wrong, so if somebody is upset by one of your actions, it's actually their problem (ok, those people usually try to make it yours. And some of them are upset because you don't have the same religion or are not as zealous, have some other political beliefs, eat the wrong things, wear the wrong colors or are nice to the wrong people). So it's unavoidable to upset others from time to time and no big deal (and I upset people in the past for things like not working for free for them).
 

podperson

Active member
#33
Catalina doesn’t require software fo be notarized. A future macos will.

It doesn’t look to me like macos notarization requires extra coding, since you can notarize software that’s already been written. It’s a more elaborate version of code-signing. My guess is that your executable round-trips to apple where it is inspected mechanically to look for suspicious code patterns. Recall that earlier this year malware was introduced into signed code by subverted copies of xcode. So developers signed software they wrote in good faith, but their tools added malware they didn’t know about. Notarization would stop this.

So, calm down.

Inkscape is X11-based so goodness knows what shenanigans go on when it executes. Assuming there’s enough folks who care about X11 it will presumably get fixed. But it’s not like Apple has shown much love for X11 apps in the past and the sky hasn’t fallen on them.

That said, i suspect apple will need to tweak its policies to cope with things like brew — because software developers cannot live without brew. The thing is, code signing was a horror show when it first appeared; now it’s automated to the point of being zero friction during developnent.
 
Last edited:

podperson

Active member
#35
Oh, i’ve lost count of macos versions :)

Inkscape’s been around a long time so they should have an existing developer cert. Even so, notarization does not sound too onerous and in any event at some point the kinks will be ironed out.

Does inkscape run without comment in 10.14? If so it’s signed with an existing cert and they don’t need to do anything.

Gatekeeper is even compatible with developer tools these days.

My guess is the worst case scenario may be you need to build the tools for yourself in the interim (much like how some ios apps circumvent apple’s restrictions by being distributed as XCode projects; unity did that with its iOS testing tool as a stopgap measure until they figured out how to deploy via the App store). This is completely viable for open source projects.

This all goes back to the old App Store debate. What works best for developers vs. users?
 
Last edited:

podperson

Active member
#36
I should add that there are some truly terrible software development practices out there to the effect that developers essentially run installer scripts downloaded on the fly from random repos in privileged mode locally. This is a HGUE security hole and it’s absolutely rife in the open source world (and the open source world means virtually all modern software development). Given recent events, Apple is absolutely right to force developers — like me — to clean up our act.
 

podperson

Active member
#37
While I don't have a problem with the iOS App Store, I don't see why I can't run what software I choose on my computer (I see them as too very different platforms with different use cases). That said we seem to be getting even dumber and pointless features in iOS too, for example FaceTime using AR to correct where you yes are looking when you look at the callers video stream, I will stop ranting now.
At some point we’ll need to pick our poison. Do we want computers that are reasonably secure or not?

Microsoft, which of all the commercial OS vendors is the most “open” just turned off their ebook servers making it impossible for people who had bought books from their store to read their books. Right now Windows gets petulant when you try to use unsigned software. I expect it will follow Apple’s example soon, except implement it less pleasantly. The only platform that doesn’t require some kind of signing of software for ordinary users right now is Linux and similar open source OSes (BSD, etc.). I suspect it won’t be long before computers which aren’t managed in some way won’t be allowed to connect to a lot of networks, so you may have a choice of “freedom” with virtually no convenience (or safety) or picking your poison and accepting what comes with it.

Right now, Apple is the only option that isn’t going to sell your data to advertisers and worse.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
#38
<rant>
<TL;DR>
The following might sound slightly (a lot?) over the top however, I don't believe we are being offered secure computing, it is restricted choice to increase profits in the guise of security.
There have been a number of security/privacy breaches with apps in the iOS app store, for example and I dare say not limited to the Facebook own VPN that was sending data home to Facebook, and Facebook have also been guilty of mis-using their developer certs, not to mention the recent Zoom issues.

App Stores are not the answer in fact app stores, code signing, certs etc are all attempts to layer security on top of what is an insecure architecture, both processors and the internet are fundamentally insecure, neither were ever designed for the usage we are putting them too.

With respect to personal data, yes Apple don't sell it, right now, because it is both a unique selling point/key differentiator and quite high on their users agendas; they can no longer bash PC with the fact they don't get viruses (another indicator as to how insecure the processors and OSes are), instead they can bash google et al with their sharing of personal data.

While Linux is more secure, having a better understanding of what is user code/data and what is os and kernel code, I don't think it really goes far enough, it is still possible for malicious code to subvert the OS, rather than layering on virus checkers and App Store inspection processors the OS should be made to be secure, to prevent such maliciousness. We should also not forget that the processors Linus generally runs on are flawed, we can see this from the massive look ahead vulnerability that hit the head lines in 2017/2018.
</TL;DR>
</rant>

Until the processor is designed with security in mind, until the OS is designed with security in mind, I don't think we can have secure computing, and all I see Apple offering is an opportunity to line their own pockets whilst claiming it is for security.

Of course I could be wrong, and just need to put the tinfoil hat in the bin :D

At some point we’ll need to pick our poison. Do we want computers that are reasonably secure or not?
I do agree though, and I will chose more secure when it is actually offered :D
 
#39
Right now, Apple is the only option that isn’t going to sell your data to advertisers and worse.
While I do agree with this, we cannot rely on it for the future. Like Encrypt I believe it being pure PR, a way to distinguish themselves from Microsoft which really went dark side completely. But I don't know many people who changed from Windows to Mac because of the new policy introduced with Windows 10 (I didn't trust them before. But that's when it got official). We did here. All the others I know ranted about it, said, yes, it's time to think about a change, but stayed in their comfort zone of MS Windows because Apple is so expensive (all in all, you get roughly the same, in my opinion and where I live, for the same amount).

And we have to admit, even at the moment it's not more than pure faith on our side, that our data is save with Apple. So I don't use Siri, and have very few things in the Apple cloud. Still they have a lot of data about me I can't be sure for what it will be used in the future. So my faith, sometimes, is a bit strained.

If I will ever use windows again, it would be restricted fully to 3d work (which is an option I keep in mind. The new mac pro, as great as it seems, is sadly a bit over my budget at least at the time. I had hoped for a cheaper entry level machine).

(For the record: I never had a facebook account (when it was the new thing to have, I actually read the conditions), never used twitter, instagram or whatsapp (for that I recommend and use Threema, sometimes even with customers). I don't have a youtube account and shy away from any other social media. For business reasons, though, I have a seldom used Google account I only log in when I absolutely have to. My preferred search engine is duckduckgo.com (again, as said in another post, for research I sometimes have to use Google because of more content listed there. And I do use a Credit Card as seldom as possible).

And yes, I know, even so those firms still have a lot of information about me because of scripts in websites i visited, an IP that doesn't change as often as I would like, and so on, and so on).

I don't believe we are being offered secure computing, it is restricted choice to increase profits in the guise of security.
There have been a number of security/privacy breaches with apps in the iOS app store, for example and I dare say not limited to the Facebook own VPN that was sending data home to Facebook, and Facebook have also been guilty of mis-using their developer certs, not to mention the recent Zoom issues.

App Stores are not the answer in fact app stores, code signing, certs etc are all attempts to layer security on top of what is an insecure architecture, both processors and the internet are fundamentally insecure, neither were ever designed for the usage we are putting them too.
The problem is not the usage, but the character traits of mankind and the pure criminal energy some people developed, combined with the policy of some states like China and Russia and power fantasies of politicians in the so-called "free" western world (as much as I remember, there wasn't one free country where they didn't have some politicians who wanted to forbid (!) encrypted mails as long as the state doesn't have a possibility for decryption* (it's quite an old idea)). The makers of the internet and the WWW were (and are) idealistic people, like the father of the www, Tim Berners-Lee, who seems disappointed with what happened to his invention. They saw the big potential behind the net, so many possibilities which never really came true (even so it has a lot of positive aspects, especially as it did change fundamentally the way we are able to gather information (and fake news)).

Okay, the sheer stupidity of many users plays an important role, too, the way they react to spam, or do open links blindly... and so on, and so on (I just read an article about how much (fake) Viagra our customs already catched this year, often with none or too much of the active ingredient and possible harmful other substances. Spam mails still work, pishing works, fake net shops, dating accounts etc. still work).

So, no, at the moment it's not really possible to create a fully save system, especially one that saves the user from his own stupidity. And of course it's marketing on Apple's side, albeit one, that only works to a certain degree as long as they deliver. MacOS and IOS are not fully save but more so than their counterparts.

All those security breaks Encrypt mentions are reasons for further measures from Apple to try to stop such misuses. They have to, because it's part of what they sell. That they make it a bit more difficult for developers has a downside for them, too, as some people simply will never change to Apple's environment, because of the smaller app options available. There is so much stuff around for windows only, and with those Apple policies, it will be worse. They know exactly how many potential customers they lose because of that, while security, at least at the moment, is probably not as effective a selling argument as it should be.

More effective, even automatic checks, can save us form some harm (not all, of course). So I'm always a bit of two minds about stuff like this notarization. It's a hindrance for developers, but it really works as a measure for more security. Apple does try to close all those backdoors.

Their plans to use own processors are a further step in this direction of more security. They can't be 100 % successful about it, but they do work on safer machines.

While Linux is more secure ...
It isn't. It's just less of a target. And, of course, the users are technically more versed then the average user of Windows, MacOS, Android or IOS. The chance is a little slimmer that they do some of the more obvious stupid things.

Please, correct me, if I'm wrong, but as much as I know, there is no gatekeeper, sandboxing or inbuilt antivirus (be it as weak as in the macos).

There are several distributions, which is for me one of the hindrances in actually using Linux. There are apps around that only run on some, other apps that would need others. Whatever, security-wise I'm not so sure if all Linux distributors are trustworthy. Some are company driven and do get some of your data. There is talk about spyware in certain distributions (never looked deeper into this).

And then there is the software you use on it. You can't say for sure if there is some hidden backdoor, spyware or whatever hidden. You plain don't know and don't have an easy way to be 100 % sure (you actually would have to check continually what data is sent and received to where).

All in all, I do agree with Pod that MacOS at the moment is the most secure system around. But on the other hand, new malware for the mac is coming daily, as it is seen more and more like an interesting target for criminals. The malware created for MacOS is growing by the hundreds daily (but still a small amount compared to the hundredthousends of malware apps created for Windows).

Until the processor is designed with security in mind, until the OS is designed with security in mind, I don't think we can have secure computing, and all I see Apple offering is an opportunity to line their own pockets whilst claiming it is for security.

Of course I could be wrong, and just need to put the tinfoil hat in the bin :D
I really believe that their new processors will be designed with security in mind, as are the MacOSes. Like I already said, they have monetary reasons, but it has to work.

Sadly, you can keep your tinfoil hat on.

First, they can only do so much without losing customers. Second, their policy can change anytime. Third, there is no technical safeguard against pishing, fake shops and so on; too much of the security is dependent on the user. Fourth, they are out for getting your money. For example with their taxing tricks they did show already where their allegiances lay.

So it's important that we keep our distrust to a certain degree.

And now I have to go looking for some tinfoil.



*corrected to decription in an edit ...
 

podperson

Active member
#40
<rant>
Until the processor is designed with security in mind, until the OS is designed with security in mind, I don't think we can have secure computing, and all I see Apple offering is an opportunity to line their own pockets whilst claiming it is for security.
What do you think an OS designed for security looks like?

Apple wants to be able to flip a kill switch for software that turns our to be malware. They can’t predict in advance which software is bad, so this lets them react either when a specific product turns out to have a problem or a specific developer turns out to be untrustworthy. How can you do this without doing what Apple is doing?

Look into how Apple’s security chips work. You can store biometric data in them but you can’t pull it out. Again, what do you think the kind of security we all want looks like in practice?

Incidentally, the biggest cpu related security problem right now (heartbleed) is something apple’s own silicon is not vulnerable to.
 
Top