I’ll also be curious if placing the app in ~/Applications avoids the restriction. This has long been my way to get around some of the restrictions at work. /Applications requires admin rights, ~/Applications does not. Apps still show up in LaunchPad and work as normal (as far as I’ve seen), they are just only available to the user, instead of all users, which is fine for my situation. I used to have to request admin rights every time VS Code wanted to update on my work laptop, but since I put it in my user folder instead, it’s been smooth sailing.
They don't.
> I’ll also be curious if placing the app in ~/Applications avoids the restriction.
It doesn't.
Apple kinda reminds me of Intel in the 2010's ( not 1-1 comparison ), hollowed and rotting inside but in a constant party because $$ coming in and line going up..
They wrongly think because they control the dials when things start to go south they can just step on the gas and change course, it's a fools illusion because the people who actually can make a difference will not be there and the whole organization already is tuned for the wrong incentives, so when Tim Apple's minions step of the gas... nothing will happen other than pumping out more "beautiful, amazing, thinner" but useless slop.
This doesn't seem at all a fair characterization of what happened here - you can still run these applications, they just added a (seemingly pretty reasonable) step to do so. I don't see this as allowing users to do less, and I struggle to find a strong argument against this when the typical user is not a l33t hacker type and most typical users find it extremely easy to download and run malware.
Every version of macOS makes it harder and harder to run unsigned code. They keep pushing the bypass deeper and making it less convenient. It’s super super annoying and stupid.
You're free to distribute (and sell) your notarized app however you want.
Provided you’re continuing paying every year.
I have no problem with the fee, but getting that frickin signing process just right took me days to get working right the first time.
There is also the quetion of privacy, for FOSS creators who are not a company, to have their real name shipped with the binary.
Or is all of this theatrics to try and resuscitate the probably-dead Mac App Store?
https://9to5mac.com/2024/08/06/macos-sequoia-screen-recordin...
- 1Password requires supplying a password hint when changing the master password.
- Unifi OS enforcing password quality requirements even when locally/self hosted.
- "Set up later" (instead of "No") as the negative option for various "helpful" feature prompts in iOS.That said I can certainly see the argument that Apple isn’t going about handling this set of problems correctly, but ignoring it or pretending it doesn’t exist isn’t right either.
Most are.
But the OSes could be designed way better for this stuff too.
Give the user security but also total visibility. A central place to grant/revoke app permissions, and to check what all apps ask for, click to see their "privacy policy" or lack thereof, has an easy way to filter to see e.g. "which apps use the camera, when they last used it", etc.
When some app is blocked and you wonder why it doesn't work, it should be easy to see a list of "blocked apps" and sort them by "when they were blocked" and other such things.
I'm OK with this. When the prompt appears, you're very much trying to do something else, and ya don't need the detour. "Bug me l8r plz."
I've spend literally days attempting to get a Python-based GUI application "signed", using every available packaging option and dozens of different approaches recommended by a multitude of different sources.
Absolute failure -- and no usable error messages indicating what might be wrong. Just basically "no, you can't upload that.".
This does not bode well...
What, in the past 10 years of MacOS development trends, suggested to you that anything was headed in the remote direction of "boding well"?
This is the first time I've tried to develop something to target a macOS installation -- and it was a train-wreck.
This is going to make running a DisplayLink (not DisplayPort) display very onerous if not impossible.
I guess I only get to use 2 external screens if I'm forced to upgrade my work mac.
> Putting EAS and utilisation clamping together, we took a 15" M2 MacBook Air from about 6 hours of useable battery life just sitting at the desktop to about 8-10 hours of 1080p30 YouTube, 12-15 hours of desktop use, and an enormous 25-28 hours of screen-off idle time. We still have many more tricks up our sleeves to eke out more battery life, and a deep dive on EAS utilisation clamping is in the works. Watch this space!
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asahi-Linux-improves-battery-l...
But with the remaining outstanding hardware issues and the battery life gap in mind, I will probably get an overall better experience sooner if I just pony up for the upcoming Snapdragon X Elite laptop from Tuxedo Computers¹. :-\
On the other hand, the whole Linux desktop stack has benefited from work that Asahi devs have done, so I think that project is still undeniably valuable even for users on other aarch64 hardware.
--
1: https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/TUXEDO-on-ARM-is-coming.t...
Long time ago, you could run any executable you wanted. Then, you got a little nag, but whatever. Then (I think) you had to right click and take an extra step to run them, with a scary warning. Then, you got an even scarier warning and had to navigate into Settings to select "Allow applications downloaded from" -> Anywhere. Then, they removed the "Anywhere" option, but you could re-enable it with the command line.
It's also directionally clear: They surely intend to fully boil the frog one day and remove the ability to do this.
Se also: The UX you have to navigate in order to fill your own password into web pages on Safari.
Will Right Click > Open still work? That is how I currently bypass this issue with unsigned applications.
xattr -d com.apple.quarantine
will keep working.
At the moment I'm just linking to https://disable-gatekeeper.github.io/ and hoping that if anyone ever comes across my repo, that they know how to read and won't bother me about it. Maybe in the future the optimal solution would be to just not provide any pre-built binaries.
Or users who were told to "control click" by malicious sites peddling trojan horses and other stuff, so that they never see a warning
Untrue. You always see a warning: https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/unsigned.html