Security is definitely high on the priority list for most OSes these days, but it does raise the question of when does security stop you doing what you want to do with your OS?PaulJ wrote: 10 Apr 2021 15:35 @rubber_jonnie, in years past the acid test for software was it function as spec'd. That was hard enough when dealing IO. Back then root was all powerful, you could do anything as root. Now days modern computers have been infected with security code to attempt to stop the bad guy from gaining a foothold in the machine and execute their own code. If you want to do anything system or io related it's harder to get through the security layers than getting the functionality operational. I really don't write any code for a modern OS because most of the effort is getting through the security protection. Although MacOS is a fine operating system I'm not writing any IO related code for it. The M1 and successors is going to be worse since the M1 had a lot more security built into the hardware. It's one of the reasons iPad apps will run on it while Intel based machines need additional efforts which developers see no value in.
The funny part of all the security is a large part of all OS's are built on legacy code that were built in the days of "if it runs without issue" it's ok. So we see all the time of huge security issues being uncovered in old libraries. So I will use MacOS kinda like a hammer. It's got great features but too big a pain in the ass to write code for beyond any self contained app that don't need access to much. Have a stable of old Linux machines, the Atari stuff, and good ole SWTPC machines if I actually want to do something.
Still pondering the M1... want one now but really don't need it.. just got the trashcan which was brand new (NOS) from OWC which meets all my needs. Rumor has it there will be a Mac Pro with Apple silicon so I'm most likely going to wait awhile to see what develops. The M1 is a monster.. the swap is so efficient you really don't even notice its in swap without a benchmark program. I suspect Big Sur will be the last Apple OS that will be largely reliable for the Intel machines. You know Apple is going to put all their efforts toward get the OS to run flawlessly on their silicon. Also change made to improve Mx will have detrimental effects on the Intel based machine and in house testing of Intel machines will fade the further we get down the road.
Last but not least Jon, you get what you pay for. IBM did an investigation on the relative costs for businesses that use Apple vs MS. They found it was significantly cheaper to use Apple. So you may pay a little more up front but it's well worth the price.
https://9to5mac.com/2019/11/12/ibm-mac- ... roductive/
https://www.computerworld.com/article/3 ... ought.html
There have been a few occasions where this has come up for me, probably many times with Windows, but SELINUX has also slapped me in the face a few times once I started working more on Linux once I started working for an ISP as a data centre engineer. It just hamstrung me all the time and was a bloody nightmare.
Windows seems to be a little less harsh, or maybe it's just hiding and pretending to let you do what you want. And I know what you mean re legacy code, because there have been so many Windows faults over the years that have been a result of older code.
As for Mac OS, I am very much liking it, but worried that the level of access I like will slowly evaporate. I mean I can get root in Catalina, but how long before that level of control goes. Same for Linux and Windows.
:sigh:
As for getting what you pay for, yep I do get that and talking toa work colleague who is a long term Mac user, I think the initial cost while high is tempered by the longevity of the hardware, which based on how good my 2012 MBP is means lower TCO.
I think an M1 or later MBP is going to be my path just as long as I can run everything I need, and this time next year I don't doubt that will be the case. As fora PC, well I'll always have my work machine.
