http://arstechnica.com/apple/2016/06/raw-shooting-a-harsher-gatekeeper-and-more-obscure-macos-and-ios-10-changes/
IT'S OGRE, APPLE WALLED GARDEN IS NOW PERMANENT
DELETE THIS
>>55090230
appletards BTFO
>>55090230
yo can enable it by writint "sudo rm -rf /" in terminal you fuck
>Don’t panic. You can still run unsigned apps by right-clicking (or control-clicking) on them and clicking Open, and once you’ve run them once they’ll continue to run without issue.
Pajeets can't read
>>55090230
>taking anything from the pre-beta for granted
> IT'S OGRE
> You can still run unsigned apps by right-clicking (or control-clicking) on them and clicking Open, and once you’ve run them once they’ll continue to run without issue. And disabling Gatekeeper entirely via the terminal with the sudo spctl --master-disable command is also still possible.
Not yet.
does being autistic make it harder to read whole articles?
>>55090230
> Press option
> Right click
> "Open" *.app
WeW lad!
>see article with interesting title
>read the first 2 sentences
>immediately post to /g/ to show all those apple faggots!!! XD
>>55090291
They can, but they just want to spread llies just to get people to use their shitty linux distro.
>>55090433
i don't think they're thinking "time to spread lies". it's just the natural tendency for people to stop looking for more information when they've found data that agrees with their prior beliefs. if you're a brand zealot, the headline is enough for you to get all amped up and post retarded shit on 4chan about something.
this is just like that time that retards posted that screenshot of some indian news story reporting on how many indians were working at apple now. literally the article was written by indians, the publication was some local backwater indian publication, and the sources were indian. it'd be like reading your mom's christmas card describing how great her son has done in the past year. but zealots don't care, because thinking that critically about the source doesn't seem worthwhile, when they've already struck gold with the superficial clickbaity title.
>>55090472
Happens a lot on /tv/. Worst part is when fake article links get posted a fair bit and people still react as if it is real.
>>55090631
makes sense. it's just playing into people's wishful thinking.
and before someone calls us all neckbeards for pretending to be above it all, i'll admit that it's something that gets to me too. just not in this one specific case, so i have the self-awareness to spot what's happening with people like OP.
Even though I imagine they'll keep the command-line command (for now), I still dislike this change. It's not a good development.
>>55090671
it would be really shocking if they managed to subvert the user's power in some unfixable way. SIP did to some extent, but even that can be turned off (it's a bit of work though).
Still, I agree that this is a shitty thing to do. I'd prefer if they did something like made the GUI more intimidating or something, but left a graphical way to do it.
Then again, I have a dotfiles repo/bootstrap script for whenever I get a new OS X machine set up (with a hackintosh and having replaced/reformatted my rMBP once or twice now, it's been often enough to make it worthwhile), and if this kicks me in the ass to add this additional thing to my bootstrap script, then fine.
As long as I *can* add a command and turn this thing off (which I could've done until now, but never bothered to do because the GUI was much more apparently accessible).
>>55090717
>Still, I agree that this is a shitty thing to do. I'd prefer if they did something like made the GUI more intimidating or something, but left a graphical way to do it.
Google's way of handling developer menu on Android where you have to tap a text label n (I think n=7 on Android) amount of times in order to get the GUI to open would work well in my opinion.
>>55090291
Can you admit this is stupid though? Apple initially did this do prevent malware. This makes it easier to install malware. A person retarded enough to install malware, may not be able to change the system prefs, but can easily be coerced to right click and run.
>>55090757
The right-click method isn't new though.
>>55090742
Yeah, but that has a very strong "easter egg" feel to it that I suspect Apple isn't into (based on the absence of that in iOS and OS X/macOS).
I think, bizarrely, I'd be more okay with it if OS X had a sudo-exclusive command likedefaults write com.apple.poweruser -bool true/false
(and maybe a requirement that you log out and back in or something)
where setting it to true would do things like disable SIP, give you more (dangerous) options for gatekeeper, etc...
keep all the under-the-hood options that still exist (like the ability to toggle the gatekeeper through the shell), but add a toggle to turn the graphical user interface into a more expert or "safety not guaranteed" mode.
Or that could be a graphical toggle buried somewhere in the preferences.
>>55090788
I've been thinking the same thing. I understand why they do things like this, but some of us don't need it.
>>55090834
that's funny because /g/ wants you to leave.
complete bullshit: the thread
>>55090883
can you explain why these screenshots don't show it then?
i'm not trying to seem like i'm doubting you; i'm just assuming that neither group is trolling and trying to figure out whether something like a version update (where they reintroduced the option, for instance) might be behind this, rather than people bullshitting each other deliberately.
stop accusing everyone of malice when coincidence and stupidity are still on the table.
>>55090834
>>55090908
Fuck off weaboo piece of shit trip faggot
>>55090472
IMO, the title wasn't clickbaity so much as the image OP decided to post.
this is the beginning.
>there's an override
and soon there won't be. just like the extension signing disable flag went away in chromium stable channels, in a year or two apple will remove the workarounds and only let people who have code signing certificates and developer accounts to run unsigned code
>>55090907
i couldn't tell you. i installed sierra and it shows up just like it has since yosemite when i first moved to macos.
>>55090933
i mean the image the OP posted was in the article, and the takeaway from a 4-year-old's reading of that article might've yielded the "IT'S OGRE" response from a kid.
>>55090907
It's a developer PREVIEW, there are going to be bugs. Assuming that arstechnica isn't just plain lying for whatever reason.
Apple wants to kill the desktop. Really they only have the problem with those pesky developers for their systems, so eventually they'll release their dev tools for Windows and are done with OSX.
>>55090291
That sounds more like a bug waiting to be fixed 2bh
>>55091026
you are retarded
>>55091043
Just wait.
>>55091004
bugs are unexpected behavior. issues like these tend not to be the manifestation of bugs as often as they are decisions made that we're just learning about now.
while i agree that it's wrong to rush to judgment, it's also not totally crazy to think that an option disappearing from the GUI might be deliberate. we kind of have to assume that everything except for the breaking stuff is part of what they're going for.
>>55091122
>bugs are unexpected behavior
Yes, that's right. Unexpected behavior like an option not showing up. Why are you intent on believing it's a decision when someone else is showing the option to still exist?
>>55091144
because
1) an error is more likely to manifest in ways that break the system in some way - like the button not doing anything or selecting it crashing the system for some bizarre reason.
and
2) because i happen to trust arstechnica's filter for errors and bullshit more than i trust [insert arbitrary anon from 4chan].
4chan isn't a place for credibility. if you ever see conflicting reports between 4chan and some other place, by design you should be trusting 4chan less; that's the price we all pay for not having to register accounts - we forfeit empirical credibility.
>>55091190
arstechnica is garbage, retard
>>55091026
>eventually they'll release their dev tools for Windows
If you didn't need OS X to develop for iShits, Apple would lose a third of the Mac market overnight.
>>55090940
>and soon there won't be
If they'd wanted to lock down whole os like the ios - they could do it much faster and easier.
Here they just want to force developers to sandbox for their apps. Nobody want skype having access to browser history, and transmission encrypting your hdd.
>>55091307
This doesn't prevent any of that (OP Image) unless I missed some new sandboxing paradigm in the new MacOS release. Identified developers just means that it was signed by a valid code signing certificate that chains up to a trusted intermediate/root CA in the MAC OS Certificate store.
>apptards getting cucked
>>55091232
stop listening to /g/ for opinions on news sites and actually evaluate them yourself.
>>55091446
i'm the guy posting the screenshot with the "Anywhere" option, so i am evaluating it for myself, fag. which is why i said arstechnica is garbage.
>>55091461
okay, then you should know that generally ars technica is not garbage, and there's at least one completely reasonable explanation for why a static news article doesn't accurately report on your experience using an operating system that you may have downloaded after that article was published (or after they vetted the story).
i maybe should've clarified that you should base your opinions on sufficient evidence, but i guess it's something if you're not admitting that you're parroting the retarded shit that /g/ spews.
>>55091461
What garbage reporting has ars done? I'm genuinely curious. Amongst Verge, Gizmodo, etc... Ars has generally seemed pretty competent and thorough.
>>55091336
Sanboxing is here for a few years already, and it is mandatory for appstore, but most of devs are ignoring it.
>This doesn't prevent any of that
You could prevent skype to access your browser history by signing it yourself.
>codesign -s - -f --entitlements ~/SkypeJail.entitlements /Applications/SkypeJail.app
In case of transmission there is much less possibility of hacking appstore then the app-specific update server.
>>55090757
Applefag here.
Yes it's basically fucking pointless.
Gatekeeper is a complete joke anyway.
https://www.synack.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/GatekeeperExposed.pdf
It exists more for marketing purposes than for actual security, just like UAC on Windows.
>>55090907
I heard its a bug where the option in the settings menu doesn't actually do anything, either they removed it or because of how cocoa works, its left out.
>>55090883
This guy probably had it enabled from his previous installation so its also enabled.
>>55091523
>just like UAC on Windows.
yep. it's sad that apple didn't learn from microsoft's mistake. or maybe they figured that the VERY limited success microsoft had was enough for them. or maybe they figured that by changing it from a slider to radio buttons they'd have a profoundly different outcome.
in any case, history repeats itself and nobody seems to have learned anything.
>>55091555
>the option in the settings menu doesn't actually do anything
this is how a bug tends to play out.
also the explanation makes sense. i'd like to see someone do a fresh install of 10.12 before we claim to know anything.
>>55091566
>it's sad that apple didn't learn from microsoft's mistake.
Old Apple did.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FfetbidVUYw
>>55090230
> Right click > open > Yes i'm sure.
Wow I must be a godamn genius.
>>55091493
bruh i installed sierra directly after wwdc and already called bullshit on this as soon as their article was posted.
>>55090230
Holy fuck this is awful
>>55090433
The only people who use Linux are whites and people who pretend they're white (South Americans).
>>55090230
Steve wouldn't have let this happen.
They should get rid of the right click option and keep the settings option. I don't think the average user would realize that right clicking to open an app disables their security. The settings could at least have something like WARNING: DANGEROUS.
