Because we'll all natually run to Windows 8..the same reasons exist to avoid that too..
Why is that always the default answer?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
OS X Mountain Lion Limits Apps to Mac App Store, Signed Apps by Default
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because we'll all natually run to Windows 8..the same reasons exist to avoid that too..
Why is that always the default answer?
It's time for the Apple Faithful to accept this reality.
Once a closed eco system, it's about to be locked down permanently
As they love to say. It's about the experience... One that's the mirror image of Big Brother as dictated by Apple.
Decades after their famous commercial & "in your face" anti-big brother stance, Apples control has usurped all others. Apple is now Big Brother.
Steve's Won All The Marbles & Owns the Playground as Well.
Even if it's from the beyond.
Not at all. This shows that Apple is committed to security and keeping malware off their systems in spite of the level of tech prowess (including utter lack of) that their users have.
People who agree with Apple on this are the same people who agree with the Patriot Act or SOPA.
We ALL knew this was coming but we also ALL know where it will end.
Apple is the new Microsoft, except worse. Their product are overpriced but the quality is lower (a new Macbook will only last 2 years now), they are not innovating anymore (iPhone 4S, iPad 3...) and they are even dumbing down their products (Moutain Lion which doesn't bring anything new or better but rather less and limited), they are bullying everyone, from dying company like Kodak to all opponents, they are making a consumer electronics market and education market of the rich vs. the poor (in a near future, rich kids will all have the same iPad or Macbook Air while other will struggle or be outcaste) etc...
We ALL knew this was coming but we also ALL know where it will end.
Apple is the new Microsoft, except worse. Their product are overpriced but the quality is lower (a new Macbook will only last 2 years now), they are not innovating anymore (iPhone 4S, iPad 3...) and they are even dumbing down their products (Moutain Lion which doesn't bring anything new or better but rather less and limited), they are bullying everyone, from dying company like Kodak to all opponents, they are making a consumer electronics market and education market of the rich vs. the poor (in a near future, rich kids will all have the same iPad or Macbook Air while other will struggle or be outcaste) etc...
Last edited by a moderator:
Only on this board can 'they're concerned about security' be use as a slur.
Ok then. You don't like that. I'm optimistic.
Come on now. This isn't a bad thing. It's great for the casual computer user who has no idea what they're doing. You wouldn't believe the amount of idiots I had to help uninstall that stupid malware bug that went around posing as a virus protection software.
We can shut it off no problem. I doubt we'll ever see the day that OS X will need to be jailbroken to run other apps, though. That's counter culture to desktop computing.
We can shut it off no problem. I doubt we'll ever see the day that OS X will need to be jailbroken to run other apps, though. That's counter culture to desktop computing.
I don't know too many people who want to run OS 6 - OS 9 apps any more, either.
How many PPC Macs are still in operation? Yes, I personally have two, but they're relegated to limited use like a DVR and novel-writing purposes.
I seem to notice how even Windows alerts to unsigned apps and expired certificates. Unsigned apps aren't a technology unto themselves, they are merely apps which the developer has chosen not to take ownership in the event of a problem -- such as security.
Except apple gives you an Opt out, while the government does not.
That's not a good analogy.
Oh dear, oh dear. I wish some of you would seriously think a second. If we didn't have the range of ability of humans to use a computer and everyone (noob to geek), this sort of feature would never exist.
The pesermists here will tell you it's Apple locking you down. Well, I personally think you're wrong. It's a pretty simple concept to protect the most vulnerable of your customers coming into the Apple store because they installed a bad application. User experience will go up for the majority with the feature, and as it's switchable to run anything; why moan?
The day Mac OS X turns into iOS, will be the legitimate day to complain and stop buying Mac products.
Anyone who says the Mac OS X app store is a bad idea needs to spun around in a chair or 5 minutes. Seriously, why complain at simplicity?
The pesermists here will tell you it's Apple locking you down. Well, I personally think you're wrong. It's a pretty simple concept to protect the most vulnerable of your customers coming into the Apple store because they installed a bad application. User experience will go up for the majority with the feature, and as it's switchable to run anything; why moan?
The day Mac OS X turns into iOS, will be the legitimate day to complain and stop buying Mac products.
Anyone who says the Mac OS X app store is a bad idea needs to spun around in a chair or 5 minutes. Seriously, why complain at simplicity?
Welcome to schizophrenic club, you know, people that see things that actually aren't there.
I knew this thread was going to be full of "the end of the world is nigh" posts. In its current state, I love this feature.
Ever removing the "anywhere" option will causewithout questiona mass exodus of developers and platforms are historically only as alive as their development community. If the App Store were to ever become the ONLY distribution method, the whole idea of being a UNIX-based OS would be a joke. Too many devs use tools like MacPorts and Homebrew or just compile their own stuff from source.
Mind you, this is anything but the majority, but developers are and will always be the most powerful minority on any platform.
Ever removing the "anywhere" option will causewithout questiona mass exodus of developers and platforms are historically only as alive as their development community. If the App Store were to ever become the ONLY distribution method, the whole idea of being a UNIX-based OS would be a joke. Too many devs use tools like MacPorts and Homebrew or just compile their own stuff from source.
Mind you, this is anything but the majority, but developers are and will always be the most powerful minority on any platform.
Hahaha this the most ridiculous thing I ever heard.
But nice try at manipulation, I can see how your mind works "put two things people really hate and then claim if you agree with Apple they also like this"
I hear they use that trick a lot in North Korea.
Next up, "OMG Apple gatekeeper kills kittens"
AND? They have clearly said that you can get a certificate just by asking for one. The only rule you have to agree to is if you attach that certificate to something nasty like malware it will be blacklisted. Otherwise have at it.
so what reason is there not to get a certificate.
This default I would imagine would lead most developers to strickly offer apps on the MAS and not bother with outside the MAS
I remember how when the iphone app store came out and people would laugh at the notion that such a thing would ever come up for the mac line and flat out said it would be horrible to have a walled garden on the mac....then it happened and this is just slowly incrementing towards it entirely
I remember how when the iphone app store came out and people would laugh at the notion that such a thing would ever come up for the mac line and flat out said it would be horrible to have a walled garden on the mac....then it happened and this is just slowly incrementing towards it entirely
You are right about that. The computer would be useless to me if it were locked down like that. We will have a carefully watch Apple for signs they are going that way.
BTW you would not have to sell your Apple equipment. Linux runs well on Apple computers and the hardware would still be first rate. And I doubt you COULD sell your Apple products after Apple did that, who'd be buyiing?
It's time for the Apple Faithful to accept this reality.
Once a closed eco system, it's about to be locked down permanently
Hold on, isn't a closed eco system a locked down eco system anyway? Same thing, different words.
Microsoft have locked companies/customers down for years with stupid licensing schemes. Shame they didn't innovate when they had a majority of the market and release central app systems that could download software without you having to walk down to the shop or other such user experience enhancements.
Psssssht.
I think we're in agreement about the intention (preventing malware), which is certainly a good one. While 'only' requiring code-signing is better than requiring App Store approval, I think it's a false choice. The vast majority of Mac users have fared just fine running unsigned code for the past decade. At the moment, I just don't think that getting marginally-improved security is worth the cost of Apple having a kill switch over a large swath of a Mac software company's revenue.
As for "they're only killing harmful apps", disabling signed-but-not-approved apps is new territory for Apple so we don't know how they will implement this policy. However, given that Apple has made more than a few controversial App Store decisions, and since Apple may eventually be dealing with making judgement calls on a much greater quantity of signed-but-not-approved apps compared to App Store submissions, I would guess that it's only a matter of time before Apple runs into some murky territory about what is and isn't allowed.
Whether this becomes an issue or not all depends on what Apple's definition of 'malware' will be. Will the definition only include code that does things like deleting files or installing a botnet client? What about code that, through the use of private APIs, has the potential to corrupt files? What about code that obfuscates its operation for privacy reasons, but could potentially be used for nefarious purposes (anything from TrueCrypt to BitTorrent could apply here)?
I agree that having the option to run unsigned code allays many of these concerns for now. It's just easy to get a little concerned when one looks at the trajectory (unsigned code > sandboxing required for App Store apps > APIs only available to App Store apps > signed code required for default operation, etc.)
Last edited:
Slippery slope fallacy detected.
It is stupid whenever this fallacy is used. For example, does it make much sense to say that if same sex marriage is allowed, what is to stop us form recognizing the union of man and box turtle?
That's the day I reach for Bill's outstretched, and loving arms, joyfully embracing Windows X. That will be the day when I spend $2k on a computer made in China and will be told what I can run on it. I love my Mac(s), but I will never be scared to "brick" my Mac.... LOL that sounds funny just saying that. But if that ever did come to pass, I'll be the first to say Steve, it was nice playing with you, RIP, but I'm out.
Furi0usBee
It worked because apps were cheap - 99c for an excellent product.
Mac App store prices are same as retail... there's no incentive for me to purchase online when I can buy a sharable copy on physical media.
If it stays as it is now you dont have to care dude, just switch to "Anywhere" and install whatever you want..
I think Apple is signaling at least me that it's time to start exploring other options. Sound like the walled garden is coming to mac. It matters verylittle that it's a toggle that you need to move the point of putting it there is control. It's been fun
"Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line and the man come take you away"
(Buffalo Springfield, "For What It's Worth")