Apple Removes Network Locations Feature in macOS Ventura

[chucker23n1]

(Incidentally, there were at least four utilities to this effect — MarcoPolo, its fork ControlPlane, Location X, and NetworkLocation.

All of them are dead. On the one hand: kind of a sign of the times. Perhaps this isn't as useful as it was two decades ago. On the other hand, the change in Ventura might create an opening.)

 

[visualseed]

Well, that assumes money can fix all problems in development. Which seems a logical assumption, but: it really can't. Hiring good developers is not easy. Even if you get a really good developer, increased team size leads to increased coordination costs.


I think a DHCP server would perform the same function, really. Plug your Mac into Ethernet and it can figure out connection details over DHCP. If not plugged in, it can do the same thing over a WiFi network. If you're a business not running a DHCP server? Now's a good time to re-evaluate that.

I'm sure there's still cases where it's needed, but I bet a shortcut, once built, can configure networking with the same number of clicks. So it's functionality most don't need that can probably be replaced for most of the rest with a shortcut. I can see why it failed to make the list when Apple was needing to build new UIs for Settings.

That would only address some of the features. Network locations also lets you determine which networks to connect to in the first place. Which WiFi network or whether to prefer ethernet over Wifi if both are present depending on where you are. I'll give you an example, I don't mind using Xfinity wifi hotspots when I'm traveling or out at a coffee shop, but I don't want my computer connecting to the Xfinity hotspot in the office next door when I'm at work.

 

[Millah]

My wishful thinking is that Focus, in the long run, is a modern take on Mac OS Classic’s Location Manager. You can *kind* of do this by switching network settings based on focus mode using a script.

"Apple's legendary ease-of-use that the Mac is known for"

Nothing screams legendary ease-of-use like essentially writing your own system software or automations.

What always set Apple apart from all the other nerd-targeting computer companies were the simple but powerful nice touches throughout Apple's products. Even if a feature was narrowly targeted, some nerd inside Apple thought of making it easy to operate. Apple's products were designed and engineered enthusiasts who had excellent taste for interaction and design. The nerds and enthusiasts at Apple designed products for non-enthusiasts and enthusiasts alike because even an enthusiast can appreciate a powerful feature being easier to operate. They used to have a special gift of creating features that satisfied the majority of both camps.

They seem to struggle with this more and more these days. Sometimes they either go too nerdy and powerful (Focus is a good example), or not powerful enough and too simplistic in capabilities.

 

[Analog Kid]

This is one of those features that seems really weird until you find a reason you need it. I use it for one very specific purpose: configuring my network switch, which requires accessing it from a specific IP and a few other configuration hassles that I can settle all at once with a change of "location".

Same if I'm doing something specific with a Raspberry Pi and want a direct connection rather than bringing everything together on one public-ish network.

I imagine this has caused a lot of confusion for users who open Network Settings and see this "Location" control that doesn't have any clear purpose for 90% of people. Taking it away isn't going to affect me much day to day, but it'll make my life much more complicated a few times a year. I could almost get by if network settings were per-user, and I could use fast user switching to change the configuration, but sadly they're system level settings.


The name "Locations" sort of misses the point of what it does. I think it's origins are pre-WiFi, or maybe not pre, but early enough that WiFi wasn't the overwhelmingly dominant form of network connection that it is today. WiFi has locations kind of embedded in the named network concept.

Ethernet though, does not. You plug the connector in at work, you plug the connector in at home, you plug it in at a hotel and there's no real way for the system to know what it is you've just connected to. And while it's not quite as wild-west as it once was, I used to have to play proxy configuration games and set up IP ranges and stuff differently depending on where I was.

My wishful thinking is that Focus, in the long run, is a modern take on Mac OS Classic’s Location Manager. You can *kind* of do this by switching network settings based on focus mode using a script.

Yeah, I always thought Network Locations should have been expanded to do more than just change the low level network settings and change the whole computing context. Focus is kind of that, but also not exactly. It seems Focus is more about your social context than your computing context.

But yeah, some kind of macro-configuration mechanism would be welcome.

 

[sdf]

That would only address some of the features. Network locations also lets you determine which networks to connect to in the first place. Which WiFi network or whether to prefer ethernet over Wifi if both are present depending on where you are. I'll give you an example, I don't mind using Xfinity wifi hotspots when I'm traveling or out at a coffee shop, but I don't want my computer connecting to the Xfinity hotspot in the office next door when I'm at work.

You should be able to handle that by setting the wifi hotspots are a lower priority, right? And if that doesn't work, turn off auto-join. You'll be the same number of clicks away from them as you are with Locations, I think?

 

[livmatus]

Apple will eventually realease a premium version of macOS with annual subscription ... where they'll introduce all the settings they took from the base version

 

[RumorConsumer]

Oh god I love locations

 

[ilikewhey]

oh that is annoying, i prefer my rj45 when i dock my mbp to my monitor since wifi is always kinda shotty.

 

[chucker23n1]

The name "Locations" sort of misses the point of what it does. I think it's origins are pre-WiFi,

The origins are in Mac OS Classic's Location Manager.

This was a control panel (what one would now call a preference pane) where you stored an entire set of configuration options, and applied them all in one swoop.

In Mac OS X, only the network aspect remained.

 

[Bremse]

Well that sucks. I guess a 3rd party tool could do the job but why not just leave functionality the way it was? There was nothing wrong with it. They finally figured out that removing ports was a bad idea. Maybe this will eventually come back?
I use different network profiles all the time. One basic use is with pihole. I can quickly switch to a profile that circumvents pihole if I run into an issue with a website.

 

[Analog Kid]

The origins are in Mac OS Classic's Location Manager.

View attachment 2042285

This was a control panel (what one would now call a preference pane) where you stored an entire set of configuration options, and applied them all in one swoop.

I'd forgotten about that little guy...

That. We need that.

 

[sdf]

But yes, disabling DHCP is more of a security by obscurity measure.

That's not a bad thing, it's just not a big thing.

 

[sdf]

Well that sucks. I guess a 3rd party tool could do the job but why not just leave functionality the way it was? There was nothing wrong with it.

Because the UI clearly had to be rewritten for Ventura.

 

[!!!]

What a stupid change. I use this every time I switch to wired so it doesn't go off and start using Wi-Fi randomly.

 

[sdf]

What a stupid change. I use this every time I switch to wired so it doesn't go off and start using Wi-Fi randomly.

Just prioritize wired over wireless. Been doing that at my desk for years. It works great.

 

[cualexander]

Depends on what the DHCP server does.



It could, but you could still switch to manual either way.

But yes, disabling DHCP is more of a security by obscurity measure.

A more secure solution would be to implement 802.1X. Wired or wireless, no certificate, no network access. Period. End of story. No need to disable DHCP. Most high security environments, like DoD, Government agencies, etc. just use 802.1X. Much simpler than removing DHCP.

And really with DHCP Reservations there’s not much need to static anything these days. Only in one/off testing situations really.

 

[sdf]

Apple will eventually realease a premium version of macOS with annual subscription ... where they'll introduce all the settings they took from the base version

They won't do that. And if they did, the version without all the ridiculous layers of settings would be the Pro version.

 

[rpmurray]

But things like not having my Mac mini ever go to sleep automatically because the setting is completely lacking within the new settings pane was driving me crazy. I told myself that it was most likely just missing from BETA1, but BETA2, 3, 4 and 5 has released and it's still missing and no comment has been made from Apple on my feedback on it which I delivered back in BETA1 making it feel like they are not going to have it be a setting at all on macOS Ventura which seems crazy to me. No setting to allow your system to go to sleep after being idle for a set amount of time? Really?

My understanding is that Apple thinks this is too difficult for users to understand so they're hard coding a five minute limit on idle at which point the Mac will go to sleep, whether you want it to or not. They're planning to tout it as a plus because it will reduce energy use and your electric bill. I think it might also be related to pending legislation in the EU that would make this a requirement for all new electronic devices that have USB-c ports.

 

[urnotl33t]

Yep.



It's still a thing in high-security environments. (In fact, I had a talk just a few weeks ago on whether we should get rid of DHCP again.)

Otherwise, you easily run into hazards where someone walks in with an Ethernet cable in their pocket, connects their laptop, and has a certain level of access. Yes, you can restrict them to subnets, or whitelist MAC addresses… or you could outright get rid of DHCP altogether.

Also not the answer. You want 802.1x (and MAB with central authentication backend) for that. Cisco ISE is really great for that (albeit huge and expensive). You can take your way through it with Microsoft's NPS server, too. I've done both.

NPS is cheap (free-ish) but requires some work for MAB. Cisco ISE is expensive but the profiler is fantastic and automates a bunch of stuff.

 

[chucker23n1]

A more secure solution would be to implement 802.1X.

Also not the answer. You want 802.1x

I wasn’t asking for advice on securing a network.

 

[twistedpixel8]

Great, hopefully this means they’ve fixed all the problems where locations simply stop working and nothing loads, often when a VPN has been enabled.

Or maybe that hasn’t been fixed and they’ve just taken away the only fix without a full reboot. Apple in 2022: it’s the latter.

 

[minik]

Although I don't use this feature, I see a few people use it at work. It'll be a bummer to not see it on the GUI on GM.

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

Great idea, Apple!
After the default ("Automatic") has been an issue forever we'll likely be stuck with that in the future and can't change it easily... How about fixing that first?

 

[itsamacthing]

22 years into Mac use, tried it many times, never actually used it.. Apple knows which features aren’t worth the maintenance

 

[ian87w]

Ding Ding Ding!

Next up... "macOS Pro".

Let's hope that Apple doesn't do this. Having "one Mac OS" has always been one of their more favourable attributes, unlike the Windows experience where you needed to choose between 6 different flavours.

The joke is becoming a realty