Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Amen to this. Especially to those of us that for whatever reason still like to have music on their desktop like I am a professional musician and I need the actual files. I always say “I am now a Luddite. Because I wanna actually have an own the ones and zeros “

But you are absolutely correct the music program on the desktop is truly one of the worst programs I’ve ever used in my life. In the search feature is horrific. And it is so clunky and unfriendly UserWise.

Hey you mentioned some thing that sounded like a program name because unless it shapes up I’m going to have to redouble my efforts to find a program it works better. I have looked in the past but not put a ton of effort into it.

Right now, I've been mainly using Roon, which is a great program for consolidating a downloaded library that I actually own with a streaming service. The problems are 1) Roon is running on Rosetta still, though the latest update from the company is that an Apple Silicon version is being worked on and 2) the only streaming services you can use with Roon are Qobuz and Tidal. Tidal is not an option for me, and Qobuz is great for classical (which is much of what I stream), but not always so great for everything else. Apple Music is the best all-around streaming service in terms of what's available in their library and sound quality, but I hate the Music app. So I'm hoping the new changes to the Music app and the new classical app might finally convince me to switch over to Apple Music. But we shall see...
 
Would be great if they can take a break from adding new features just for the sake of adding new features and fix the bugs, since Catalina MacOS has been giving me so much trouble, i am starting to fell like i am using windows now.
 
Looks like we’re nearing macOS transformation into toyOS with each of these yearly releases
looks like Apple cares about how many new features are added each year, they don't care if they work or not. If a new feature doesn't work they can always fix it in next update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spinnetti
Am I the only one who still feels weird about macOS now getting a +1 numbering system every year? I'm used to the idea that the main number, ie X, was the huge underlying change (eg. OS9 to OS X). Now it's just the yearly number that was the number after the dot previously. I understand the idea is to follow the numbering scheme of iOS, but I just still couldn't wrap my heads around it. And I still think it's going to get a bit silly once we reach the twenties or thirties. I mean of course, can't wait for macOS 69....
adding +1 makes people think this is major update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spinnetti
not expecting much for it to be honest. messages improvements I guess and changes to settings preferences.
you mean add more settings ? when i send an iMessage it used make a sound, i did mute everything, even put my system in focus mode, nothing worked till i found that there is another mute setting in iMessages. Apple is becoming more like Windows, settings are in too many locations.
 
Mammoth… Lucky #13… I may skip this one for a while. Wouldn’t want my stuff to go extinct.

6i9gym.jpg
 
And look how it worked for him… ;)

Hey, they made it home alive and the story has inspired millions around the world. If macOS 13 is a failure, I doubt people will want to remember it 😁
 
This is completely wrong. iCloud Backup does not have end-to-end encryption. Period.


"Apple may not be able to listen in on your conversations, but they can decrypt the messages stored in your backups, because data in iCloud backups is not end-to-end encrypted.1

And it’s not just iCloud backups. Here’s an incomplete list of data sources in iCloud that are not end-to-end-encrypted:

iCloud backups
Messages (de facto when iCloud Backup is enabled because the backup contains a decryption key for the messages)
Photos
Files in iCloud Drive
Notes
Contacts
Reminders
Calendars
Voice memos
Bookmarks (your Safari history and open tabs are end-to-end-encrypted)

Source: Apple, iCloud security overview

In other words, if you use Apple services as intended and recommended by Apple, a large portion of your most sensitive data is in fact not securely encrypted. Both Apple and U.S. government agencies (and possibly other governments?) can potentially access it."

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: I WAS the one
I didn’t see any slowdown on my 2019 MBP in upgrading from Big Sur to Monterrey . I wonder if the way you are keeping all of your files on external hard drives might be causing something to work inefficiently?
Saved documents doesn't make any functional change at all. System documents are all in the main HDD. Explain how a Word document saved on an external drive can harm a computer? I even went to Apple Store, and they admitted Big Sur runs faster. "Monterey is always running processes in the background, like searching for an iPad or an iPhone through Bluetooth or Wi-Fi, its priority is unifying user experience as a one." They even recommend me to turn off iCloud if I wanted more space on my HDD! Check how much space I have now. When iCloud was activated, I barely have any space at all! Like 78g free only!
 

Attachments

  • Albertkinng Screenshot - 06-02-2022 3.jpg
    Albertkinng Screenshot - 06-02-2022 3.jpg
    77.5 KB · Views: 44
Books? With Books you are doomed. Imagine you want to change platform anyway in the future, all the books you buyer are history. Or Apple does change it's apps in a way you don't like?
You can access the raw epubs and PDFs (and m4bs), which are stored (with mangled file names) inside ~/Library.

Of course, if you bought DRMed books, you’re stuck but that’s true whoever you bought them from.
 
The two upgrades I’d really like are to Photos.app.

When you have a large library, time machine backups become terribly slow because it takes a long time to copy large directories, even if almost all the contents can be hard linked. Breaking up the first-level children of the Originals, Derivatives, etc. directories would save a lot of time.

The other change would be reducing the caching: I have a large library stored locally (not in iCloud) but the thumbnails and other derivative data is larger than the photos themselves. As processing is cheap and storage expensive, I’d prefer to have less caching.
 
This is completely wrong. iCloud Backup does not have end-to-end encryption. Period.


"Apple may not be able to listen in on your conversations, but they can decrypt the messages stored in your backups, because data in iCloud backups is not end-to-end encrypted.1

And it’s not just iCloud backups. Here’s an incomplete list of data sources in iCloud that are not end-to-end-encrypted:

iCloud backups
Messages (de facto when iCloud Backup is enabled because the backup contains a decryption key for the messages)
Photos
Files in iCloud Drive
Notes
Contacts
Reminders
Calendars
Voice memos
Bookmarks (your Safari history and open tabs are end-to-end-encrypted)

Source: Apple, iCloud security overview

In other words, if you use Apple services as intended and recommended by Apple, a large portion of your most sensitive data is in fact not securely encrypted. Both Apple and U.S. government agencies (and possibly other governments?) can potentially access it."

The source your are citing from apple is the exact confirmation of my point. Look at how the individual services interconnect and where each key for each service is stored. Yes, Apple can access some data, but "large portion" is a relative statement. And relative statements are often alarmist these days. "Large according to who?" should be the immediate follow up question. Let's be specific. From analysis of the services we can glean what Apple actually knows.

In the case of iCloud Backup the key for encryption is stored on our devices(s). It does not live on Apple's servers (except in the cased of iCloud Keychain). They cannot decrypt the backup data itself without this key. The transmission of this data is NOT E2E encrypted, this is true. Only the blob data for your backup is. This is why government officials work to unlock phones and other devices. It is the easiest way to get at this information.

In the case of iMessage the content of messages is encrypted with a key stored on our devices. It does not live on Apple's servers (except in the case of iCloud Keychain).They cannot decrypt the content of messages without this key. This is why government officials work to unlock phones and other devices. It is the easiest way to get at this information.

In both the above cases data such as time stamps, destination IP, source IP, message recipient, blob size, encrypted blob data, message signatures and checksums are NOT encrypted by our private keys. They are encrypted by Apple's keys or sent plain text. Apple has access to and can share all this information. However, content data is encrypted with our keys prior to Apple's keys to put the data on the wire. Apple never sees the content plain text.

A side note, the "key" for your iCloud Keychain is the iCloud password (you are only arguing the backups so I won't dig in too far here). Assuming Apple is not storing passwords plaintext anywhere and just a hash of it for auth this is secrecy that keeps passwords stored in iCloud secure. The backup key is stored encrypted with the iCloud password as the key on Apples server. Without they iCloud password they can not decrypt this data.

Going back to the data Apple can share, it is not insignificant. They have identity data and potentially data on who is contacted by each of us. Handing this to government officials can allow tracking of groups of people and contacts. It can be used for surveillance of the population of a state at large or an individual's private dealings. A warrant is required for the government to legally request this data in most democratic countries but that leans on how much we each trust our legal system and that's another topic.

Apple, however, can not pull this data from device backups. They can only pull it from their own logs. IMessage does have a separate "backup" of your most recent messages that get synced between machines. The same identity information above can be retrieved by Apple from this. But remember, your message is encrypted with your keys before it is sent to Apple. All they have is the encrypted blob of the content of your message.

In my previous post I said "privacy is maintained" and perhaps that could be ambiguous. I am a network protocol developer and I was thinking "privacy" in terms of packet privacy. These days auth/identity data is often something we would like to keep completely private as well. This is not kept private from Apple. Only our content is.

Backup included, metadata around iCloud is very accessible to Apple and whoever they choose to share it with. Apple does a reasonable job making sure that any actor in their systems can not access our content data (nor can a government they share the encrypted blobs with). But if the identifying metadata counts as a "large portion" then I guess I'm OK with Apple having that. Each person can decide whether they are comfortable here or not but I would argue we should dig in and understand exactly what is what to make a good call.

The Softbranch article doesn't do a service level analysis. From the start the concept of end to end encryption doesn't make sense in the context of a customer storing data with a provider, and they are trying to apply it as such. It only makes sense between customers communicating directly. End to end encryption is just a short hand for saying that the keys to encrypt and decrypt each live with the exact sender and receiver of intended data and ONLY those two. To do this analysis right we have to look at exactly where encryption keys are stored, who has access to them, and what they can decrypt. Softbranch failed to do this. This is what I have done above to prove that while the buzzword "end to end encryption" doesn't apply here the content is still secure.

If you disagree with the above I'll propose an experiment to be scientific about it. On a test device configure iCloud backup. Check your keychain and grab the key for iCloud backup. Hook the device up to the iOS debugger and step through the CFNetStream write calls to see your outgoing data before it is encrypted with Apple's keys (you won't be able to read it once it is encrypted with Apple's keys). Start the backup and examine what is sent. If you see your data clear text let me know and we'll have to go talk to Apple about this. I'll admit. I trust Apple is doing what they say here and have not done this particular experiment. (I also trust someone else HAS done this experiment and if it had gone wrong they would have called Apple out on it).
 
I don't have time to read the long post right now. Just take a look at the Apple Transparency Report.

e.g.
"The number of account-based requests that resulted in Apple providing content data, such as stored photos, email, iOS device backups, contacts or calendars, in response to a valid legal request. We count each account-based request where we provide content data and report the total number of such instances by country/region."


I don't need to read your text either, because you're completely wrong. You write about "private key" in one of your posts above, but iCloud Backup does not have end-to-end encryption. AES is a symmetric encryption
That's what Apple says, too.

"Backup
In transit & on server
A minimum of 128-bit AES encryption".
It doesn't say end-to-end encryption anywhere. Only where it says end-to-end encryption, it is used.

Accordingly, Apple has the key and gives out the contents of the backups on request, as you can read in the Apple Transparency Report (or in news, if something comes to the public).
 
"The iCloud problem: Why Apple's backup is more insecure than many suspect.

Apple fails to protect iCloud backups with end-to-end encryption - and turns them over to authorities when needed. Many users don't know this."

 
The two upgrades I’d really like are to Photos.app.

The update I would like to see regarding Photos is replacing it with a at least halfway decent alternative. Photos has so many bugs and lacks so much functionality that it is a complete joke.

Worst macOS and ipadOS app from Apple.
 
I don't have time to read the long post right now. Just take a look at the Apple Transparency Report.

e.g.
"The number of account-based requests that resulted in Apple providing content data, such as stored photos, email, iOS device backups, contacts or calendars, in response to a valid legal request. We count each account-based request where we provide content data and report the total number of such instances by country/region."


I don't need to read your text either, because you're completely wrong. You write about "private key" in one of your posts above, but iCloud Backup does not have end-to-end encryption. AES is a symmetric encryption
That's what Apple says, too.

"Backup
In transit & on server
A minimum of 128-bit AES encryption".
It doesn't say end-to-end encryption anywhere. Only where it says end-to-end encryption, it is used.

Accordingly, Apple has the key and gives out the contents of the backups on request, as you can read in the Apple Transparency Report (or in news, if something comes to the public).
If you aren't going to read it don't reply. You'll just make a fool of yourself. If you actually do you'll see. I agreed with you it wasn't end to end. Well done. That doesn't mean it isn't secure.

In no way have you shown how a key generated on a device for backup was stored with Apple in such a way that Apple could use it. When you walk me through the steps on how that happens I will happily concede.

Also, check the number of account content requests actually served up in that report you linked. See if you think it's that many. Also, consider, is it possibly the government already had the password? Or maybe apple has the ability to brute force AES 128? If you want to debate stop throwing docs out and walk me through what happens on the wire to prove me wrong.
 
The source your are citing from apple is the exact confirmation of my point. Look at how the individual services interconnect and where each key for each service is stored. Yes, Apple can access some data, but "large portion" is a relative statement. And relative statements are often alarmist these days. "Large according to who?" should be the immediate follow up question. Let's be specific. From analysis of the services we can glean what Apple actually knows.
You write something that Apple does not even describe in the article.

In the case of iCloud Backup the key for encryption is stored on our devices(s). It does not live on Apple's servers (except in the cased of iCloud Keychain).

Where is that described in the link?
In the link above it says:
"iCloud secures your information by encrypting it when it’s in transit, storing it in an encrypted format, and securing your encryption keys in Apple data centers."

They cannot decrypt the backup data itself without this key. The transmission of this data is NOT E2E encrypted, this is true. Only the blob data for your backup is. This is why government officials work to unlock phones and other devices. It is the easiest way to get at this information.
An iPhone is not required. You just ask Apple and Apple gives you the data. Apple has the keys and access to the backup.
If someone doesn't use iCloud backup or only the services that are end-to-end encrypted, then they are trying to unlock an iPhone.

In the case of iMessage the content of messages is encrypted with a key stored on our devices. It does not live on Apple's servers (except in the case of iCloud Keychain).They cannot decrypt the content of messages without this key. This is why government officials work to unlock phones and other devices. It is the easiest way to get at this information.
If someone uses iCloud Backup, then access to the backup is requested. Thus, the messages can be read.

You are confusing something. Otherwise, it is your task to prove that by quoting the relevant passages in the documentation that prove your point (Quotation and source).

"Since Apple has full control over the encryption keys, the company will serve government requests by providing a copy of the user’s iCloud data along with the encryption keys."
 
Last edited:
Has Apple in any way leaked other possible macOS names?

I can see Monterey for the first full M1 support.
But I can also see Mammoth as the release to support the M3 (when, eventually, it comes).

I'm wondering if there are any names with just two letters M? To support the M2.
 
Can we please get an updated version of Dogcow?

carry on.
As you wished.

 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.