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.
macOS Sierra Tidbits: Apple File System, RAID Support, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This "macOS" release better let me download files from anywhere I want off the web and not use strictly their App Store. I've always had a problem with gatekeeper. I won't upgrade if Gatekeeper picks and chooses where I can and can't download from. That's crazy on a computer.
A thing one should realise is that 10.12 is not a new OS. Its an incremental upgrade to 10.11, a polish pack if you want. Visually, its indistinguishable. It doesn't bring any new radical features to the system, just refines what we already have and makes it more convenient. People were complaining about too frequent OS X releases, well, this is not really a 'release'.
P.S. I don't believe that the article covers it, but 10.12 also contains support for wide-gamut displays. Which may be some indication for the new hardware that is coming.
[doublepost=1465897124][/doublepost]
Your sarcasm is totally inappropriate. This is an alpha preview. Of course it can't do much at this point. Its not ready yet to be used as a startup volume.
P.S. I don't believe that the article covers it, but 10.12 also contains support for wide-gamut displays. Which may be some indication for the new hardware that is coming.
[doublepost=1465897124][/doublepost]
Your sarcasm is totally inappropriate. This is an alpha preview. Of course it can't do much at this point. Its not ready yet to be used as a startup volume.
So, if an app developer doesn't have approval from Apple, their app cannot be used on a Mac???
I'm not regretting my decision to stay in the backwaters of pre 10.10...
I'm not regretting my decision to stay in the backwaters of pre 10.10...
Back in the 90s: Microsoft aimed at controlling the user and limiting his/her choices. We moved to the Mac.
Today: Apple aims at controlling the user data and limiting his/her choices. We'll move to other OS that provides us with the same freedom of choice and guarantee of privacy that Apple offered us in the 90s.
Sad, but this is Apple today. First it was the "autosave" (let the OS decide when to save, which -for obvious reasons- was a total failure in terms of almost none real world apps using it). Then it was designing Apple Store policies in a way that third party developers drop support for older OS X/iOS versions prematurely, helping forcing buy new Apple devices ASAP. Then they start neglecting standard APIs such as OpenGL, OpenCL and Vulkan, while introducing custom proprietary APIs that add cost to the development of multiplatform applications. Then your iOS mobile devices start to have far more data about you that you never suspected it had, and they tend to move it to the Cloud with an ease you weren't aware of.
And then it comes Sierra today, with the feature of "knowing what files you really want to upload to the cloud".
Man, if I had with Microsoft the same patience I'm having with Apple, I'd still be using the Win stuff in one of those beige PC dull boxes, and wearing the cheap suit from the PC guy in the (then brilliant, today sad to replay) Apple "PC vs Mac" ads.
Today: Apple aims at controlling the user data and limiting his/her choices. We'll move to other OS that provides us with the same freedom of choice and guarantee of privacy that Apple offered us in the 90s.
Sad, but this is Apple today. First it was the "autosave" (let the OS decide when to save, which -for obvious reasons- was a total failure in terms of almost none real world apps using it). Then it was designing Apple Store policies in a way that third party developers drop support for older OS X/iOS versions prematurely, helping forcing buy new Apple devices ASAP. Then they start neglecting standard APIs such as OpenGL, OpenCL and Vulkan, while introducing custom proprietary APIs that add cost to the development of multiplatform applications. Then your iOS mobile devices start to have far more data about you that you never suspected it had, and they tend to move it to the Cloud with an ease you weren't aware of.
And then it comes Sierra today, with the feature of "knowing what files you really want to upload to the cloud".
Man, if I had with Microsoft the same patience I'm having with Apple, I'd still be using the Win stuff in one of those beige PC dull boxes, and wearing the cheap suit from the PC guy in the (then brilliant, today sad to replay) Apple "PC vs Mac" ads.
Or you could just RAID over Thunderbolt. Plug in an external drive and set it up as a RAID 0, 1, or the fake RAID option described in the article. From my reading of the file system improvements, there shouldn't be any issues if it is disconnected while the computer is on.
Good point, though I would be very nervous RAIDing internal & external HDDs, even if the new AFS means it shouldn't mess up if they disconnect. Time will tell, though.
Edit: I just re-read what I posted and apologize if it comes across as terse. I didn't mean it that way.
"Hold down the Control key, click on an application, and choose 'open.'"
That's how you can have an application installed from anywhere. If Apple won't allow you to put it in Applications then put the application somewhere else and open from there. I doubt they will exclude unsigned applications completely. They are just trying to make it harder for people to potentially compromise the security of their system. Those who are savvy enough to go around it still will have the option.
Also, this is a beta so things will change. As with most betas, Apple almost always leaves things out and then add them in over time as the core features lose bugs.
Last edited:
APFS represents the biggest change to the Mac OS in many years. Unlike the other technologies, features, and bugs Apple has introduced with each iteration of OS X, this will affect virtually every user who upgrades. Although there are many hurdles along the way, I'm encouraged by this quote from John Siracusa: "The new file system is real, and it's…spectacular?"
I'm kind of undecided on the Apple File System. I guess I don't see why encryption is being added to the file system when it exists in Core Storage, as it also potentially prevents Core Storage from getting other useful features like compression (good encryption shouldn't be compressible, that has to be done first).
Also, they only mention copy-on-write metadata, but will support snapshots which leaves me confused. Journalling is actually not a very nice feature, copy-on-write is far superior in nearly every way, plus it's the obvious choice for a file-system to support snap-shots since you don't overwrite old data until you have to.
I dunno, I prefer the separation of block level features into Core Storage, as it makes them file system independent, and lets the file system focus on fewer things which is better for stability overall. Plus Core Storage can be enabled on existing file-systems, whereas APFS will presumably require wiping an existing one, so will be mainly limited to newer devices.
Also, they only mention copy-on-write metadata, but will support snapshots which leaves me confused. Journalling is actually not a very nice feature, copy-on-write is far superior in nearly every way, plus it's the obvious choice for a file-system to support snap-shots since you don't overwrite old data until you have to.
I dunno, I prefer the separation of block level features into Core Storage, as it makes them file system independent, and lets the file system focus on fewer things which is better for stability overall. Plus Core Storage can be enabled on existing file-systems, whereas APFS will presumably require wiping an existing one, so will be mainly limited to newer devices.
That's an obviously reasonable point, however, if Tim didn't have such a hard-on for allocating Apples main focus from, "bulletproof software with hardware to match," to building a vehicle and handing-off nearly all of their proprietary features to 3rd party developers, I'm sure this would have already been implemented. It's not about the tech being in alpha, it's the looming question of, "Wtf are Apple engineers actually doing nowadays?"
Ever since Tim removed Scott from head of OS development, Macintosh software has gone nowhere... Until four years later, half-heartedly.
Well yes tis sounds a lot like ZFS doesn't it? There was a roumer a few years ago that apple pland to change to zfs maybe this is their version of it
You're right but what if they also gave ALL their attention to Apple Music, iCloud and iTunes? Those are barely usable. Besides, with the amount of money Apple has, there is zero excuse for their software to not be top notch - across the board.
The seamless cloud backup approach probably works well in an always connected (desktop) environment. But just like the problems reported by iOS users of iTunes, who've been complaining about difficulties in finding which media are physically on their devices, it may not work quite so well on the road or in the air. As primarily a laptop user it would be great to see more being done to help create an always connected laptop experience - MBPs with built in LTE maybe, or even cooler would be ultra fast (purple rimmed) wireless network switching that would allow switching between access points during a commute (eg between xfinity hotspots on my LIRR commute). Until then I'm perhaps not keen to have apple decide which documents can be made unreachable on the road ...
Regarding Optimized Storage (which you should never use), Apple didn't mention that you'll need to subscribe and pay for more iCloud space.
The (at this time) missing support for booting from the new fil system, missing time machine support and no fusion drive support. Well the fs is in beta at this time so the above will probably be in place by release, or maybe you will end up with a boot partition like linux where you have a boot loader and the kernel we will have to wait and see
Not so, this feature assumes everyone is on high performance fibre-infrastructure based internet access.
Where I am, I still only have access to ADSL2 that floats between 0.9 to 7Mbp/s down depending on the conditions, including how many systems are connected.
Utterly abysmal by today's standards, but it's what I have access to, and Apple in their perfectly lightning fast connections bubble reality add 'features' that only make this worse.
I don't really use 'cloud' services in part due to my speed issues.
The upload speed I have access to is worse BTW, floating between 0.1 and 0.9Mbp/s depending on the conditions.
I literally cannot afford to have these kinds of cloud 'services'.
It took roughly 12 hours or so for me to successfully download the 6.25GB PS4 demo for DOOM(2016) to give an idea of my issue time-wise.
Which by my estimate took less than 20 minutes to beat when I actually played it, so... yeah...
I have been calling for this for a while. I am more than sure that Apple has macOS running on arm already. But as always deals and politics play into this. People still want to run Windows on a Mac (why?). Apple still has contracts with Intel. But the constant delays from Intel which has been a determining factor for releasing new Apple hardware has got to be a thorn in apple's skin. I am sure there is some internal roadmap on this and as you state, the changes they are making will allow them to execute on it, if and when it becomes advantageous to do so.
If they do, the the debate of iOS vs macOS will get interesting.
I don't think you understand the complexity of developing a filesystem. This is not a question of putting tons of engineers on the job. This is literally a work of art that is done by few very knowledgeable people (or even one person) and not something that can be rushed or accelerated by throwing money on it. What we get here is a first glimpse, so that a larger user base can experiment with the FS and report bugs they find.
