Hacker News Reader

Comment by Brajeshwar | Hacker News Reader

I thought this was a good thing. I want to know what I missed when removing/disabling things that open at logins, run in the background, and have extensive permissions.

View on HN

> I want to know what I missed when removing/disabling things that open at logins,

All the permission grants are summarized in system preferences. Much more elegant to go do your own audit than have to respond to nag screens.

The nag screens are an inferior Windows security feature (think UAC) no doubt manifested as a result of The Bozo Explosion which Jobs managed to fend off for about a decade or so.

It's only a good thing if you can disable it, and you can't. I know which apps I granted permission, don't bug me about it. This is terrible UX design.

I really hate how every year I have to hope macOS won't introduce annoying new features (this annoying nagging screen), break compatibility with existing third-party apps (Intune VPN was broken for months after the release of Sonoma) or just remove existing functionality entirely altogether (subpixel aliasing was removed a few years ago resulting in awful font rendering on non-retina displays).

How can I justify spending an extraordinary amount of money on a MacBook Pro when the operating system introduces breaking changes _every year_? And on top of that, I can't even choose to run my own operating system? Very annoying.

Isn't it much more feasible on MacOS to stay on old major versions, than e.g. Windows? When I've been on older versions, I seem to still get security updates. But I've never been more than a year behind.

Apple clarifies security update policy: Only the latest OSes are fully patched https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-secu...

Not sure. The Settings app has this big red dot when there's an update and there's not much I can do to get rid of it other than updating.

AFAICT, Apple excludes all their own apps. Seems like a way to try to get people to use Apple's apps over everyone else's. Just to check, I pick the Quick Time Player. I pick "New Screen Recording". No prompt.

I thought all apps using the new window picker API were excluded and that includes most of Apple's apps?

This is correct - the mechanism seems like it’s primarily for shaming developers that don’t use the new API

Don’t let facts get in the way of Apple bashing. Apple already does so many legitimately anticompetitive things (see: iOS EU blah blah), so resorting to this low-quality complaining is very lazy.

I'm getting this alert even for code that uses only the new ScreenCaptureKit framework, specifically the SCScreenshotManager class introduced in WWDC23. Hopefully this is a bug and Apple meant to show this only for apps that still use deprecated functions like CGWindowListCreateImage.

> I pick "New Screen Recording". No prompt.

But that's also you performing a positive action to start the (presumably time-limited) recording which is different from something in the background passively recording your screen over a long period (Bartender, etc.)

(I do not like the permission prompts but I understand where they're coming from)

Apple presumably knows their own apps aren't malware?

If Apple wants to record your screen they don't need to use Quick Time Player to do it. They can bake it into the firmware.

If you don't trust Apple not to randomly record with Quick Time Player, you shouldn't be using macOS.

Too many notifications and you get fatigued which is not good either. Maybe in future the on-device AI will decide whether to notify you. (Hmm this could be an idea, can you use a RPA tool to click those notifications on mac?)

I agree with reducing notifications, but not at the expense of critical notifications. For more than a decade, I have eliminated all forms of notifications and have been selectively allowing the ones that need to notify me. I believe that this falls under the "OK to notify."

Allowing that to be automated outside of users control is just another security problem to solve. Why not go all in on this and let the apps approve all privileges for themselves, right? So convenient for the user... That just contradicts the very idea of any approvals from user.

I actually think UAC on Windows has this done more clearly and is harder to go around. Wonder how that would work if it was extended for more granular permissions that apps can trigger on demand.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com