• Your favorite








    , and
  • Mac OS X 10.7 Talk Sparks Controversy

    A controversial post from Rixstep is drawing wide apprehension, disbelief, and cries of "big fat rumor" this weekend. What's all the fuss about? Well, it seems that Apple wants to be large and in charge for when Mac OS 10.7 rolls out. Indeed, there could be "big changes" ahead. And, as Rixstep hints, Apple will exercise absolute authority in ways never before observed in Mac operating systems. According to Rixstep's post yesterday, no software will be able to run on Mac OS X 10.7 without being approved by Apple!

    Assuming this all plays out as foreshadowed, this fall Apple will initiate a program to sign up independent software vendors for the 10.7 developer program. Similar to the iPhone's variation of the program, the 10.7 developer program will cost $99 and deliver a host of bells and whistles, like Xcode developer tools and access to online API documentation. But, at the end of the day, devs who have software to push for OS 10.7 will have to get Apple's seal of approval by submitting their products to the App Store just as any developer would today in obtaining access for their work.

    According to the report, OS 10.7 will have "kernel support for ('insistence on') binaries signed with Apple's root certificate." But the piece goes on to say that "Slapping a root certificate on a binary running Snow Leopard or earlier doesn't change anything: the certificate represents an additional executable section that can easily be removed. Individual apps can of course check for the presence of a certificate, but it's not before the OS kernel itself insists on this certificate that program execution is totally in Apple's control."

    Of course, there are two sides to every story. And multiple sides (from the dev world, at least) are now surfacing to say that Rixstep's post reads like pure fiction. As a result, countless other devs and websites (including our friends at 9to5Mac) are firmly keeping this report from Rixstep in the rumor column. One dev in the know even told 9to5Mac that "I'm in the Mac Developer program, and there have been no announcements from Apple about 10.7 whatsoever to developers."

    Who's in the know? Who's in the dark?

    As more and more developers weigh in on Rixstep's post, it would seem that the information presented yesterday was far from totally accurate. Of course, a lot of people didn't initially believe that Gizmodo had the new iPhone model either. Could there be some morsel of truth to Rixstep's piece? Absolutely. It just might be a while until we know for sure.
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Mac OS X 10.7 Talk Sparks Controversy started by Michael Essany View original post
    Comments 67 Comments
    1. CanadianSongEmperor's Avatar
      CanadianSongEmperor -
      I guess your throwing justice and honour out the window.

      The entire basis of your post is to insult me, and make assumptions. It doesn't matter what credentials I have, and I have not asked you your credentials, since I doubt that they would be relevant as to whether or not Apple will follow through on the aforementioned policy.

      The future is for all to partially decide - no single individual decides it alone.

      The number of posts that I have is also not relevant. The number of posts that you have is not relevant. What matters is the content of our posts.

      What makes you so sure that Apple will never bring this new policy into effect?

      I have read every post on this topic, and I am not convinced.
    1. moon#pie's Avatar
      moon#pie -
      Because you are an newb unless you give your credentials (i.e. "I'm steve jobs"). I agree with the reasons why apple keeps the iphone platform closed. Does that stop me from jailbreaking? no. Apple keeps the iphone closed because if it didn't they would be getting all sorts of lawsuits due to stolen information, viruses, and a whole slew of other things. computers are different.

      If they introduced a "mac app store" that only allowed signed packages to be installed on a mac, then they would lose a very large share of the market due to the fact that a lot of people's favorite applications, for example Handbrake, would not be allowed to be installed on macs, while all of the other computer systems can have whatever they want installed (as long as it's compatible of course).

      I would like to have a mac appstore where apple approved applications can be easily viewed and downloaded. It would make it real easy to find an app for the task you need it for due to the much better organization of apple as opposed to google. But I don't want it to be a closed system where ONLY those apps can be installed.
    1. CanadianSongEmperor's Avatar
      CanadianSongEmperor -
      Granted, if I don't give my credentials it doesn't rule out the possibility that I'm a Newb. But it doesn't prove it either. Again, I return to justice.

      I agree that Apple would lose a large share of the market. But I think that they would survive. Forgetting about iPods for the moment, I believe that Apple would be able to keep selling to some businesses. The military, I'm sure, could negotiate something with Apple. A ton of people working with Graphics may not be affected.

      I think that Apple would lose a lot of business, but by no means all of it.

      Also, one thing I see in favour of Apple enacting this policy is that it would be harder to get viruses - not to say that is a major issue at the moment, but it could become a much bigger issue than it is now.

      I don't like the idea of Apple enacting this policy any more than you do. I don't think it would be the death of Apple, though.
    1. moon#pie's Avatar
      moon#pie -
      The the heck are you talking about justice?

      You know what? You can't argue with a fool, so I am herby leaving this "discussion" because you don't want to listen.
    1. CanadianSongEmperor's Avatar
      CanadianSongEmperor -
      I'm listening, we have different points of view, and philosophies, though. I have heard and understand your argument. You are refusing to acknowledge that I have one.

      Just because Apple enacting this new policy wouldn't be good for either of us, doesn't mean that it wouldn't be good for anyone at all.

      It is unjust to assume that I am a newb because I don't post my credentials.
    1. moon#pie's Avatar
      moon#pie -
      Well, I said I wasn't coming back but I have to make this last post. You can check all over these forums for my credentials. I have about 700 instances for you to look at. But you come in here and act like you are an expert even though you just joined today. I happen to know a lot about how apple operates. What do you know? Oh, that's right, you don't want to simply say "well, I was the founder of mac rumors" or "I study apple's business movements for a living". Bu you won't, which in turn, leaves me to believe that you have non other than that fact that you can spell well (I do appreciate that more than you know. you have no idea how many people are here can't spell "here").

      I have listened to your argument, but disagree with it.
    1. CanadianSongEmperor's Avatar
      CanadianSongEmperor -
      No offence or disrespect intended, but I don't really care about credentials. They don't necessarily make someone right about a prediction. And credentials can be falsified.

      I'm not just saying this here. It is something that I firmly believe both on and off of these forums. No human is perfect, therefore nothing any human makes is perfect.

      But I think that we are getting off topic here. I will not reply here regarding credentials again.