577 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 375 ms ] thread
So, will it be macOS 10.12 or just macOS 12? I don't think they mentioned this during the presentation.
I only heard them refer to it as "macOS Sierra".
I hope all the cloud storage can be turned off. Depending on your job (e.g. confidential data) or how much you pay for bandwidth, these are some really bad features.
It's not like iOS where everything is locked down. You are root and can do anything you want on your machine. It should be pretty trivial to prevent the cloud storage stuff from running.
I have to disable security by typing commands at a reboot to change system icons, so I'm not really root in the traditional sense on my Mac.
Unless they remove the ability to turn off SIP, you have full control over your machine. This is very different from iOS where you have to wait for some team of Chinese hackers to discover a security vulnerability in order to get access to your own device.

Not sure why this is not "root in the traditional sense", unless you're in some environment where you don't have physical access to the machine and can't reboot for some reason.

I meant with SIP, root is not the all powerful account it is traditionally. I'm also sick of the idea of disabling security to do simple things that shouldn't be covered by the security.
You can be sick of that if you want, but it doesn't really have anything to do with the point I was making, which is that it should be possible to disable cloud storage on your Mac, since you can do anything on your own device.

Whether you can do that with a reboot or not, whether you need to disable SIP, etc., isn't really germane to what I was talking about and I feel like you just wanted to take the opportunity to rant.

I don't think I should have to disable security to do things that are not security concerns. I also doubt the average user regards root as a solution. I am not hopeful given what was said during the prior beta, that disabling SIP will always be an option.

> I feel like you just wanted to take the opportunity to rant.

Was this line necessary?

How is running an account as true root not a security concern?
I have to dispute that changing core system files is something that 'shouldn't be covered by the security'. It's exactly what this sort of feature is for.
> You are root and can do anything you want on your machine.

That was never my experience on an Apple device. Now my Linux boxes yes, but Apple and Windows no way. Especially with the Mac App Store and the user Interface being so locked down by Apple. Many things are hidden by Apple.

What specifically have you tried to do on an OS X computer that you couldn't?
The only thing I have found that couldn't be done on an OS X device was run a custom kernel without breaking power management. Do you have any other examples of things that you can't do?
Can you modify system files and resign them so you can keep SIP working?
Probably, if you boot the kernel with boot flags that tell it to accept any signature. I haven't tested this.
Ya that cloud storage thing needs to be able to be turned off for my personal use because I don't want that feature and for work otherwise I can never upgrade past 10.11 and will basically have to go back to a Windows machine when it comes time to replace my work machine.

Apple Pay in Safari seems very interesting. I wish they had come up with something that would have worked with any browser as my personal primary machine is Linux, but I can probably upgrade my old macbook to use that.

There are also people who simply don't have access to sufficient bandwidth to make use of cloud storage. Forcing it on would make the OS and my internet connection useless to me.
Those are not the only reasons to want the cloud features turned off. I don't want my phone and computer tied together, and it already annoys me how integrated the iPhone is to iTunes. I also don't want Apple cloud data storage. It's not a feature I need very often, and for the times I do, I have dropbox. I am not interested in having cloud storage integrated into the operating system like that.

I will not be upgrading to this version until it has been verified that all of this crap can be turned off completely.

You can turn them off in the setup process of macOS Sierra
(comment deleted)
Why should it not be? It's been a single checkbox in settings since it was introduced.
In OS X, the X is the tenth version of Mac OS. So this new version is now "Mac OS 10: macOS."

Unless they bump the version number, that is. Then it would be "Mac OS 11: macOS."

'X' could potentially also stand for Xnu or uniX.
Safari-tab? What do they mean?
Tabs across all windows, all apps.
The article doesn't contain the term 'Safari-tab'. It does have 'Safari-like tabs' in it, by which I would imagine they mean tabs, like you get in the Safari user interface.
what happens if the app already have tabs inside? Like sublime for example
They meant all apps made by Apple, not random apps, as far as I could tell.
I could be wrong but I think he said all apps without any developer changes..
I’ve been asking for this for awhile now. It has never made sense for every app to try to tab-ify its windows in a slightly different way, when it so clearly needed to be a window manager feature. Although, I really hope it allows inter-app interleaving of tabs, and not just all-one-app tab stacks.
Funny thing, "macOS" (actually "мак ос" / "мак ось") was a slang name for OS X in Russian and Ukrainian languages all this time.
Weren't all pre OS-X versions also called Mac OS?
Up until recently, it was Mac OS X.
Between versions 7 and 10 it was officially MacOS [VERSION], before that it was referred to as system [VERSION], as in System 6 and so on. That was not an official name, it was the version number of the file `system` and was simply the system that ran on a Mac, because there was only one.

It got the official name MacOS when they allowed the selling of clones.

We colloquially call it "Mac OS" in English too.
Does the fact that they didn't talk about UXKit mean that it's not happening?
Could be in the dev sessions. Seems to be that the keynote hasn't been direct at devs in quite a few years. So the stuff you, as a developer, care about won't be shown in the big show.
Will they update the unix layer? A lot of the CLI tools there are positively prehistoric.

Maybe while they're at it they can add a real package manager too.

Is there a way to replace all of them in one move?
Just install all the formulae from that repository, I'd assume. They all replace some system-provided tool. I believe they install the binaries to a separate directory that you need to prepend to your $PATH in order to get your shell to default to the updated versions.
You can't really replace the underlying tools, you'd want to install the new versions in a different folder and update your Environment to point to those executables.

EDIT: I'm wrong, didn't realize homebrew-dupes actually is meant to replace the OS X utils.

Why not replace? If there's a security flaw, I want those versions gone.

EDIT: you edited :)

So effectively, it's only one step better than installing Cygwin on a Windows machine?

Can someone please remind me again why the MacBook is such a preffered machine for software development? For years I've been told, "You get a shell!", and "It's UNIX under the covers", etc.

Except that the shell userspace is antiquated, and the UNIX flavor is BSD rather than Linux. Meaning that I'm just as out-of-sync with my target server as if I were on a Windows machine, I still have to run Docker through a VM layer, etc.

Don't get me wrong, the hardware is excellant. But the software is even more locked-down and less customizable than the MS world... and just skipping the middle man and installing Linux directly is a 10x better developer experience than both.

I agree with most of your grumbles.

> Can someone please remind me again why the MacBook is such a preffered machine for software development?

For me, the greatest battery life and trackpad money can buy.

100x this. I actually could not imagine going back to mouse anymore.
> Except that the shell userspace is antiquated, and the UNIX flavor is BSD rather than Linux.

Few people use advanced features of those utilities. As a result, these two points don't make any difference. At least for me.

I just don't get this complaint. Run brew install <package>, add a folder to PATH. Done. Anything somewhat popular (vim/git/python/ruby/graphviz, imagemagick...) is usually updated after a day and I don't remember the last time it gave me any trouble.

The comparison with Windows simply doesn't work. Unix software compiles on OS X out-of-the-box. It doesn't on Windows. The conventions (pathnames, line endings, CLIs, time zones) are either the same or compatible, on Windows they're not.

If your complaint is that the UNIX layer of Mac OS X isn't ~exactly~ like Linux, then the only way you're going to solve that problem is by running Linux instead.

It's easy to get more up-to-date software with package managers.

> Except that the shell userspace is antiquated, and the UNIX flavor is BSD rather than Linux.

Nit: GNU. Linux doesn't have a userspace. It's a kernel.

Yes you can do. use "brew install coreutils"
Excellent, thanks!
This is not the same thing.
Does anyone know if this is a bad idea? Like do any of the system provided utilities do anything special in OS X that will be broken if they are replaced? I'd like to do install these replacements, but am concerned about possible side effects.
In the case of Homebrew, it'll install things to 'usr/local/Cellar', and symlink them from /usr/local, leaving the OS X tools in place in /usr/bin
By default, it will append a "g" to all the coreutils at least, like ls -> gls, sed -> gsed, etc. And things that are already default on OS X, like curl, perl etc, will not be symlinked into /usr/local unless you force it.

But personally, I changed my coreutils over a year ago to the GNU ones (via symlinks), and I force link every single package, I've never had a single issue.

Though our use cases may be different, and you may have issues. In which case you can just `brew unlink $package`.

> Will they update the unix layer? A lot of the CLI tools there are positively prehistoric.

They won't, they don't want to touch any GPLv3 code.

What do BSD distros use?
You got to be a bit more specific.

--- edit ---

They all have their own version of the "GNU core utilities". BSD make instead of GNU make. less(1) is dual-licensed (I think) so everybody uses the same (OpenBSD has forked it recently though). FreeBSD's default shell is tcsh, OpenBSD uses a fork of pdksh. If you want bash then you have to install it from ports.

Most of OS X's userland comes from FreeBSD (except for bash and make) and I think they keep it reasonably up to date.

Sorry, I meant two things: License used for their tools and if they used any tools that aren't 'GNU specific' at all.
Most of it is BSD-style licensed, some (less and ssh for example) are dual-licensed, and very few are GPLv2 (the old versions of make, bash, and emacs; but also current git). vim is licensed under a custom GPLv2-style license.

A lot of GPLv2 code now uses GPLv3 (all the GNU tools obviously) and Apple (and others too) doesn't want to ship GPLv3 code.

Almost all of the userland comes from FreeBSD. Even stuff that Apple could take directly from OpenBSD for example.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=freebsd

They are able to distribute GPL v3 code because they way it is packaged complies with the terms of the license.

Well the tools are 'stand-alone' for the most part, and they do provide the code for them, I believe the issue would be if they integrated any tools into BSD licensed software that it would have to be GPL licensed. I was hoping BSD to some degree maintained their own versions, that could of been useful for Apple, not saying they can't maintain their own, but at least they could help fund BSD and maintain their OS' CLI toolset.
By default, FreeBSD uses Almquist Shell for root, and Tenex C Shell for users. OpenBSD uses a modified pdksh for users, which is simlinked to /bin/sh for root, and NetBSD uses Almquist shell for users and root.
It's the other way around on FreeBSD: csh is the default for root and sh for users.
For stuff in ports, GPLv3 code, because they don't have Apple's legal team that's worried about GPLv3. FreeBSD ports' bash is at 4.3.

    titan:~/src/bsd/freebsd-ports geofft$ find . -name Makefile -exec grep LICENSE.*=.*GPLv3 {} + | wc -l
    1456
Why would they touch GPLv3 code when perfectly good BSD tools available from FreeBSD?
If you're being serious here: bash is IMO the most glaringly old utility you get in an OSX install, and it's GPLv3.
There's more to a userland than the shell, and there are plenty of shells out there that are not encumbered by GPLv3.
Actually bash 3.2 is GPL v2.0. Later versions switched to GPL v3 and this is why Apple is not updating to newer version.

Give it a few more years and there will be no one left at Apple that has any clue what bash is.

Mostly not, due to licensing. The GNU utils that transitioned to GPL v3 (eg Bash) are kind of stuck there in 2007.
I don't understand. What is it about the licensing of _user space_ tools that prevent their being used?
The new clauses in the GPLv3 bring up legal questions that some teams would rather just not deal with, even as user space tools. As such, Apple has decided to avoid potential legal headaches and stick with tools under better understood licenses. Most of the BSDs have stuck with GPLv2 stuff, with FreeBSD actively working to replace the few bits and pieces of GPLed code in their base system with code that is under the BSD or other liberal licenses.
Nothing. Apple is just being overly paranoid or hoping to some day do things that GPLv3 won't allow them to do. Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Intel, IBM; all of these companies have some interaction with GPLv3, but Apple staunchly refuses to even touch it.

It's a real pity, because Apple's popularity is sending some message that GPLv3 is poisonous, when it reality it's only a problem for them because they chose to make it a problem for themselves.

> because Apple's popularity is sending some message that GPLv3 is poisonous

Doesn't Linus' refusal of GPL3 damage its reputation much greater than Apple?

The Linux devs publicly denounced an early draft of GPLv3 and never reconsidered the question. Yeah, I think they just didn't feel like trying to understand it, and Linus's own anti-FSF attitude spreads to his followers.
Actually Linus didn't have any big problems with one of the GPLv3 drafts[1]. And many bits of the Linux kernel are individually licensed as GPLv2+. Not to mention that Linus used to have in COPYING that they were considering updating. Very few kernel developers hate GPLv3.

[1] http://www.computerworld.com/article/2544276/network-softwar...

I was thinking of this position statement, which is signed by prominent Linux devs. I don't think they ever reconsidered their position after the final draft:

http://lwn.net/Articles/200422/

I definitely feel this pain too, but:

They can't upgrade to recent GNU tools (bash is the one most people complain about) because of the GPLv3. And I feel their developer manpower is better spent on fixing OS bugs at this point. These issues are better fixed by developers less encumbered by the closed-sourceness of OS X.

> They can't upgrade to recent GNU tools because of the GPLv3.

They can but it is their choice not to use GPLv3 tools.

Doesn't SIP cause issues with the TiVoization clause? I guess I'm not an expert on this, but it's possible Apple wants to leave the possibility open of making SIP mandatory.
An OS with mandatory SIP will be the point I stop upgrading. I'm fine with optional features like this, but the instant it becomes mandatory and can't be bypassed I'm gone.
The decision of not shipping GPLv3 user space tools predates SIP by several years, far more than I would bet SIP has been in development. I think it's just a legal issue as in lawyers don't want to touch it period
They can't find or build alternatives? they could have the same impact at the Unix level that they've had on the high-level GUI. It could certainly use it.
But an updated cp(1) that has all the same options as the GNU one has a much lower return-on-investment as 3x emojis (which I chose for this example since it could be around the same amount of work).
What about the GPLv3 prevents them from using GNU user space tools?
The GPLv3 has clauses in it that opens up a new load of legal questions for Apple that they'd rather avoid. I just wish that Apple would move to using less encumbered shell that is actively being developed, like pdksh or zsh.
If Microsoft is willing to ship GNU tools as a officially sanctioned extension to Windows, then Apple definitely has no valid excuse to avoid GPL v3.
Apple and Microsoft have different legal departments. Apple's still has questions over GPLv3, for better or for worse.
They really don't. They know exactly what they can and can't do. They don't think it's vague or ambiguous.

They just don't see it as worth the energy for them to use it.

I can't disagree with that strategy (if no one is really pushing you to do X, why bother), at Google we do the same with android mostly, but for different reasons:

We don't use GPLv3 because the OEMs/etc don't want it, and rip it out anyway :)

Similarly, i expect in Apple's case, they don't use it in parts they may keep common to ios/macos because then they can't keep them common.

In any case, the TL;DR is that there aren't open legal questions or magic things they are waiting to play out. They've made their choice and have been sticking by it.

Microsoft does not ship any GPL code at all on the operating system.
> If Microsoft is willing to ship GNU tools

They're not. After you enable the Linux subsystem you get the userland from Canonical under Ubuntu's license, Microsoft ships WSL and CLI shims triggering the download of the Ubuntu userland.

"The GPLv3 has clauses in it that opens up a new load of legal questions for Apple that they'd rather avoid."

I'm curious why you think it opens up legal questions, etc. They've pretty definitively stated they just don't want to use it. There are no vague or mysterious questions they are waiting to get answers to or anything like that.

Nothing prevents them, they chose not to. It would restrict them from shipping GPLv3 versions in the future if they tivoize the platform further, which they almost certainly intend to do, its kind of Apple's thing nowadays.
Ditto, this is supposed to be a Developers' event.
The keynote almost always has loads of end-user stuff, that's not new.
(comment deleted)
> Maybe while they're at it they can add a real package manager too.

Contrary to those who suggested Brew, I stand by your request: de-installing anything that went in as a .pkg is a .pita and Apple doesn't provide, as best I can tell, any mechanism short of the author providing its own "Uninstall.app" to remove software.

I've gotten very close by scripting some of the `pkgutil` output, but it's nowhere near `apt-get remove` and friends.

I think Apple's idea of a package manager is the App Store. Since they do not screw with /usr/local in any way stuff like brew and ports is a quite good alternative to a first party solution.

I just hope they will not start screwing with /usr/local

Their tools are up to date with POSIX UNIX certification, just not with GNU extra goodies.
Copy/paste across iPhone and Mac is very useful. All the other features are Meh. I really don't want to be that guy talking to my Mac at work. I can't be sure that all my questions to Siri are not awkward to speak out. Would have been great to have a textual interface though. You know that Keyboard thingy that is always with a Mac?!
Spotlight is already incredibly useful, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's getting some of these improvements. We should know soon since Developer Preview of Sierra should be available today.
The definitely said it wont be available today.
I think clipboard permissions for applications is going to become an issue with features like this. I may be incorrect but I'm pretty sure that clipboard access is unrestricted on both OS X (ugh, macOS) and iOS.
I think I'm gonna stick with calling it OS X, marketers be d*ed.
Frankly, I much preferred when they called it Mac OS X. The change to OS X just seemed stupid to me—with a name like 'Operating System Ten', it was as if it didn’t even have a name anymore!

…which is why (in my opinion) macOS ('Mac Operating System') is far better than what it’s replacing.

It was called Mac OS for years (1)

I also remember when it was just called "System"

(1) Yeah yeah I know all about NeXT, but OS X isn't NeXT as anyone who used Rhapsody will remember

> I really don't want to be that guy talking to my Mac at work

What about your disabled colleague?

Now, I'm all for making Siri better as an "Accessibility feature". I was just referring to myself talking to my Mac for doing my basic activities. It might be annoying at best to my co-worker so would he be to me when he does talk to his Mac all the time.
> Copy/paste across iPhone and Mac is very useful.

I don't use a Mac or an iPhone, but I applaud this sort of device harmony.

That said, I am worried that it would unnecessarily leverage the cloud. My guess is that instead of the two devices directly communicating with one another—that is, instead of leveraging the fact that they are probably on the same local network and should just work in concert—the clipboard data will be sent via a cloud intermediary. That is, it will be exfiltrated from the local network, sent through Apple, and then back into the local network.

If I am wrong about that, I am happy to hear it.

In the presentation they said that it used Handoff, which is direct device to device communication.
P2P connections is a place that's generally terrible for mobile. You have to keep connections open to more devices, which is generally bad for battery.

You could imagine a copy/paste that waits for a message from the cloud (because Apple push notifications are pretty solid), then opens the new connection to the local device, so the data never leaves your network. At least to me, that sounds needless complex when the typical use case could just send the entire payload with the "go look for this device" message.

This sort of thing is exactly what Bluetooth Low Energy is for.
To my knowledge, existing continuity features already do one better and communicate directly between devices, not even requiring them to be on the same network. (AirDrop is a good example.) But obviously we have no way of knowing if this will be the case here, or if there is a cloud-based fallback.
Yes, the Hand-off mechanism works without iCloud involvement or even using your active internet connection. I just tried by disabling Wifi on my Mac and opening up message to continue on a semi written message from my iPhone.

Now, there could always be a iCloud fallback that says if there is internet, just use it. Perks of using non-free software is that it will almost always non-verifiable.

> I just tried by disabling Wifi on my Mac and opening up message to continue on a semi written message from my iPhone.

How is this possible? Bluetooth? USB? Or are we talking about a previously synced draft that's still there when you turn your internet off? Sounds like a basic iCloud cache to me.

Continuity/Handoff works over Bluetooth 4/LE.
The original Continuity used bluetooth, p2p wifi (which is also what AirDrop uses), regular wifi and iCloud, some features would depend on a specific substrate but for others it could use several at the same time or switch between them.
This enables an interesting new kind of attack.

1. Attach an attack device to someone’s account.

2. ‘Poll’ the clipboard by pasting every ~5 seconds.

3. If the contents of the clipboard appear to be ‘secure’ (looks like shellcode, bitcoin address, url, etc), quickly replace the contents with an attack string with same datatype.

If you have an untrusted device attached to your Apple account, your local clipboard can no longer be trusted.

Indeed, WHATWG is currently considering [1] a related scenario where rogue websites with access to the clipboard will inject formats with dodgy payload to exploit flaws in some app if the user pastes.

[1] https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/1244

It's unrelated to "apple account" it works over Bluetooth LE.
As someone who uses KDE Connect for copy/paste between my Android phone and my Linux desktop I can say that this feature is _amazing_.
I loved that I could hear the audience audibly gasp when the presenter brought that up and that the presenter was caught off-guard.
I use iOS and a password manager, and maybe 5-10% of apps I use have an integration for it (and I place the blame on Apple for this, imo if they actually care about user security as much as they want everyone to believe they do, they should have an app store review policy that forbids having a password field without using the password manager extension).

Anyway, the effect is that almost every time I sign into an iOS app, I'm copy & pasting my password into the password field. So now my passwords will all be synced via bluetooth and/or to icloud whenever I sign into an app.

At this point, is using a password manager actually less secure than just re-using the same password everywhere like everyone else does?

Your alternative is simply copy-pasting without using the system clipboard (old-fashioned style). I imagine there's a lot less attack vectors by doing it that way, at a small time cost.

Is there no option for a "local only" clipboard with this?

We at CopyCopy (a cross-platform cloud clipboard) solve this problem by only universally copying stuff that you copy twice.

So:

copy once -> not sent to cloud/devices

copy twice (or click floating button) -> sent to all your devices and cloud account

Sometimes I copy my private keys to the clipboard.

cat privatekey > pbcopy

Scary if it ends up on my mobile device clipboard.

>I really don't want to be that guy talking to my Mac at work.

If Siri might bring an end to shared offices, I am all for it! But joking aside, yes, there are surroundings, where you don't want to talk to your device - in which I also prefer text messages to phone conversations.

But well-done voice integration can vastly improve usability. Just think of not having to grab your mouse and look for that music/video player control just to mute/stop things, but being able to do it with a short voice command without leaving your editor.

So the Mac is listening all the time. How can I physically disable the microphone?
You can unplug it.

I'm sure they'll allow you to disable Siri though (or maybe even disable the "hey Siri" crap and just use a button or something).

Looks like you have to press a button for it to start listening.
I wonder if this will work similarly to pressing Fn twice to get to get the speech-to-text dialog in OSX.
On the iPhone, the always-on "Hey Siri" activation is actually local on the device. You can test this out by activating Airplane Mode and saying "Hey Siri". The interface comes up, then says that you can't use Siri because you're offline.

This means that Apple isn't listening to you 24/7, only when Siri is activated. Sure, sometimes it's activated accidentally and might overhear something you didn't want it to, but those times are pretty rare.

If Apple introduces a "Hey Siri" feature on the Mac (which it's unclear about given the fact that in the demo Craig activated Siri by clicking on the icon, then later by pressing a key on the keyboard), I expect it would operate in the same way.

Finally, I'm sure there's a software setting you can use to disable Siri if you really don't want it to be activated.

I hope there will be option to disable Siri. Don't want turned on mic 24/7.
There's a sysconfig to turn off nearly everything in OS X if you're comfy with the CLI, I doubt Siri would be any different. It will probably be a usual GUI switch though, due to privacy laws.
I know. Very familiar with CLI. I spwnd 80% of time on my MacBook in iTerm. :)

I was pretty disappointed by this WWDC. Any info on next XCode version?

The beta for XCode 8 is up which includes Swift 3 and support for iOS 10.

Before you decide you're disappointed, wait for the Developer State of the Union later today and the other sessions. There's interesting things like an "Apple File System" session. It looks like the beta for the file system will be in macOS Sierra and come out officially in 2017. You won't be able to use it as a boot drive (probably a safe precaution) and it has a few other restrictions, but it's a good start.

Yeah I read about those, checked everything! Can't wait to learn more! :) Thanks anyway!
On the iPhone, the always-on "Hey Siri" activation is actually local on the device. You can test this out by activating Airplane Mode and saying "Hey Siri". The interface comes up, then says that you can't use Siri because you're offline.

This means that Apple isn't listening to you 24/7, only when Siri is activated. Sure, sometimes it's activated accidentally and might overhear something you didn't want it to, but those times are pretty rare.

If Apple introduces a "Hey Siri" feature on the Mac (which it's unclear about given the fact that in the demo Craig activated Siri by clicking on the icon, then later by pressing a key on the keyboard), I expect it would operate in the same way.

Finally, I'm sure there's a software setting you can use to disable Siri if you really don't want it to be activated.

| This means that Apple isn't listening to you 24/7, only when Siri is activated.

what?! your proof that Apple isn't listening 24/7 is not a proof at all. A device that is listening to you 24/7 to hear when you say "hey Siri" can tell you "you can't use it because you are not online" whenever it wants to, and I don't think anybody was suggesting that Apple servers were capable of listening in when you have no network.

Apple has been shown in the past to log information on the device itself, however.

Would be useful to be able to type to Siri in a public setting...
wow. what a great innovation. rename the damn thing and auto unlock. i hoped for new stuff. even a /bin/bash upgrade would be nice. I mean:

    GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release (x86_64-apple-darwin15)
    Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
but, no. all we get every year are either 3d icons, or flat icons, round corners, new name...
homebrew is your friend. They are not going to upgrade anything that has gone to GPL3.
Any reason why they can't fork it and port all the new stuff? I'd imagine for legal reasons they will have to hire devs who haven't looked at the GNU source code.
Why fork? In 2016 Microsoft will be shipping a Windows extension that will allow running GPLv3 bash. Heck, if Microsoft is not afraid of the legal consequences, surely Apple shouldn't be, either?
> In 2016 Microsoft will be shipping a Windows extension that will allow running GPLv3 bash. Heck, if Microsoft is not afraid of the legal consequences, surely Apple shouldn't be, either?

Microsoft will not be shipping GPLv3 code. Microsoft will be shipping WSL, you get the actual code from Canonical under Ubuntu's license when you enable the WSL and try to use one of the command-line tools.

And guess what? You can do the exact same thing on your OSX machine right now, by installing Homebrew or Macports or Nix or even downloading and compiling the fucking tarballs. Apple has been "shipping an OSX extension that allows running GPLv3 bash" for a bit more than 15 years now.

What's the return on investment on that? A huge undertaking, bring features many people do not care about, and the only benefit is that the few people who do use those new features can have it the instant they install the OS rather than after they type `brew install bash`.
`brew install bash`
Get out of here with your reasonable requests, this is a DEVELOPER conference, not a design conf... oh - wait.
Will this make the OS suck less? Seriously, at least for my use case, and in my opinion, OS X has been on a downward trend for a while (since 10.6). They need to fix the bugs, and get back to a nice stable OS that "just works." That's all I'm interested in.
Apple really needs to improve OpenGL support at least. Bump version to 4.4. They should also fix any OpenGL bugs in a timely manner.

Windows file sharing (at least with Windows 10 Pro) is pretty broken as well. Transferring multiple large files (especially 2 GB+) from OS X to a win10 file share seems to fail every time.

> Apple really needs to improve OpenGL support at least. Bump version to 4.4. They should also fix any OpenGL bugs in a timely manner.

Not going to happen. Metal is the One True Way now.

I had kept my Macs at 10.6 for a long time but had to "upgrade" one of them to help my daughter with an iPhone problem (really annoying that you have to update your Mac just to copy files to a phone, but whatever). Everything was worse. Search was terrible. Mail was in the crapper. The weirdest shock was when I was using Apple apps and discovered they'd changed Shift-Command-S from "Save As" to "Duplicate." That move is really emblematic of Apple's direction with the Mac — arbitrary changes that either eliminate features or make everyday workflow more cumbersome.

I bought my first Mac in 1989. I bought my first non-Mac PC in 2015 and stopped using Mac altogether.

> Shift-Command-S

Basically at this point I'm recommending everyone to forget about iWorks apps (even though I brought a few people onto them earlier). I'm still holding on to Keynote even though the version compatibility issues are absolutely horrible, but it still produces the best presentations with the least effort, so I'm biting that bullet. To everyone else who's still using the old Keynote: Don't even think about trying out the redesigned one, nothing will be compatible anymore, just stick with it as long as you can!.

Meanwhile Google Docs impress me more and more.

(comment deleted)
Still no mention of Vulkan support on macOS or iOS. The dream of one 3D API to rule them all remains a dream :(
Sony and Nintendo also don't care.
Every time I see a new version of OS X released, I'm tired just thinking about all the dev incoming to support the new issues / crashes / incompatibilities / XCode things to download again and other so called "features" support...
Will they likely be moving to major version increments for each named release? Since it's no longer "OS 10," will Sierra be macOS 11, and the named release after it macOS12, and so on?
I wouldn't be too surprised if they just dropped the number, and kept the name.

"macOS Sierra" and so on.

MY prediction is that Sierra will be aka macOS 10.12.

Starting next year we will have iOS 11 and macOS 11. That way the numbers are unified.

This will finally alleviate the awkward pronunciation ambiguity. To this day, I'm not sure whether to say "OS ex" or "OS ten".
If you use the say command in the Terminal you get the definitive answer.
Spoiler alert for anybody without access to a mac right now: $ say "OS X" pronounces it as "OS Ten".
Its rules for pronouncing "X" are also distinct in these cases:

  say "Malcolm X"
  say "Louis X"
Hah, it does roman numerals up to 49

say Louis XLIX = Louis the 49th say Louis L = Louis L

Is it Mac Oh Ess or does it rhyme with GladOS?
Mac Oh Ess, like iOS, tvOS, and watchOS.
That's true for macOS Sierra, but will Mac OS X 10.11 El Capitan and earlier be retroactively rebranded as macOS? Now we will have to listen to people say things like "I upgraded my Mac from Mac OS X 10.10 to macOS Siera". :)
It was called "OS X", not "Mac OS X" since 10.8.
Thanks! I forgot about that name change. We've come full circle:

Mac OS 9 -> Mac OS X 10.0 -> OS X 10.8 -> macOS 10.12

You need to listen to Gruber shred Roman numerals - it's pretty funny. Episode 155 of The Talk Show.
The good news is that I might not have to listen to people call it "Mac OS Ex" anymore.

I'm hoping there's a bunch of new APIs hiding in there allowing ISVs to do cool stuff. Because the new version, meh, don't care about Siri much and the rest of the stuff is window dressing, IMO. Maybe some improvements for Xcode, testing tools?

I have never in RL heard anyone call it "OS ten"
Just curious what age range you are in. From what I've personally noticed, younger folks tend to almost all pronounce it "O-S-ecks" and most in my generation (~40) tend to pronounce it "O-S-ten".
24 year old here. I exclusively call it "O-S-ten" and cringe every time someone says "O-S-ecks". Only particular reason I can think of is that we had OS 9 machines in grade school that slowly got replaced by OS X machines. Seemed natural I guess.

Plus, "O-S-ecks" gets too close to "O-S-sex". I was a kid...

Yeah, 9->10 seemed natural, and I remember articles when it was first released along the lines of "OS X (pronounced O-S-Ten)". I used to cringe when I heard "ecks", but it's become so common it doesn't have an effect anymore.
I am close to your age, and I have always called it "O-S-ecks" because I hate roman numbers (there's a book that I call D-S-M-eye-vee) and because "O-S-ex ten point nine" sounds better than the alternative.
Yeah, now you can take sides between "macahss" and "mac-oh-ess".

And, we could use some more window dressing! The Mac's weird window management now feels extremely dated compared to Win10 and KDE/Gnome.

And, we could use some more window dressing!

Okay, I could get on board with that. Though I'm not one of those loading every window manager out there in search of perfection, Mac OS is looking a bit dated. I'm not even sure what I'm looking for (well, except I've figure out that I'm not a tiling WM kind of guy), but some sprucing up would be appreciated.

> I'm not even sure what I'm looking for

I'm after Windows that remember how I set my defaults and keeps them.

Am I the only one who was really disappointed when the were talking about 'getting back disk space' and by the meant 'move stuff to the cloud' and not 'LZ4 in HFS+'? (I've given up on ZFS on OS X by default.)

Edit: Oh, wow! Apple File System! (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11896785 for discussion)

I foresee a lot of trouble as a MBP user with no other Apple products (MBP=work machine). Interoperability with Android phones is already sucky and they seem to bundle their product line even more.

Siri for MBP will be annoying, hope it can be disabled completely...which of course won't stop my co-workers from using it all day :(

It also sounds like there will be a few new attack vectors. The log in when close by sounds like a pretty horrible idea and I have a feeling the copy/paste feature will turn out to cause some issues as well.

"Siri, a coworker is complaining next to me. What should I do?"
What is sucky with Android phones and OS X? You want Universal Clipboard use something like Pushbullet or alternatives http://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/26495/univer... you want cloud sync use the existing cloudservices or use Syncthing which lets you sync even without a cloud. You can get nearly all features today also with Android ( even unlocking the Mac with Android Wear https://www.gadgetish.com/index.html ). Of course you will not get them from Apple ;)
There are many of of OSX-iOS only apps that I would buy have it been available in Android.
This is all shockingly "meh."
Completely agree. Although I am no longer shocked by this stuff from Apple..
Honestly the name switch is the most interesting thing. And it's marginally interesting.
Half the people here are complaining about too many new features and not enough stability, and the other half are complaining that there aren't enough new features. This is why Apple doesn't listen to consumers and instead just puts out whatever they want to.
No, I think they are complaining about too many features that just aren't good. A little different.
It's not about quantity, but quality. People are complaining because these new features are (mostly) unsubstantial gimmicks.
- You can unlock your mac using you apple watch. - You can confirm payments using your apple watch.

A thief having your mac and watch can do/buy everything? Is it just me thinging about it?

Probably. The Apple Watch locks when removed from the wrist, and required subsequent authentication before it can be used for payments. There's minimal risk here.
I dont own one. Does it look when removed? Is unlocking required for all, or can i disable it?
It locks automatically when you remove it from your wrist.
I also don't own one, but my understanding is that:

- a passcode is required to use features like Apple Pay

- the watch can be configured such that it only has to be unlocked once, until it is removed from the wrist/rebooted/manually locked

>> "- a passcode is required to use features like Apple Pay"

Not true. You just double tap the side button and can use Apple Pay. The way it secures itself is that as soon as you remove it from your wrist it locks and requires a passcode. You can't do anything with it until you enter the passcode.

That's what I mean, sorry. You can't configure Apple Pay without having set up a passcode; wrist detection allows you to skip entering the passcode so long as the watch hasn't been removed.
I think this is fair but I also struggle to think of a situation where my Mac and my Apple Watch get stolen and I'm not aware of it in time to lock my accounts.
maybe you're aware, but not able to do something. Backpack with Macbook, Watch and Phone stolen. What would you do?
Macbook sure, phone maybe, but why would your watch be in your backpack?

Also, the watch automatically enters a locked state when its off your wrist.

Because the robber said "your Apple gadgets or your life!", and carried them away in the bag.

Or, perhaps because you put in in the bag to go through airport security, and the bag was handed to someone else.

Your watch would be locked, being off your wrist.

Your phone is locked because its got TouchID enabled and a passcode.

Your laptop is locked as well. Getting in here requires you unlock something first, even if you have everything. The stronger security devices provide authentication to the weaker ones.

(comment deleted)
I'd imagine you would need to unlock the Apple watch before it would unlock the computer.
Indeed. It's actually an interesting cycle: you can unlock the iPhone with your thumb, which unlocks your Watch if on your wrist, which unlocks your Mac if nearby.

Any problem in computer science can be solved with another level of indirection.

and your fingerprint is on the mac. \o\ \o/ /o/
As soon as the Apple Watch is taken off your wrist it has to be unlocked with the passcode again, I believe.
The "Optimized storage" made me laugh.

How about making physical storage devices exchangeable again?

But that conflicts with the "Optimize revenue" directive.
Canonical was surely onto something, they just failed to deliver. Apple probably will however.