macOS Sequoia makes it harder to run not notarized or signed apps

I hope they will at least prompt the user to let them know what’s going on. I’ve run into this before on macOS, where an app wouldn’t launch, and on a hunch I went into the security settings and saw a section there were it was blocked and I could allow it. There was not even a hint of this in the error message when trying to launch the app. It was a very poor experience.

I’ll also be curious if placing the app in ~/Applications avoids the restriction. This has long been my way to get around some of the restrictions at work. /Applications requires admin rights, ~/Applications does not. Apps still show up in LaunchPad and work as normal (as far as I’ve seen), they are just only available to the user, instead of all users, which is fine for my situation. I used to have to request admin rights every time VS Code wanted to update on my work laptop, but since I put it in my user folder instead, it’s been smooth sailing.

Yes, make macOS more and more like iPadOS so their users can do less and less other than buying apps from the app store and scrolling through the slop on Safari.

Apple kinda reminds me of Intel in the 2010's ( not 1-1 comparison ), hollowed and rotting inside but in a constant party because $$ coming in and line going up..

They wrongly think because they control the dials when things start to go south they can just step on the gas and change course, it's a fools illusion because the people who actually can make a difference will not be there and the whole organization already is tuned for the wrong incentives, so when Tim Apple's minions step of the gas... nothing will happen other than pumping out more "beautiful, amazing, thinner" but useless slop.

It also adds a new permission prompt for screenshot and screen recording apps that doesn’t allow a user to permanently grant permission, but requires a weekly re-authorization.

https://9to5mac.com/2024/08/06/macos-sequoia-screen-recordin...

Apple needs more antitrust scrutiny if for no other reason than to make them reconsider the direction they're headed on third party software.

This is not good.

I've spend literally days attempting to get a Python-based GUI application "signed", using every available packaging option and dozens of different approaches recommended by a multitude of different sources.

Absolute failure -- and no usable error messages indicating what might be wrong. Just basically "no, you can't upload that.".

This does not bode well...

Edit: referencing this article: https://9to5mac.com/2024/08/06/macos-sequoia-screen-recordin...

This is going to make running a DisplayLink (not DisplayPort) display very onerous if not impossible.

I guess I only get to use 2 external screens if I'm forced to upgrade my work mac.

As a maintainer of an open source app with 30K downloads per version, this will definitely make inconvenience my macos users

This will mostly affect advanced users. Hopefully, my next update will be Asahi, once its hardware support (especially HDMI output) has advanced enough.

Apple seems to like to coerce their users onto their preferred track little by little, release after release, instead of hamfistedly forcing it on day one. Instead, each release is a small drip of inconvenience and nudging.

Long time ago, you could run any executable you wanted. Then, you got a little nag, but whatever. Then (I think) you had to right click and take an extra step to run them, with a scary warning. Then, you got an even scarier warning and had to navigate into Settings to select "Allow applications downloaded from" -> Anywhere. Then, they removed the "Anywhere" option, but you could re-enable it with the command line.

It's also directionally clear: They surely intend to fully boil the frog one day and remove the ability to do this.

Se also: The UX you have to navigate in order to fill your own password into web pages on Safari.

> In macOS Sequoia, users will no longer be able to Control-click to override Gatekeeper when opening software that isn’t signed correctly or notarized.

Will Right Click > Open still work? That is how I currently bypass this issue with unsigned applications.

Sorry Apple, but I have no intention to pay 100€ per year for the privilege to notarise an application I have up for free on a GitHub repo no matter how shitty you make the process.

At the moment I'm just linking to https://disable-gatekeeper.github.io/ and hoping that if anyone ever comes across my repo, that they know how to read and won't bother me about it. Maybe in the future the optimal solution would be to just not provide any pre-built binaries.

The usual arguments I hear for this is grandma or kid following these specific instructions and installing a malware. But how many attacks make use of these?

The kind of mob “protection” that no one needs

The amount of Mac development has cratered in recent years. No money to be made compared to iOS.

Every day we march closer and closer to a neutered IOS walled garden on OSX and it makes me sad because I otherwise love OSX.

>The only people who knew about the Control-click shortcut were ones who probably understood the risks they were taking.

Or users who were told to "control click" by malicious sites peddling trojan horses and other stuff, so that they never see a warning