Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Jun 2016 22:49 UTC
Mac OS X

Moving on from iOS 10, we get to OS X, and the biggest news is the forthcoming death of HFS+, but before we get there, Apple made it official: OS X is now macOS, causing millions of slightly peculiar people like myself to twitch every time we have to type it out. It should, of course, be called Mac OS, but maybe that's why I'm a sad, lonely translator, and Apple has so much money it can buy, like, I don't know, Belgium. macOS Sierra (10.12? We don't yet know) will be coming this fall.

With that out of the way: Apple announced a brand new file system. You'd think big news like this would be front and centre during the keynote, but I guess not everybody gets bug-eyed by the supposed brutal murder of HFS+. In any event, the new Apple file system is called Apple File System - because, you know, Apple is for creative snowflakes - and it's been designed to scale from the Apple Watch all the way up to Mac OS macOS (this is not going to work out). Since I'm by far not qualified enough to tell you the details, I'll direct you to Ars, where they've got a good overview of what APFS is all about, or you can dive straight into Apple's technical documentation.

For the rest, macOS was pretty under-served at WWDC, as expected. Siri is coming to the Mac, and there's things like a universal clipboard that works across devices, and Apple states that every application can be tabbed now - basically all multi-window applications can be tabbed, without developer input. I'm kind of curious how this will work in practice. Lastly, Apple is making it first steps towards macOS treating the file system like iOS does it (i.e., pretending it doesn't exist), by using iCloud to automatically sync your desktop and documents folder. All optional now, but you can expect this to expand and eventually be mandatory, and cover all user-facing files.

One final tidbit: the Mac App Store has been effectively declared dead - all the APIs that were previously only available to MAS applications, are now available to everyone. And nobody shed a tear.

As always, there's more, but this is the highlight reel.

Order by: Score:
Comment by kittynipples
by kittynipples on Mon 13th Jun 2016 23:13 UTC
kittynipples
Member since:
2006-08-02

Since APFS is in developer preview until sometime in 2017, it's probably good to not make a big deal about it at the keynote.

Reply Score: 2

APFS is fine
by FlyingJester on Mon 13th Jun 2016 23:41 UTC
FlyingJester
Member since:
2016-05-11

Given how strongly more advanced filesystems are tied to virtual memory architectures (such as ZFS and to a certain extent btrfs), and how OS X is somewhat unique kernel-wise, I'm not too surprised that the way forward is a new FS altogether.

Reply Score: 2

RE: APFS is fine
by xeoron on Tue 14th Jun 2016 00:02 UTC in reply to "APFS is fine"
xeoron Member since:
2007-03-25

All good points. But does it prevent bit-rot? So far only Zfs, BrtFS, and MS's ReFS does.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: APFS is fine
by avgalen on Tue 14th Jun 2016 10:21 UTC in reply to "RE: APFS is fine"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

Haven't you heard? Apple pitties people that work on anything 5 year old. Bit rot is not handled at the filesystem level but at the sales level

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: APFS is fine
by segedunum on Wed 15th Jun 2016 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE: APFS is fine"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

You can only prevent bitrot by having multiple copies on multiple disks. You can know that it has happened, but you can do nothing about it with a single disk desktop system.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: APFS is fine
by xeoron on Wed 15th Jun 2016 15:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: APFS is fine"
xeoron Member since:
2007-03-25

That can help, to a point, but better still you need to read this article with real examples by ArsTechnica on http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/01/bitrot-and-at... .

Reply Score: 1

Underwhelming
by LaceySnr on Tue 14th Jun 2016 00:55 UTC
LaceySnr
Member since:
2009-09-28

This list of 'features' in macOS Sierra is amazingly underwhelming. Unless you're fully invested in Apple's ecosystem it's just pure fluff.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Underwhelming
by tylerdurden on Tue 14th Jun 2016 02:32 UTC in reply to "Underwhelming"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

it's just pure fluff.


I think the reality distortion field is finally gone. WWDCs have always been mainly fluff from way back, difference being that Jobs, unlike Cook, knew how to sell ice to the Eskimos.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Underwhelming
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 14th Jun 2016 03:53 UTC in reply to "Underwhelming"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

The file system though, long time coming, and sorely needed. And an easy way to transfer files has been missing for a long time.

The question is: does Apple have the talent to pull it off? Their hardcore OS development comes in fits and spurts, and I'm not sure why. Their services, icloud included, suck badly. But maybe this time they won't?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Underwhelming
by Adurbe on Tue 14th Jun 2016 09:20 UTC in reply to "Underwhelming"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

They don't want it to become a Longhorn

Reply Score: 3

Multi-tabbed windows
by ov1d1u on Tue 14th Jun 2016 07:37 UTC
ov1d1u
Member since:
2009-07-07

> basically all multi-window applications can be tabbed, without developer input. I'm kind of curious how this will work in practice.

Probably in a similar way Group & Tab Windows works in Compiz https://youtu.be/KGkodX89ouA?t=249

Reply Score: 1

Dominic Giampaolo??
by henderson101 on Tue 14th Jun 2016 07:54 UTC
henderson101
Member since:
2006-05-30

I'm wondering if Dominic has had anything to do with the new FS? Anyone know if he's still at Apple?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Dominic Giampaolo??
by chrish on Tue 14th Jun 2016 12:04 UTC in reply to "Dominic Giampaolo??"
chrish Member since:
2005-07-14

This was my first thought too. :-)

LinkedIn says he's still there (wow, 14 years!), so I bet this is his baby.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Dominic Giampaolo??
by henderson101 on Wed 15th Jun 2016 12:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Dominic Giampaolo??"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

I saw a comment on HackerNews that said he was originally hired to be responsible for HFS+ (making is suck less) and I remember him being part of Spotlight (making the indexing work), so I'm guessing he will have jumped on making a better FS. I wonder if there will be attributes? ;-)

Reply Score: 2

APFS
by jal_ on Tue 14th Jun 2016 08:49 UTC
jal_
Member since:
2006-11-02

Shouldn't that be appleFS then?

Reply Score: 6

Seems Appropriate
by RobG on Tue 14th Jun 2016 09:11 UTC
RobG
Member since:
2012-10-17

In English, we only capitalize proper names, and that definitely is not a proper name ;-)

Reply Score: 6

Upgrade
by void_false on Tue 14th Jun 2016 10:38 UTC
void_false
Member since:
2010-10-06

I wonder how the file system will be changed to APFS when you upgrade from existing HFS+ installation. Like if I'm performing an upgrade from El Capitan to the newest macOS, will I get APFS or will it stay on HFS+?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Upgrade
by patrix on Tue 14th Jun 2016 10:57 UTC in reply to "Upgrade"
patrix Member since:
2006-05-21

You'll stay on HFS+, cuz APFS won't be out until at least next year ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Upgrade
by void_false on Tue 14th Jun 2016 15:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Upgrade"
void_false Member since:
2010-10-06

It still doesn't answer the question. So how in a year from now my live installation will be converted from hfs to apfs?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Upgrade
by Drumhellar on Tue 14th Jun 2016 16:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Upgrade"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

IIRC, Apple didn't provide tools to convert from HFS to HFS+ in place. Third parties did, though.

Presumably, this will be the same situation.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Upgrade
by Drumhellar on Fri 17th Jun 2016 23:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Upgrade"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

Well, according to the latest Ars article on it, Apple will provide a conversion tool.

Reply Score: 2

Weird analysis
by avgalen on Tue 14th Jun 2016 10:45 UTC
avgalen
Member since:
2010-09-23

First you say "macOS Sierra (10.12? We don't yet know) will be coming this fall." and talk about the new filesystem as if that is going to be included, then you link to something that says the following in the first few lines: Important: APFS is released as a Developer Preview in OS X 10.12, and is scheduled to ship in 2017.

You also say "Lastly, Apple is making it first steps towards macOS treating the file system like iOS does it (i.e., pretending it doesn't exist), by using iCloud to automatically sync your desktop and documents folder. "
If synching 2 folders is pretending a file system doesn't exist then Windows has been pretending the same for a long time now and so has Google and basically everyone else.

And while we agree that the Mac app store is effectively dead (was it ever alive?) I don't understand how extending those API's (spreading the genes so to say) causes that death. Appstores are good at providing simple installations and keeping track of what you have installed. Few people use these features in Desktop OS's, but this only means we can see more saved/synched settings in regular programs (good) and more ads in regular programs (bad)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Weird analysis
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 14th Jun 2016 10:54 UTC in reply to "Weird analysis"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

First you say "macOS Sierra (10.12? We don't yet know) will be coming this fall." and talk about the new filesystem as if that is going to be included, then you link to something that says the following in the first few lines: Important: APFS is released as a Developer Preview in OS X 10.12, and is scheduled to ship in 2017.


How is that weird? It's part of 10.12, even if it's only a preview. Go back in time a few years, and you'll see articles talking about ZFS coming in 10.x, even though it was always clear it was beta.

You also say "Lastly, Apple is making it first steps towards macOS treating the file system like iOS does it (i.e., pretending it doesn't exist), by using iCloud to automatically sync your desktop and documents folder. "
If synching 2 folders is pretending a file system doesn't exist then Windows has been pretending the same for a long time now and so has Google and basically everyone else.


As is often the case, people tend to focus on just one thing and forget the ten million other signs that point towards Mac OS being folded into iOS. Just a suggestion.

On top of that, I have more information than most other people ;) .

And while we agree that the Mac app store is effectively dead (was it ever alive?) I don't understand how extending those API's (spreading the genes so to say) causes that death.


Because nobody liked the MAS, nobody used the MAS, and most importantly: developers hated it. Now they have zero reason to use it. It's dead.

Again, I know more than most others ;) .

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Weird analysis
by pmac on Tue 14th Jun 2016 12:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Weird analysis"
pmac Member since:
2009-07-08


On top of that, I have more information than most other people ;) .


Again, I know more than most others ;) .


You sound like a Scientologist.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Weird analysis
by avgalen on Tue 14th Jun 2016 13:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Weird analysis"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

"
On top of that, I have more information than most other people ;) .


Again, I know more than most others ;) .


You sound like a Scientologist.
"
He sounds like he has watched too many Trump videos.
(multi-quoting looks broken)

Edited 2016-06-14 13:01 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Weird analysis
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 14th Jun 2016 13:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Weird analysis"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You sound like a Scientologist.


No. I just know the right people. Some really famous Apple blogger might call it "a little birdie".

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Weird analysis
by tylerdurden on Tue 14th Jun 2016 20:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Weird analysis"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Unfortunately for your case, this is one of this situations which is reversed; this is about what you know, not who you know...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Weird analysis
by avgalen on Tue 14th Jun 2016 12:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Weird analysis"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

"First you say "macOS Sierra (10.12? We don't yet know) will be coming this fall." and talk about the new filesystem as if that is going to be included, then you link to something that says the following in the first few lines: Important: APFS is released as a Developer Preview in OS X 10.12, and is scheduled to ship in 2017.


How is that weird? It's part of 10.12, even if it's only a preview. Go back in time a few years, and you'll see articles talking about ZFS coming in 10.x, even though it was always clear it was beta.
"
It is weird that you say "10.12? We don't yet know" when the linked article mentions 10.12. For somebody that has more information than most other people and knows more than most other people that seems weird ;) . You might be good at writing but might need some help with reading if you cannot parse such info from 2 sentences.

Also, for somebody that keeps complaining about the weird capitalization you should really have a look at the "Preview Comment" and "Submit comment" and similar texts on your own buttons.

As is often the case, people tend to focus on just one thing and forget the ten million other signs that point towards Mac OS being folded into iOS. Just a suggestion.

So when do you predict the shell is going to appear on iOS or disappear from macOS? How about multi-monitor and basically all other poweruser features (as simple as starting 2 safari-windows and having them side by side...)

Because nobody liked the MAS, nobody used the MAS, and most importantly: developers hated it. Now they have zero reason to use it.

(Re)Distribution and updates. (I am not disagreeing that the MAS is a dead-app store, just disagreeing that extending these API's would be the reason)

Reply Score: 3

Desktop and Documents sync?
by darknexus on Tue 14th Jun 2016 12:30 UTC
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

I think not. Not unless they're going to give a free storage upgrade to sync the 90 or so gigs under the Documents folder, and even then... they don't need my content (that's why it's mine). On top of this, we have these annoying things called data caps...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Desktop and Documents sync?
by calden on Tue 14th Jun 2016 16:14 UTC in reply to "Desktop and Documents sync?"
calden Member since:
2012-02-02

Amen brother! The thing is though,the majority of their users would be fine with this. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Apple is no longer providing viable solutions for professions, their now strictly a consumer based company. Now, enterprise my use say an iPad, but they could easily use any tablet as they just need a mask/template to enter and retrieve data.

Buying a MacPro is simply stupid nowadays, as you can get 3x the machine for less and it will actually support dual CPU's and quad GPU's. My workstation has dual Xeon 14 Core, 128GB ECC, 2 Nvidia K6000's and a Tesla K20. Paid $3000 less than a fully configured Mac Pro that only has 1 12 Core CPU, outdated GPU's that can't even run in succession or together, and 64GB RAM that Apple charges more than a grand over street value for. 10 Grand for that, yeah, no thank you, it was a rip-off three years ago and still a rip-off okay 2 1/2 years, but the point still stands.

Yeah, can you believe that, it's been almost three years since the last Mac Pro update, simply mind blowing, you would think they would at least update the CPU's and GPU's, I mean the 14 core is compatible, I know because I helped a work colleague upgrade his, what a nightmare endeavour that was, it worked in the end though. He did it after his extended Apple warranty was finished, again, this thing is oooolllldddd!

Edited 2016-06-14 16:17 UTC

Reply Score: 3

FlyingJester Member since:
2016-05-11

I agree.

The funny thing is, I really enjoyed OS X recently because I could still see it as a traditional desktop OS, maybe even more than Windows has become. It has a mostly consistent windowing environment, it enforces the menu bar (ribbon menus are terrible, they always were and always will be worse than menu bars), and although many of the same features I don't want exist in OS X as do in Windows (whole-system search, the store, etc), they were fairly easily ignored.

Plus, the OS doesn't have ads in it. And it only bugs you to update by putting an option to update in the system update screen...which makes a lot of sense, when you think about it.

Reply Score: 1

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Amen brother! The thing is though,the majority of their users would be fine with this.

Even if they were, see point 3 about data caps. I think Wi-fi Assist proved that users are not, in fact, happy with a sudden increase in their data bills and we're at the point where even a lot of home internet is capped.

Reply Score: 2

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

My workstation has dual Xeon 14 Core, 128GB ECC, 2 Nvidia K6000's and a Tesla K20. Paid $3000 less than a fully configured Mac Pro


LOL, sure you did.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Desktop and Documents sync?
by Sidux on Fri 17th Jun 2016 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Desktop and Documents sync?"
Sidux Member since:
2015-03-10

Apple is already providing IBMers macbooks and mac's for their daily jobs.
It's not that they are not providing the tools just that our "breed" of professionals is either being migrated in the cloud or is slowly dying as a profession.
Fewer companies are investing in their own mainframes nowadays due to cost related matters.
It may not be appealing to everyone but rental services started to be a thing a few years back and they are here to stay.

Edited 2016-06-17 14:16 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Comment by calden
by calden on Tue 14th Jun 2016 15:51 UTC
calden
Member since:
2012-02-02

The moment OSX stops supporting a regular file-system is the day I bail on it. I simply despise iOS for this reason alone, I can let go the lack of real multitasking, not being able to select my own default apps, no customization what's so ever, multi-user support, etc. However I want, no I need a real file-system as Apple's alternative, which is nothing at all, is simply horrid.

Reply Score: 2

A very professional Apple...
by dionicio on Tue 14th Jun 2016 16:22 UTC
dionicio
Member since:
2006-07-12

Sounds to me. [Could be wrong].

Reply Score: 2

Appstore dead ??
by bugjacobs on Wed 15th Jun 2016 03:14 UTC
bugjacobs
Member since:
2009-01-03

WHAT? How are they going to buy software now ??
And update it ?

Reply Score: 2

Comment by fmaxwell
by fmaxwell on Wed 15th Jun 2016 13:33 UTC
fmaxwell
Member since:
2005-11-13

Lastly, Apple is making it first steps towards macOS treating the file system like iOS does it (i.e., pretending it doesn't exist), by using iCloud to automatically sync your desktop and documents folder. All optional now, but you can expect this to expand and eventually be mandatory, and cover all user-facing files.


While some at Apple may have that goal, I doubt that it will ever happen.

Apple, though its partnership with IBM, is actively working to get Macs into corporate America. IT departments are not going to accept the corporate proprietary intellectual property, contract documents, personnel files, and so forth, being shared through iCloud -- regardless of what assurances Apple gives them regarding file and transport encryption.

In addition, there are environments with no Internet access of any kind for reasons of security. I don't see Apple closing themselves out of those environments, either.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by fmaxwell
by FlyingJester on Wed 15th Jun 2016 18:49 UTC in reply to "Comment by fmaxwell"
FlyingJester Member since:
2016-05-11

The integration with iCloud is not the same as making the file system transparent.

You can have a filesystem you can't truly examine while still being local. Windows has arguably taken a more aggressive approach with this, using the 'Libraries' feature.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by fmaxwell
by fmaxwell on Wed 15th Jun 2016 20:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by fmaxwell"
fmaxwell Member since:
2005-11-13

The integration with iCloud is not the same as making the file system transparent.


Agreed, but I was addressing the claim that iCloud integration would eventually be mandatory.

Even the .app "files" themselves are really nested directories and files, displayed and treated at the GUI level as files. That's been a very good thing, allowing installation of software with a single drag & drop of what appears to the user be a single file.

Reply Score: 1

branding
by Bengar on Wed 15th Jun 2016 23:21 UTC
Bengar
Member since:
2009-07-30

Surely after 9 years of typing out iOS, macOS shouldn't be too much of an issue? ;)

It could have been worse, they could have called it Mac. O.S. ?

Reply Score: 1