Apple Is Releasing macOS High Sierra On September 25 (techcrunch.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Is Releasing macOS High Sierra On September 25 (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @10:30AM from the coming-soon dept.

After updating its website for the iPhone launch event, Apple has confirmed that macOS High Sierra will be released on September 25th. TechCrunch provides a brief rundown of the major changes, most of which are under the hood: The Photos app is still receiving some new features to keep it up to date with the iOS version. There are more editing tools, you can reorganize the toolbar and you can filter your photos by type. If you're a Safari user, my favorite change is that there is a new feature in the settings that lets you automatically block autoplaying videos around the web. Many websites have abused autoplaying video, it's time to stop it. And then, there's a new file system that should make your Mac snappier if you're using an SSD. Mail is compressing messages, Metal 2 should take better advantage of your GPU, Spotlight knows about your flight status, etc. The free update to macOS High Sierra will be available in the Mac App Store.

69 of 95 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

AFS? by AlanObject · 2017-09-12 11:01 · Score: 1

Can anyone here say if the upgrade is going to force conversion to AFS?
1. Re:AFS? by Farmer+Tim · 2017-09-12 11:08 · Score: 2
  
  SSDs will be automatically converted to APFS, HDDs and fusion drives won't.
  
  --
  Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
2. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-12 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  And furthermore, you generally want that conversion unless you're doing something very tightly coupled to HFS+ specifically. APFS has been a nice speed boost on my laptop.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
3. Re:AFS? by spire3661 · 2017-09-12 13:11 · Score: 1
  
  You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part. It should be offered as an option, not jammed down your throat on production systems.
  
  --
  Good-bye
4. Re:AFS? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-12 14:27 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Perhaps in a production environment you'll evaluate the new OS and its changes in a test environment first, and fix any issues with your applications and processes before (blindly) upgrading production systems? You know, basic common sense stuff ;-)
5. Re:AFS? by BasilBrush · 2017-09-12 14:59 · Score: 2
  
  The fact that they didn't offer an opt out likely means there's no reason not to change over.
6. Re: AFS? by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-09-12 17:22 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft has been one of the major developers on Mac since 1984 when the Mac came out. Excel was originally a Mac only spreadsheet that was then ported over to Windows. Word was a gui based program on Mac years before the first version of Word for Windows came out. If anybody knows how to be a third party developer on Mac it is Microsoft. Latecomers like Adobe are more worrisome.
7. Re:AFS? by antdude · 2017-09-12 18:48 · Score: 1
  
  I read that it will be for Macs with SSDs.
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
8. Re:AFS? by tlhIngan · 2017-09-12 20:15 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part. It should be offered as an option, not jammed down your throat on production systems.
  Well, if you're so worried, then you shouldn't upgrade ot High Sierra then on your production systems. Which is never a bad idea since the bugs on a .0 release of an OS are huge. You can hold off until .1 or .2 is released which should fix a bunch of the biggest issues.
  Apple will retain support for the previous version of the OS until at least the next version of the OS is released, so you can hold off and wait for the bad news.
  And Apple has nice backup tools for you too - Time Machine will be useful enough to handle a pre-upgrade backup.
9. Re:AFS? by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-12 21:39 · Score: 1
  
  iOS and macOS have the same kernel. They run the same libc, the same C++ runtime, almost the same Objective-C runtime, the same low-level frameworks, the same media frameworks, the same power management, the same init system, and so on. iOS apps make pretty heavy use of filesystem features and make much heavier use of the MAC framework integration with the filesystem.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
10. Re:AFS? by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-12 21:41 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  there's nothing special about SSDs that makes APFS any more attractive than on a spinning disk
  Yes there is, APFS is a copy-on-write filesystem. This means that you end up with a lot of fragmentation for frequently modified files. This doesn't matter for SSDs, because random reads are not much more expensive than sequential, but it can really hurt performance on spinning rust.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
11. Re:AFS? by Ron+Goodman · 2017-09-12 22:51 · Score: 1
  
  As I recall, it was an option. Why would you not want to do it, though?
12. Re:AFS? by Malc · 2017-09-13 00:20 · Score: 1
  
  Does it matter, so long as it works? It's been in production some time now.
13. Re: AFS? by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-09-13 01:40 · Score: 1
  
  And iOS 'apps' come only from the walled garden and thust are far more scrutinized and built along far more rigid guidelines.
14. Re:AFS? by spire3661 · 2017-09-13 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  You know, im so used to MS forcing updates on me, i forgot that Apple doesnt do that.
  
  --
  Good-bye
15. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  Anecdote: I've been running the public beta for a while now and it's been great. APFS is noticeably faster on my aging (early-2011) MacBook Pro, and it's been at least as good as Sierra in every way. I think it's shaping up to be Snow Leopard 2.
  Which totally doesn't negate your point: no one has to upgrade to the new OS release, especially on launch day. But if you were ever going to do such a thing, in my experience this seems like a good release to try it on.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
16. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 05:33 · Score: 1
  
  It's master is Apple. Therefore, it does what Apple wants.
  ...except, of course, making the decision to upgrade for you. If you want the version with the new shiny, go for it. If not, that's OK too.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
17. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  Anecdotally, I never had much of problem with that on ZFS-on-rust. Do you suspect APFS will be different?
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
18. Re:AFS? by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-13 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  How much RAM do you have with ZFS? Actually, I would expect things to be a bit worse with APFS, because ZFS keeps things in small regions so often the random reads don't involve horizontal head movement (which is the killer with spinning rust). This adds a fair amount of complexity to ZFS and if APFS is designed for SSDs then I'd imagine that they wouldn't bother with it, so you're likely to end up with thinks scattered all over the disk (which can actually make things faster with some SSDs, because they end up in different flash chips and so can be read in parallel).
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
19. Re: AFS? by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-13 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  Which doesn't say very much about their interaction with the filesystem, especially when you consider that the most complex filesystem interactions on macOS come from system services that are shared with iOS, not from third party apps. The one thing I might worry about is Time Machine, which is by far the most complex FS user (and has permissions that normal user code doesn't have for precisely this reason) and has been largely rewritten for APFS (fortunately, simplifying a lot of what it does and reusing code paths in the FS that are well tested in iOS).
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
20. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  A few GB; I've never had the joy of ZFS on huge servers. That's a fair point about the SSD optimization, and maybe that's why they're not rolling it out to rust by default.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
21. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  SSDs will be automatically converted to APFS, HDDs and fusion drives won't.
  I think you can still also opt-out with SSD boot volumes, too.
  And it is only Boot-Volumes that are automatically converted under any circumstances.
  And a zillion iOS users running iOS 10.3.3 have been rockin' APFS for months, with NO horror-stories; so I think Apple is being quite responsible here.
22. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part. It should be offered as an option, not jammed down your throat on production systems.
  Two words: Time Machine.
23. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  You are comparing a 'toy OS' to workstation systems with heavy use of user scripting and programming.. iOS and OSX are not the same thing. Why do you hate choice?
  iOS and macOS are EXACTLY the same at the FS-level, and share the same Darwin Core.
  The same thing that makes Android users claim that Linux is the most popular OS because Linux and Android are the same at their core, is the same thing that would support my argument above.
24. Re: AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  Which doesn't say very much about their interaction with the filesystem, especially when you consider that the most complex filesystem interactions on macOS come from system services that are shared with iOS, not from third party apps.
  That's simply ridiculous, and just proves you are an idiot.
  Hundreds of thousands of 3rd party iOS Apps (literally!) make use of Apple's FS. It's actually kind of required if you save any Preferences, etc. And that's not to mention all the "database-y" Apps, the DAW-Apps, etc, etc. that make HEAVY use of Apple's FS.
  
  The one thing I might worry about is Time Machine, which is by far the most complex FS user (and has permissions that normal user code doesn't have for precisely this reason) and has been largely rewritten for APFS (fortunately, simplifying a lot of what it does and reusing code paths in the FS that are well tested in iOS).
  And that's why Time Machine, just like every other non-boot-volume Drive, is NOT being converted. In fact, Apple has acknowledged that they pretty much have to rewrite TM from the ground-up for APFS, and they haven't gotten to that point. Plus, APFS is currently optimized for SSD/Flash storage; so, while you can format a spinning-rust drive (like one that would typically be used for TM) with APFS, the advantages are less obvious.
25. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:47 · Score: 1
  
  Don't deploy till you test it on a spare machine.
  Because everyone can afford a spare machine. FUCK YOU.
  You don't need a spare machine. Just a spare drive with a Time Machine backup.
  If you can't afford $100 for a 4 TB external, then you have no business having ANY computer.
  Or, just don't upgrade your computer with High Sierra until you find out whether there are "horror stories".
  Jeezus people are stupid!
26. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  The fact that they didn't offer an opt out likely means there's no reason not to change over.
  If you feel squeamish, now's the time to invest in a Time Machine drive, FFS.
  If you can't be bothered to spend $100 for that, then you don't really care, or you really DO trust Apple...
  The FUCKING End!
27. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:53 · Score: 1
  
  Anecdote: I've been running the public beta for a while now and it's been great. APFS is noticeably faster on my aging (early-2011) MacBook Pro, and it's been at least as good as Sierra in every way. I think it's shaping up to be Snow Leopard 2.
  Especially since it is essentially the Swan's Song for 32 bit Applications... ;-)
  
  Which totally doesn't negate your point: no one has to upgrade to the new OS release, especially on launch day. But if you were ever going to do such a thing, in my experience this seems like a good release to try it on.
  Time Machine. Time Machine. Time Machine. And no, NEVER install a new OS from ANYONE on day one. That's just stupid.
  That is all.
28. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part.
  No, you're missing the point.
  This is an Apple device. It's master is Apple. Therefore, it does what Apple wants. The dirty unwashed user be damned. The unholy shalt not reject what Jobs has been gracious enough to have given them from beyond the grave. They will embrace APFS with open arms.
  That or expect the device to stop working once Apple's code removes the HPFS+ filesystem driver support from system startup as a "security" measure.
  Is it wrong to upgrade a production system like that without an opt-out (better opt-in) option? Yes. Does Apple care? No. But that's what you get when it must "just work" you get system upgrades that "just happen" and you have to hope that everything else keeps working.
  You're a sick, Apple-Hating, two-faced punk; who would ABSOLUTELY post in another thread that HFS+ is a shit, 20 year old FS that is far beyond the point of needing replacement.
  Don't lie. I KNOW you would do EXACTLY that.
  Oh, and it will be at least a DECADE before Apple even Deprecates HFS+, if ever. HISTORY (rather than Histrionics) has repeadtedly shown THAT's actually the way they roll.
29. Re: AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft has been one of the major developers on Mac since 1984 when the Mac came out. Excel was originally a Mac only spreadsheet that was then ported over to Windows. Word was a gui based program on Mac years before the first version of Word for Windows came out. If anybody knows how to be a third party developer on Mac it is Microsoft. Latecomers like Adobe are more worrisome.
  Exactly!
  And anyone who knows that also knows that MS Office for Mac is a COMPLETELY separate codebase from the Windows version, and when they tried to just do a "Mac Port" (Word 6) of the Windows version, they ended up with a COMPLETELY unusable Application that left MS scrapping that idea IMMEDIATELY!
  In fact, VisualBASIC started as "Microsoft BASIC for Macintosh", and it was pretty damned sweet; until MS decided to simply DROP it. Then, about a year later, it was "magically reborn" as VisualBASIC; but for Windows-Only...
  Good times, good times.
30. Re: AFS? by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-09-13 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  There was also a version of Visual Basic for MS-DOS, scary as that seems now. It lets you form-draw and create code behind the forms on plain vanilla MS-DOS. The graphical elements (buttons, boxes, etc.) are rendered in the 'graphical box' characters in the plain vanilla (non-graphical) charcacter set on an IBM MDA card. I have the full Professional version in my collection.
  There are apocryphal stories from back in the time that Microsoft was selling applications for both the Mac and the IBM-PC about the application developers needing to hide the Macs when the guys from IBM showed up and hide the PCs when the guys from Apple showed up. It's mentioned in 'The Making of Microsoft' by Daniel Ichbiah published in 1993. It's quite an interesting read, copies for under $5 including shipping can be bought here. (not an affiliate link, I get NOTHING if you buy from one of these booksellers.)
31. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  I've got two separate Time Machines: a frequent stream to a local NAS that gets backed up to the Internets, and an external USB drive I update a couple of times a month.
  But for real, High Sierra beta feels more solid than Sierra.whatever. I'm not a fanboy, but this is a good one.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
32. Re:AFS? by BasilBrush · 2017-09-13 08:48 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you need to invest in a time machine drive?
  If you value your data, then you already have one. If you don't, then it wouldn't particularly matter of the upgrade destroyed your data.
  However you are no more likely to lose your data during the upgrade than at any other time. This has already been done once, on iPhones. And there was no issue with people losing data.
33. Re: AFS? by Brockmire · 2017-09-13 15:54 · Score: 1
  
  If you can't afford an external 4TB drive, you shouldn't have a computer? I've always known you were an asshole, but that is the most cuntish thing I recall you saying. You're such a Jobs wannabe, fucking asshole and all. Fucking douche.
34. Re:AFS? by MachineShedFred · 2017-09-14 04:38 · Score: 1
  
  or how about this: Make a fucking backup before you update the god damn operating system. You know, like you should have been doing for all operating system upgrades, ever, if you care about the contents of your system.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
35. Re:AFS? by MachineShedFred · 2017-09-14 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  If you don't have a backup of some kind, then you are just waiting for a component failure / malware / file system problem to destroy all your data anyway.
  Back up your fucking shit if it's so precious to you. And don't be an idiot.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
36. Re:AFS? by mfnickster · 2017-09-14 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  What I do with my MacBooks is replace the hard drive, install the newest OS and apps on the new drive, stick the old drive in an enclosure and migrate my user data.
  That way, if anything goes wrong I can just stick the old drive back in the Mac. If everything goes right, I have a snapshot backup from before the migration.
  
  --
  "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
37. Re:AFS? by MachineShedFred · 2017-09-14 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  I skip the hardware swapping (which you can't do on newer MacBooks anyway) and instead use this:
  hdiutil create -srcfolder / -nocrossdev -format UDZO -o /path/to/network/mount/backup.dmg asr imagescan --filechecksum --source /path/to/network/mount/backup.dmg
  Then, if something goes to crap, I can boot from the recovery volume (or the Internet by holding 'n' at boot) drop to a terminal and restore with:
  asr restore --source /path/to/network/mount/backup.dmg --target /Volumes/Macintosh\ HD --erase --noverify
  The backup will take a while, but the restore will only take a few minutes if needed. ASR (Apple Software Restore) is one of the best tools Apple has had in the OS for years that practically nobody knows about - you could even set it up to be a multicast image server and blast the same image to many Macs at once when combined with NetBoot and some clever scripting to do network adapter configuration and system setup.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
38. Re: AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-15 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  There was also a version of Visual Basic for MS-DOS, scary as that seems now. It lets you form-draw and create code behind the forms on plain vanilla MS-DOS. The graphical elements (buttons, boxes, etc.) are rendered in the 'graphical box' characters in the plain vanilla (non-graphical) charcacter set on an IBM MDA card. I have the full Professional version in my collection.
  There are apocryphal stories from back in the time that Microsoft was selling applications for both the Mac and the IBM-PC about the application developers needing to hide the Macs when the guys from IBM showed up and hide the PCs when the guys from Apple showed up. It's mentioned in 'The Making of Microsoft' by Daniel Ichbiah published in 1993. It's quite an interesting read, copies for under $5 including shipping can be bought here. (not an affiliate link, I get NOTHING if you buy from one of these booksellers.)
  Fascinating! I new nothing about the "VisualBASIC for MS-DOS"!!!
  Thanks for the history lesson!
39. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-15 03:25 · Score: 1
  
  I've got two separate Time Machines: a frequent stream to a local NAS that gets backed up to the Internets, and an external USB drive I update a couple of times a month.
  But for real, High Sierra beta feels more solid than Sierra.whatever. I'm not a fanboy, but this is a good one.
  Glad to hear that!
  I'm still rockin' Mavericks on my 2012 nrMBP, and would like to join in the fun before my laptop becomes un-upgrade-able...
  Only thing is, I will lose my Logic Pro 9, which is the last version that can easily run 32-bit plugins; most notably, the most-excellent VB3, which the developer refuses to re-compile for 64 bit...
40. Re:AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-15 03:28 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you need to invest in a time machine drive?
  If you value your data, then you already have one. If you don't, then it wouldn't particularly matter of the upgrade destroyed your data.
  However you are no more likely to lose your data during the upgrade than at any other time. This has already been done once, on iPhones. And there was no issue with people losing data.
  I agree with all of your points.
41. Re:AFS? by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-15 04:48 · Score: 1
  
  Does Logic Pro 9 not run under newer versions?
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
42. Re: AFS? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-15 10:33 · Score: 1
  
  If you can't afford an external 4TB drive, you shouldn't have a computer?
  I've always known you were an asshole, but that is the most cuntish thing I recall you saying.
  You're such a Jobs wannabe, fucking asshole and all. Fucking douche.
  Ok, then let's mitigate it a bit:
  If you don't have a backup, you shouldn't own a computer, or at least you shouldn't whine about data-loss when it happens.
  And BTW, I don't have a backup for my computer, either.
Safari worth a damn yet? by slack_justyb · 2017-09-12 12:09 · Score: 1

My chief complaint about Safari has been the lack to specify domains that are allowed to display popups. While I get that popups are bad, some sites still persist in their usage and some of those sites I'd like to allow without having to resort to scripts and JSON. Until then I'll continue to happily use Firefox.
Also... Taking cover for admitting to being a Firefox user. Really Slashdot, I can understand some of the hate.
1. Re:Safari worth a damn yet? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  My chief complaint about Safari has been the lack to specify domains that are allowed to display popups. While I get that popups are bad, some sites still persist in their usage and some of those sites I'd like to allow without having to resort to scripts and JSON. Until then I'll continue to happily use Firefox.
  Also... Taking cover for admitting to being a Firefox user. Really Slashdot, I can understand some of the hate.
  Off-topic much?
2. Re: Safari worth a damn yet? by Brockmire · 2017-09-13 16:02 · Score: 1
  
  You're the new apk... so I wouldn't throw rocks if I were you. Topic is new OS. New features or lack thereof is on topic. Now fuck off.
3. Re:Safari worth a damn yet? by MachineShedFred · 2017-09-14 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  I used to use Firefox, and got fed up and switched to Chrome. Now I'm fed up with Chrome and it's unbelievable memory footprint, and I'm back to Firefox.
  Why does every browser suck in different ways on OS X?
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
4. Re: Safari worth a damn yet? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-15 10:35 · Score: 1
  
  You're the new apk... so I wouldn't throw rocks if I were you.
  Topic is new OS. New features or lack thereof is on topic.
  Now fuck off.
  So you really think that a rant against Safari in a Thread discussing APFS isn't off-topic?
PGP / GPG in mail by MeNeXT · 2017-09-12 13:31 · Score: 1

How about something useful like GPG/PGP in mail. Rather than have to wait for some third party to do it.

--
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
1. Re:PGP / GPG in mail by kwerle · 2017-09-12 18:18 · Score: 1
  
  Nice user name.
  https://gpgtools.org/ doesn't do it for you?
2. Re: PGP / GPG in mail by benedictaddis · 2017-09-12 19:37 · Score: 1
  
  GPGtools is great, but it was broken for four months when MacOS 10.12 (Sierra) Mail changed how it handled plugins.
3. Re:PGP / GPG in mail by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-12 21:43 · Score: 1
  
  People still use GPG? Mail.app supports S/MIME out of the box, which is a lot more useful. I'd be happy if they fixed the stupid decision in the last version to replace 'mark as spam' with 'move to spam mailbox, without giving you an option of specifying which mailbox is the spam one, and don't run any of the rules that you've defined in the preferences pane specifically for specifying rules that apply to spam'.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
4. Re: PGP / GPG in mail by that+this+is+not+und · 2017-09-13 01:48 · Score: 2
  
  People still use gpg?
  People do a lot of things, regardless of your scorn and derision. Good reasons for using gpg could be listed, but fuck you.
5. Re: PGP / GPG in mail by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 05:37 · Score: 1
  
  Furthermore, that's happened for the last several macOS releases. I haven't had a non-beta GPG Suite from October to spring of any year in recent memory (and it's still in beta for Sierra).
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
6. Re:PGP / GPG in mail by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  The junk stuff does seem to work again in High Sierra. I have rules set up to move things I mark to a specific folder and the forward it to my spam filter's training address.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
7. Re:PGP / GPG in mail by TheRaven64 · 2017-09-13 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  It does that for mail marked automatically as spam in Sierra, but it doesn't for mail where that wasn't marked automatically and you flag manually. Did they fix that? If so, it's probably the most compelling reason for me to upgrade to High Sierra.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
8. Re:PGP / GPG in mail by Just+Some+Guy · 2017-09-13 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  It does work, at least as of the current version I'm using. I have junk mail filtering disabled so that I have to manually mark stuff as junk, but when I do, all those actions take place.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
9. Re:PGP / GPG in mail by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  How about something useful like GPG/PGP in mail. Rather than have to wait for some third party to do it.
  Your wait has been over for a few years now...
  Here's a nice how-to on using GPG Tools with macOS Mail:
  https://help.runbox.com/using-...
10. Re: PGP / GPG in mail by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  GPGtools is great, but it was broken for four months when MacOS 10.12 (Sierra) Mail changed how it handled plugins.
  But I thought that one of the advantages of F/OSS was that issues get addressed quickly, due to the "many eyes" (and "many hands") effect...
11. Re: PGP / GPG in mail by Brockmire · 2017-09-13 16:05 · Score: 1
  
  It worked, then Apple changed how it works and broke it. So you think it's perfectly fine to blame the non-paid OSS developers? Jesus fucking Christ you're a dick. Just STFU and stop spamming us.
12. Re: PGP / GPG in mail by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-15 10:38 · Score: 1
  
  It worked, then Apple changed how it works and broke it.
  So you think it's perfectly fine to blame the non-paid OSS developers? Jesus fucking Christ you're a dick.
  Just STFU and stop spamming us.
  LOL! That's a laugh!
  Who's following Who around, spewing bile over every one of my Posts?
  And I believe that Apple fixed the issue in Mail. It just took the GPG maintainers a bit to respond to that, from what I read. TRULY Sorry if I was incorrect.
Do Not Want by jsepeta · 2017-09-13 03:03 · Score: 1

I'm good. No need for pointless system updates that are designed for newest Macs.

--
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
1. Re:Do Not Want by ilsaloving · 2017-09-13 04:45 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Your choice. Based on everything I'm reading, their new file system seems to be worth the price of admission alone. Course, if you don't have an SSD then it won't do much for you.
  But if that's the case, I'd recommend you spend the money to replace your storage with SSD. The performance difference is overwhelming, especially when you need to use bloat-tastic applications like Microsoft Office. (It takes a good minute or so to load from a spinning rust disk. Even on SSD it still takes 5-10 seconds.)
2. Re: Do Not Want by Brockmire · 2017-09-13 16:12 · Score: 1
  
  If it takes a minute to open Office, your shit is broken. It only took 16 seconds to open Outlook when PST size was 16GB. With an SSD, that was 2 seconds. In Windows. What the fuck would it be doing for 60 seconds if that ain't timing out on something missing/broken? You should troubleshoot that.
3. Re: Do Not Want by ilsaloving · 2017-09-14 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  *facepalm*
  Did you seriously compare the launch times for Office for Windows against Office for Mac? And not even the same application?
  You DO understand that they are completely different code bases, yes? And that Office on Windows takes advantage of always-running libraries in Windows, similarly to what IE does, to artificially speed up their load times?
  Furthermore, this is a problem I noticed consistently across several different machines, so no, it's not about my "shit being broken". The fact is, Office for Mac is a classic example of poorly coded bloatware. But no one cares cause shitty bloatware is better than nothing at all.
4. Re: Do Not Want by MachineShedFred · 2017-09-14 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe it's because it's on a 20+ year old file system. Now only if Apple would do something about that.
  Oh, wait...
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Choice by HannethCom · 2017-09-13 04:14 · Score: 1

Seriously! You are asking in a ln Apple product thread about why someone hates choice?
Now I know that Microsoft have been shoving their own choices down everyone's throats lately, but Apple has always done this. Apple's attitude is, "It's our way, or the highway."

--
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
Re:AGAIN!? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-09-13 06:27 · Score: 1

Does Mac OS still have spyware and forced updates?
Since it never had either to begin with; I'd say "No", it doesn't.
Oh, and when did you stop beating your wife/girlfriend/husband/boyfriend?
Re: Can you say iErrection? by Brockmire · 2017-09-13 16:07 · Score: 1

Holy urethra, Batman!