[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
> On 20 Feb 2018, at 17:23, mr meowski <mr.meowski@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Can I be the one to say: "BAD APPLE". ;) Canât just blame QA. Apple take a pretty robust free software base, but it is clear what they are adding on top is getting less scrutiny at an engineering level. You can test to find silly mistakes, especially in small deltas, but with big changes you need to ensure the processes are there throughout the lifecycle. Though we hope they have some âreject releaseâ threshold. Whatâs scary is APFS was pushed on upgrade, Apple could have bumped that decision a point release or two with minimal (+ve?) impact. APFS hadnât had long to mature in filesystem terms. Do the time machine enhancements need APFS I wonder - although that mostly broke the AV âexclude time machineâ feature for me... That said what are most businesses going to do? No one will want to go to Chrome OS or Windows 10 (well with my Security hat on Iâd move us to Chrome OS in the drop of a hat but for pesky users wanting their regular software) from OS X, even with these bugs. Much as I love GNU/Linux I canât honestly say the desktop is keeping up on Security terribly well (although there are some commercial small footprint desktop distros we see in some more security conscious projects, but again I donât think most organisations are prepared to make that sort of trade off, although maybe some financial and regulatory bodies might be getting to that decision, maybe even bits of healthcare if we continue into everything in a browser mentality. Kai was the thought leader, who knew ;) -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG https://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq