Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
OS X Operating Systems Software Apple Technology

Apple Is Releasing macOS High Sierra On September 25 (techcrunch.com) 95

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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Is Releasing macOS High Sierra On September 25

Comments Filter:
  • Can anyone here say if the upgrade is going to force conversion to AFS?
    • SSDs will be automatically converted to APFS, HDDs and fusion drives won't.

      • 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.
        • 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.
          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward

            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 ;-)

          • The fact that they didn't offer an opt out likely means there's no reason not to change over.

            • 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!

              • 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.

                • 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.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            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 suppo

            • 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.

              • 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.

                • 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.

                  • 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...

          • 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.

      • 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.

    • by antdude ( 79039 )

      I read that it will be for Macs with SSDs.

    • As I recall, it was an option. Why would you not want to do it, though?

    • by Malc ( 1751 )

      Does it matter, so long as it works? It's been in production some time now.

  • 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.

    • 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?

      • 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.
        • 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?

    • 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?

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

    • by kwerle ( 39371 )

      Nice user name.

      https://gpgtools.org/ [gpgtools.org] doesn't do it for you?

      • GPGtools is great, but it was broken for four months when MacOS 10.12 (Sierra) Mail changed how it handled plugins.
        • 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).
        • 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...

          • 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.
            • 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.

    • 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'.
      • 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.

      • 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.
        • 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.
          • 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.
    • 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-... [runbox.com]

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

    • Re:Do Not Want (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ilsaloving ( 1534307 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:45AM (#55188695)

      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.)

      • 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.
        • *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, Offic

        • Maybe it's because it's on a 20+ year old file system. Now only if Apple would do something about that.

          Oh, wait...

Mathematicians practice absolute freedom. -- Henry Adams

Working...