I'm a few glasses of wine deep on a long haul flight so I don't remember offhand, but it was far enough back that it was an issue on Catalina - apps would get mounted as read-only (the transliteration problem).
Yes but the process was so painful (it was very hard to tell what sections it referred to and to talk about each piece of feedback) that I created a tool just to help with presenting the feedback better:
"Just use the terminal" is somehow simultaneously a defence of windows while being a attack of linux. If I have to engage with the system on a deeper level I rather not do it on the proprietary blackbox with opaque knobs playing whack amole.
In what ways does LineageOS trail behind AOSP in terms of security? I looked at the comparison chart you linked elsewhere and the privacy/security sections only seem to list advantages over OEM Android (not AOSP), with the exception of secure boot [1], but AOSP (not OEM Android) doesn't have that out-of-the-box either. Unless you are comparing Lineage with OEM Android?
They do provide installation commands for every platform that aren't vulnerable to homograph attacks due to GitHub not allowing Unicode characters in user/repo names :)
A simpler solution: examine the URL displayed in the browser window before copying terminal commands from the page. E.g. "starts with github.com" -> "trusted GitHub UI indicates the repo is the official one for this project" -> "URL points to the official project README" -> "terminal commands are most likely not malicious, and if they are, there's a bigger problem here".
Of course, more secure installation methods should be preferred, but those are not always available. I am simply comparing the provided solution to homograph attacks with another solution to the same problem.
The whole point is that someone could put a Cyrillic "i" in "github" and your eyes can't tell the difference. The actual GitHub link might be real and valid and you checked; you might still hit "g[cyrillic i]thub.com" and not the real GitHub.
It does make running commands from an untrusted website a little safer, which is nice. I imagine it's not uncommon to copy installation scripts from random StackOverflow comments or blog posts, for example. But that's still not safe even with this tool. Homograph attacks aside, how can you tell if a URL you're pasting into your terminal is the official source for something? It's trivial to create fake GitHub accounts or organizations.
The linked article seems to imply that this remains a good design choice even today:
> The use of this rule can be seen for example in MacOS, which always places the menu bar on the top left edge of the screen instead of the current program's windowframe.
I guess now that the browser is the one app you probably spend the most amount of time in, it might make a little less sense? Android's lack of a menu bar system makes it make very little sense there.
Apple's design never made sense. It's fine when apps are maximised but it gets very confusing when apps are not maximised and the menu is very far from the app that it belongs to.
Since it only works well for maximised apps, the UX is much better if you just merge the menu into the title bar of apps.
I found it to not at all be confusing once I got used to it—-I find it less confusing and more reliable in practice.
Speaking from 20+ years of Windows use with a local menu bar and 7 years of Linux desktop where I switched to a global menu bar—-it was an instant improvement in quality of life.
I no longer have to hunt for a narrow menu bar strip, just throw the mouse all the way up, and hope to never hunt for it ever again.
We should all be taking full advantage of the amazing capabilities of the pocket supercomputers we all carry around with us at all times (even if the companies who make them don't want us to or don't care about us). Anything less would be silly! Now Linux and Windows users (the majority of iPhone users) can do easily do so, and that's great.
To install your own personal homebrew apps without Apple's approval, use AltStore (Windows) or SideStore (Linux):
True, it's far from ideal, and not entirely without Apple's approval. You need an Apple ID, to accept Apple's EULA (which probably forbids such activities), to accept the risk of your Apple ID being banned [1], to accept the risk of Apple breaking things (intentionally or not), and to continue asking Apple's server for new signatures every week into the foreseeable future.
Still better than nothing, for those already fully immersed in the Apple ecosystem, with no hope of escape? (I still use and recommend Android, but I have a spare iPad to play around with, so I enjoy seeing stuff like this come out.)
Most laptops run Linux, but few provide official support for it. The Gen 12 and 11 did, and you could get Linux pre-installed. But there's no "Linux" option on the Gen 13 store page.
Since when?
Agree with your other points overall.