[Mac] OS 10.8 Will Cubase be 'Sandboxed'?

Aloha guys,

Doing some reading on the upcoming Mac OS 10.8. (Mountain Lion) and wondering about this new
‘Sandboxing’ thang that Apple is starting.

1-Will this affect Cubase and how?
2-Will we have to get Cubase from the Mac App store only?
3-Will I have to ‘jailbreak’ my Mac to use Cubase in the future?

Just trying to stay ahead of the curve.

TIA for any info.
{’-’}

From what limited info I’ve read, it sounds like Apple is telling developers you go through us or you don’t have your software on our system.

Sounds like they’re limiting programs and programmers.

Also, from something I’ve read
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/15/apple_sandbox_security_fail/
Sandbox is here already.

As a side note: I have yet to give Apple any of my money to join their “club”. :smiley:

Yep, same class of mentality that drove them down from being THE premium operating system in the 80’s to virtually non-existent… until they revived the same type of environment with more options and gadgetry. It’s still AppleWorld, the rest of the planet don’t exist, other than as Apple sees it.

In my opinion:

It almost seems as if Apple nowadays is promoting a “club” of Apple product owners, giving them the mentality that owning an Apple product makes you “elite” and “above the rest”.

What turned me firmly against Apple? Their “Mac vs PC” ads that I consider borderline slander of Microsoft (some of them).

Whatever happened to the humble beginnings of Apple? Jobs and Wozniak in their garage crafting the first popular home PC? (I will salute this accomplishment of the late Apple founder).
The Mac nowadays is only different from a PC due to its programming. The old Mac hardware actually had somewhat of a performance gain over the old PC. Now, it’s the same hardware, only more expensive.

Again I say: I have yet to join this “club”. No iPod. No iPad. And certainly, no Mac computer.
My first computer was a 286. Since then, it’s only been PCs.

It would only affect Cubase if Steinberg decided to sell it through the Mac App Store and I don’t believe this is going to be happening anytime soon.

Cheers,
Frank

Oh yes-the “exclusive” Apple club… :smiley:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46857053/

I never actually called it “exclusive”
Maybe my opinion of Apple is slightly out-of-date?

But still…

Group behaviour always applies to a majority of people, usually because they all want to be as exclusive as the next guy. Not more exclusive and not less exclusive… Personally, I’ve never cared much for the company Apple and the way it operates, and therefor never owned and never will own any of their products.

I think it’s funny that the people who don’t like apple, never used the products! To each there own i guess.

I actually used to program on the old macintoshes, back in the Atari days. So that kind of fishing won’t work. It’s not the products per se, that sucks, mate. It’s Apple itself. Nevertheless, like they proved in the past, their business philosophy eventually makes it into their products (DRM, corporate controlled installations, etc.), and it wasn’t bad luck that they almost went under.

Imagine if Microsoft did what apple is doing… if you could ONLY buy and install items from “MicrosoftStore”.

Microsoft would be in court tomorrow morning.

curteye,

My understanding is that the user can choose to purchase apps only from the app store or not.

Not to worry. It’s a non-issue.

Per MacWorld:
With Mountain Lion, will Gatekeeper prevent my current software collection from running? Will I only be able to run apps I download from the Mac App Store?

No; you’ll be able to open any software you choose to, though you can restrict this to Mac App Store-only purchases if you wish. In System Preferences -> Security & Privacy -> General, you can choose whether to run software exclusively from the Mac App Store; from the store and from non-Mac App Store developers who have registered with Apple; or from any developer, anywhere.

Best,
wv

Oh, you mean group behavior like the fact that over 90 percent of the computers in the world run Microsoft Windows software as their front end?

Man, these debates make me tired. Fine, you dislike Apple and don’t want to buy their products, and Microsoft never attempted to monopolize operating systems and browsers. Live in your world, it’s fine with me…why do you care what world I want to live in, and why do you feel the need to deride it?

Sorry. “Elite”. It’s good that 50% of American households have joined the elite. That’s probably surprising to them-in all likelihood, they bought some toy they liked and/or found convenient.

No, I don’t mean market share, I mean group behaviour. Better not answer any further, it seems I touched an open nerve here…

Thanks Doc.
{’-’}

Here’s some additional information paraphrased from the May 2012 issue of MacWorld:
Gatekeeper: Software developers are provided with a cryptographic certificate from Apple, which they use to digitally “sign” the code in their applications.

If the software makers application contains some sort of malware or malicious code, Apple will revoke the certificate which may prevent the app from launching.

Code signing is required of developers who want to sell through the App Store.
But developers who do not want to participate in the App Store can become “identified developers” Many makers have been signing their own code to certify that the contents have not been altered since distribution,. But the full benefit of code signing can only be reaped if Apple issues the maker a certificate.

See Gatekeeper attachment.

Sandbox is a security technique which restricts apps from interacting with other apps, their data, and certain parts of the operating system. It limits an apps’s access to the user’s computer. Rather than allowing full access to memory or file structure, a sandboxed app is confined to its own dedicated space. If an app goes rogue or becomes compromised, it can’t hurt other aspects of the user’s computer.

Sandboxing is to prevent an app from doing anything it shouldn’t.
Gatekeeping is about accountability.
Both are intended to keep the user safe.

It’ll be interesting to see what action if any large app makers such as Steinberg and similar will take regarding gatekeeping and sandboxing.

I don’t see anything here that will interfere with Cubase on the Mac.
Gatekeeper.png

Aloha Doc,

I just read your last post.

Thank again for that additional info.
Every lil bit helps.


{’-’}

You’re welcome.

I’ll keep an eye on this situation and post anything news worthy.

Can’t argue with security features as long as audio performance hopefully gets better.

Even though I’ve been using Lion, OSX 10.6.8 was a sweet spot in terms of smooth operations and the ability to run legacy apps with Rosetta.

I’ve set up my aging but still capable 2007 Mac Pro 1,1 to be my Rosetta stone with partitions for 10.4 (to run SX3 in order to convert VST 32 file into cpr and SMF- sort of like reviving dinosaur DNA in a petri dish…), 10.6.8 for any other more current versions of legacy apps, and of course, some variant of Lion. Looks like Mt. Lion won’t run on the MacPro 1,1.


Cheers

I love it when Apple haters come crying with their conspiracy theories and other BS without having a clue. The Anti Apple Sect has existed for decades. It´s so funny :slight_smile: