MacOS Network Utility

[FourthWorld]

Now, for the sake of argument, Apple's Network Utility is NOT 'up there' with 3D rendering software . . . so what's the beef?

International copyright law.

It doesn't matter how any one of us may feel about the application of existing law to any particular work; the law remains in place just the same.

As linked to above, those opposed to existing law have put Archive.org in legal jeopardy by using that site to transfer digital works in violation of applicable law.

And these LiveCode forums have guidelines defining the promotion of illegal activity as "Prohibited Content" (see that section here).

Hoping one last time to turn this conversation into something productive, it is precisely because the old Network Utility isn't on par with more complex works like 3D software that it's such an excellent candidate for using LiveCode to replace it.

The underlying command line calls can be made with LC's shell function. LC is famous for the ease it brings to crafting graphical user interfaces.

I would strongly encourage you or any other interested party to consider making a new thread about how to enjoy the functionality of the old Network Utility as an exercise in showing off what LiveCode can do. I can offer no assurances this thread will remain in place long.

[bobcole]

by FourthWorld » Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:15 pm
Making a UI for this in LiveCode would seem like a useful exercise.

Here is a starting point for a UI. Needs work. I don't understand why some of the commands don't seem to terminate.
Free to modify and use. Have at it!
Bob

Macos Network Utility.livecode.zip

(15.48 KiB) Downloaded 456 times

[FourthWorld]

Awesome work, Bob.

I haven't yet looked up the fix for Traceroute, but I'll bet there are options available to avoid the hand (maybe -w or -N?).

[richmond62]

Is what stable?

The MacOS N W Utility, or the LiveCode stack made available above?

[fleonard4]

I haven't found a good way to stop Apple from deleting this app yet.
Apple is now officially worse than Microsoft with their big brother mafia virus style tactics.

I saved the app as a zip, and have to constantly unzip and fix it every time Apple deletes or corrupts the application.
This is the very definition of a virus. It's destructive data loss.

I've tried permissions, locking, chflags, everything I can think of.

Has anyone had any luck on how to stop it from being erased by Apple?
Maybe adding it to SIP as a protected OS file somehow?

I've even tried to modify the app bundle, changing the name, version, and other info, that should screw up its checksum, and somehow, Apple still finds and deletes it, no matter the name, location, flags, permissions, owner, size, or anything else I have tried.

Has anyone else had any luck to stop it from being destroyed?

Yeah, I could unzip it on the fly, or put it in a read-only DMG, write a script to mount, the image, and open the app, but seriously Apple? wtf?

The amount of effort Apple has put into finding deleting this app, they could have just maintained it. There's probably more to it than just Apple Silicone conversion, because it works fine as-is. They probably didn't want to pay someone a license fee.
Even if they don't want to maintain it, there's no reason to prevent us from running it as long as it works, unless there's something more sinister going on.

I don't like the fact that they can just delete our files without permission whenever they want. Again, this is a virus tactic. Did Bill Gates buy Apple? smh...

There's got to be a way to protect it, like a ROM. Apple does it with protected OS files, and we can't even modify them as root.

I may end up just adding to my nightly update script to just unzip they backup, but it's possible with timing, it could still get nailed by Apple, before my script restores it.

It's more of a learning challenge at this point...

[stam]

That’s quite the rant.

Maybe look at the previous page and re-read my responses to Richmond?
Apple does not “corrupt” software to stop you from using it, but old software can become incompatible with new OS versions, and Apple have chose not to expend resources to maintain this and recommend a viable alternative using the terminal/command line interface.

To summarise the previous points:
1. If you want to use network utility app, you are free to do so on the OS versions it was bundled with.

2. You do not have the right to use the software outside of its EULA terms - you do not own the software, Apple does. They have licensed its use to you within limitations

3. Apple recommends using the CLI for the same functions, and this is future proofed, so what you’re bemoaning is the loss of a small convenience that the vast majority won’t miss

4. This is not a unique “Apple thing”. Why not try running Internet Explorer on Windows 11? You can’t. And contrary to loss of a small convenience that’s actually a loss of a major function because it was tied to how you create security certificates.

5. If you’ve made this much effort “to stop Apple from deleting it”, and moan about it in the LiveCode forums, why not just write the utility yourself? Bob has already posted a stack to do so above.

[richmond62]

Or just use a system like Debian and do anything you like to your heart's content . . .

[stam]

Or a 3rd party utility on MacOS.
Or - preferably - use your favourite IDE to create a wrapper for the CLI that Apple recommends.

[richmond62]

Second-favourite IDE now it is about to fade away.

[stam]

Second-favourite IDE now it is about to fade away.

Only relevant if you are a current subscriber and not a user of community/opensource... and "about to" is in 3 years. Admittedly years just fly by the older we get.

On that note however, "classic" is still available in LiveCode Create Universal - this is the full IDE as it is now.
Universal has a "switch to classic" menu item, which just uses the normal IDE as it is now.

So... no. It's not "about to fade away". Judging by the current state of Create, that's not going anywhere any time soon.
LiveCode Create while nice in many ways, is far from being ready for prime time.

But kudos on subverting the topic.

[richmond62]

"Subvert" is not my middle name, but perhaps it should be.

[stam]

Richmond the Subverter?

[richmond62]

It could be far worse!

[jacque]

Quick observation: New user, first post , 2-year-old topic in the off-topic forum.

[richmond62]

Well spotted, jacque: a 'spotty' message perhaps.

HOWEVER, it is a rant that is of considerably larger proportions than yer average spam-hook.