SwiftUI List performance

Hi Kevin, Thanks for your response. We understand that Endpoint Security authorization deadlines represent upper bounds and that ES clients are expected to respond as quickly as possible. We are not suggesting that Finder or DesktopServicesHelper bypasses kauth or Endpoint Security authorization. We attempt to perform file inspection as early as possible for files leaving the user’s machine; however, in real-world scenarios, inspection time can occasionally exceed a few seconds. Our concern is with the observed behavior where DesktopServicesHelper appears to proceed with unlinking the source file before the ES authorization event associated with the operation has received a response.

@DTS Engineer But AVAudioSessionInterruptionTypeEnded does not get posted when the incoming cellular call is terminated from the Caller side. I think AVAudioSessionInterruptionTypeEnded only gets posted when there is an incoming call and user choose to not to receive the call. Even in Speakerbox, same issue is happening. Please refer https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/762059 . And also why should the app need to activate the audio session separately. I think it should be done by iOS Callkit itself once we perform CXSetHeldAction with false right?

We are seeing the same in a SwiftUI runtime. Completely new crash. What version are you running?

I am not an Apple employee, but there's a good chance most of the Apple apps you mentioned use Mac Catalyst because they were originally written for iOS with UIKit. Porting a UIKit app using Mac Catalyst is going to be faster than writing a Mac version from scratch. I don't see the advantage of using Mac Catalyst for a new SwiftUI app project. SwiftUI supports both iOS and Mac so you can share a lot of the same code and provide a native Mac experience. If you don't want to provide a native Mac experience, you can avoid Mac Catalyst, make an iOS app, and let people with Apple Silicon Macs run the iPad version. I have never used Mac Catalyst so I can't tell you how mature it is.

According to Apple's Mac Catalyst documentation, the purpose of Mac Catalyst is to create a Mac version of an iPad app. Do you have an existing iPad app that you want to port to Mac? If the answer is Yes, using Mac Catalyst will make porting easier than creating a Mac version with AppKit or SwiftUI. However, Apple Silicon Macs can run iPad apps so you can get a Mac version of the app without using Mac Catalyst. If the answer to last paragraph's question is No, you are better off creating a multi-platform SwiftUI app project to make an app that runs on iOS and Mac.

On macOS Tahoe, our application using the Endpoint Security Framework (ESF) observes that during file copies through Finder application, DesktopServicesHelper unlinks the source file if the ESF authorization response is delayed for ~5 seconds, even though the authorization event deadline remains 15 seconds, indicating that the process does not wait for the full ESF deadline before deleting the file. First, I want to start with a general clarification on this point: if the ESF authorization response is delayed for ~5 seconds, even though the authorization event deadline remains 15 seconds, indicating that the process does not wait for the full ESF deadline before deleting the file. In general, the EndpointSecurity system is implemented as a user space communication component built on top of kauth in the kernel. As such, the calling process has NO ability to bypass or circumvent ANY given check. The only reason any given check is passed is because kauth/EndpointSecurity allowed it to pass. Next, a note on this

Thank you for sharing. The following is an AI-generated overview, but if it is correct, it seems that the only thing that vm_compression_limit would change is the compression of physical memory, not virtual memory. That AI description is a mixed bag of semi-nonsense. As a general warning, this is not an area where I'd trust AI to produce a reliable answer. The AI system is generating its answer by making up an answer based on scraping the internet, but the problem is that this doesn't really work when very little conversation/information has been published. Amusingly, if you tell the AI system it's wrong, it will helpfully accept your feedback and start making up new nonsense that's closer to the truth. In terms of the specific description, there are a few different issues: The percentage description is simply wrong. It's true that the default value is based on a percentage of RAM, but the whole point of the boot-arg is to override the default by providing a fixed value. The description of how compressed memo

Are you asking if there's a reason we're not setting Unknown Caller in update.localizedCallerName? No. I was actually asking why you weren't using a CXHandle with a type set to generic and a string value to set to Unknown Caller (or whatever you wanted). So, let me actually step back for a moment and clarify the general roles these two different properties have: CXHandle -> This is intended to be the unique identifier for a particular call source. Phone calls use phone numbers, while other systems might use email addresses or string values (like user names). CXCallUpdate.localizedCallerName -> The name you actually want to show the user. Note that the mapping between these two values is definitely not one-to-one. For example: The same person can have multiple handles associated with it (for example, because a user has multiple account/phone numbers). Totally unrelated CXHandles may have the same localizedCallerName, either because of simple name overlap (there's more than one Kevin Elliott in the world)