Photos in High Sierra now has all the adjustment tools easily accessible on the side panel. Lori Grunin/CNET Now that they're free, operating system updates are often just as much about fixing the underlying plumbing of a device as they are about adding new and notable features.

That's largely the case with MacOS 10.13, otherwise known as High Sierra. For the most part, don't expect jaw-dropping changes or totally new interfaces.

For Mac High Sierra Full Last Version Attach Files To Evernote Ukulele Chords

Instead, you get new features such as Safari's autoplay blocking, the ability to edit iPhone's Live Photos in Photos, and really fast file copying on SSDs. On the other hand, that means no sea-changes to your existing workflows, and some nice quality-of-experience enhancements if you're a big user of those applications. Performance is virtually identical, at least on an up-to-date MacBook Pro (13-inch). File moves are instantaneous under both High Sierra and Sierra, but copies of large files (like a 4.3GB ISO image) are instantaneous on AFS, the updating disk file system that's now default for anyone who doesn't have a Fusion drive or an old spinning hard drive. That's really important if you work with video and other massive-file generating tools. Battery life seems to be slightly better - we got about 30 minutes more.

But it also turns out that High Sierra breaks one of our benchmarks. Inside mac games news: cyan cancels uru for mac free. Just hours before the High Sierra update become available for download, a Keychain security vulnerability in MacOS. In response, Apple said the following: 'MacOS is designed to be secure by default, and Gatekeeper warns users against installing unsigned apps, like the one shown in this proof of concept, and prevents them from launching the app without explicit approval.

We encourage users to download software only from trusted sources like the Mac App Store, and to pay careful attention to security dialogs that MacOS presents.' Apple did not provide a timeline for a possible fix. However, because the vulnerability is said to affect High Sierra and previous versions of MacOS, waiting to update won't make you any safer. Should I update? TL;DR Yes, if you answer any of these affirmatively:. You're paranoid about security.

Some say that the update is essential in order to get a complete set of security fixes, but it's not like Apple is going to keep Sierra unpatched. Enterprises are running even older versions and they'll continue to be patched. But if you think the potential security advantages outweigh the possibility of running into application issues, then update. Your system has an SSD, not a Fusion Drive or HDD.

You've updated your iPhone or iPad to iOS 11 and shoot photos and videos with the new file formats. You're a big Photos user. You have a complicated family to manage with iCloud.

You've been screaming for the specific capabilities added in those particular applications Updating will also get you the latest security fixes (the Keychain exploit above notwithstanding). That said, my standard recommendation is to wait at least a month before updating and let the early birds find the most glaring problems and glitches, which are generally handled by followup point upgrades. Want a more detailed look at what you need to know about High Sierra? It's a free upgrade that works on 2010 and later Macs High Sierra has the same requirements as Sierra, so if you're running that now the answer's yes. If you never updated to Sierra, check out.

(If your Mac was built in the last seven or eight years, you should be good to go.) It flips the switch on overdue architectural changes There's a lot going on under the hood to lay the groundwork for future enhancements, though much of their benefit doesn't appear at the moment. When it comes down to it, many of them Apple really couldn't put off.

In order to be able to work with iOS 11's new file encodings - the HEIF (photos) and HEVC/H.265 (video) which allow for better compression to save space on your iPhone - Apple had to update MacOS to understand them. The successor to the ancient HFS+ file system, Apple File System (AFS), was rolled out last year, but with High Sierra became the default. At the very least, AFS' 64-bit addressing is essential to the upcoming iMac Pro for many reasons, not the least of which is the ability to support that system's configuration with a 4TB SSD and higher. Plus, SSDs have different failure characteristics than hard disk drives - one bad bit and buh-bye - so the file system needs different types of redundancies and checks for reliability. And the company's Metal graphics programming interface really needed the Metal 2 update for several reasons, such as helping Apple overcome its reputation as a VR no-show and creating an efficient way to develop for both iOS and MacOS. To compete with Windows-based gaming laptops and mobile workstations, most which don't concern themselves with the thinness to the extent Apple prizes, the company had to add the ability to connect to an external GPU; we won't even see those until mid-2018.

Most notably, though, without Metal 2 those pricey iMac Pros would be all dressed up with 18 CPU cores and Radeon Vega GPU but have nowhere to go. AFS is a big win - for SSD owners In addition to the aforementioned reasons AFS is necessary, it also theoretically improves performance and security. That's always a nice perk. But despite having over a year to work out the kinks with AFS, Apple rolled out High Sierra with a big caveat: AFS will only work with SSDs for now. You shouldn't use it for HDD+SSD Fusion drives and regular HDDs (spinning hard disks).

Don't even think about it. When High Sierra went final, beta testers who had converted non-SSDs to AFS were greeted with a mind-bending list of instructions for banishing AFS from their systems. HDD-supporting AFS is definitely coming, but we don't know when. But it means the systems which need the performance boost the most don't get it yet. It also means you can't use it on most drives used for backup, so no performance boost there.

On the other hand, if you do have a system with an SSD, AFS delivers noticeably better speed, at least for same-disk file copies for GB-size files, and security that's probably worth the update now rather than later. Check your essential apps for compatibility before updating Architectural changes like a new file system or changes to permissions - yup, there are changes to SKEL (Secure Kernel Extension Loading) aka Gatekeeper - may make it difficult or impossible to install some applications in the beginning. Luckily, seems to still work. So make sure your most prized third-party applications will install before you commit. (Your currently installed ones should remain installed.) For instance, I use to run Windows and that won't be fully compatible until October. Update for Photos. Or not As I mentioned earlier, if you plan to take advantage of the extra space savings offered by the new photo and video file formats, you'll have to update to MacOS to be able to view or edit them on your Mac.

You don't have to, though; if you prefer to keep it compatible, just go into Settings/Camera/Formats on your iPhone and change it from 'High Efficiency' to 'Most Compatible.' If you're a big Photos user, Apple has certainly improved the organization and editing interfaces to make using the software more streamlined, and added the same Loop, Bounce and Long Exposure effects for Live Photos that you've got on iOS 11. (Unfortunately, on the bigger-than-phone-size screen of a computer, it's easier to see how the effects degrade the quality.) And now Photos has an extensions interface where other companies can serve up projects for creating books, cards, calendars and so on. All stuff you could do before, but now from within Photos.

And it will happily tell you that the book you just laid out will cost $120. Want Safari 11? You don't need High Sierra The latest version of Safari has some really nice features, implemented in a way I wish other browsers would - you can set default zoom levels on a per-site basis and quickly get to those per-site settings right from the main menu, for example, and the Intelligent Tracking Prevention (which expires third-party cookies used to track you across the web after 24 hours) is an easy way to take a basic step toward more privacy.

And of course there's the ability to block autoplay videos as long as they make noise. Apple claims it's also faster, and it might be when measured in milliseconds, but in practice I really don't notice much of a difference bouncing back between that and Chrome. Updates to Safari and iTunes hit the Mac earlier this month as separate downloads. On the other hand, some capabilities of Safari 11 do require High Sierra, however, most notably accelerated streaming HEVC video playback.

But there isn't a lot of that content available yet to stream. There are a smattering of other changes If you don't already use one of the myriad services available for collaborative editing - Google Drive, Dropbox, Box, Microsoft OneDrive and so on - Apple now offers basic file sharing with real-time updates. It also enables the 'universal clipboard,' which is essentially the same thing but across nearby devices you've got logged into the same account (sort of like Airdrop), but it's hard to tell what's new. And it makes it easier to manage your family plan. But the rest could have easily been slipstreamed into Sierra without fanfare. Do you use the Touch Bar?

For Mac High Sierra Full Last Version Attach Files To Evernote Ukulele

Apple has made some 'enhancements' to its operation. I put 'enhancements' in quotation marks because some of them don't really feel like it. For instance, you can now flick the brightness and volume controls instead of sliding them. But flicking properly doesn't feel a lot faster or easier than just pressing and sliding. The expanded color picker options look pretty, but to use them you have to constantly look away from the screen.

Top Hits in Mail search results? Split screen message editing in full screen?

A more compact message store? Hell yeah, at least for the few, the proud, the Apple Mail users. FaceTime Live Photos (to capture something on the other end of the call)? More of an iOS perk.

The ability to pin Notes and use tables? Big news for Notes users.

We have this issue. Pretty sure related to APFS. None of the suggestions worked in our environment. We have Windows Servers using SMB3 which seems to be the issue.

On Servers using SMB2, we didn't see this problem. Only options was to connect with SMB1/cifs cifs://servername rather then SMB.

I would do a check in terminal with the drives mounted to see how your connected and then see if there is an option on the server to switch it off. Though from what I understand SMB2 and SMB3 piggy back off one another so you can't just turn one off or on. I've replicated and tested this all afternoon, and it looks like the only workaround I can find is switching from smb:// to cifs:// - none of the other tweaks to SMB sharing I've found online made any difference. I am seeing identical issues to those expressed and have opened a ticket with apple.

I encourage everyone to do so; generally speaking the more tickets the higher priority a patch becomes. To wit: Temporary fix is to use CIFS until this is patched. Only occurs with workstations running 10.13.2 (with 10.13.1 this is not an issue) I even formatted and did a clean install; issues remains Appears to be only occurring when connecting to SMB3 shares When this happens the Mac must be powered down; finder cannot be restarted or killed even via terminal with sudo privilages I attempted some steps in this KB to see if it helped; it did not resolve this issue. I can reproduce the Finder crash. Server: macOS High Sierra 10.13.2 with Fusion Drive and HFS+ Filesystem Standard macOS SMB file sharing Client System: macOS High Sierra 10.13.2 User has full file permissions via an ACL permissions group except „change permissions“ and „change owner“.

It happens when I move a file (drag'n drop) from one folder (same level) to another on the network drive. Finder can only be forced to quit and doesn't restart afterwards. System can only be shut down via holding the power button. Having what sounds like the same problem in at least one of our branches. Nobody here has reported it, but then, not everyone is on 10.13.x. FWIW, 10.13.1 will lock up the Finder the same way if we push it hard enough (typically, this doesn't happen on the first(or even the second or third necessarily) operation (drag and drops), but it will happen.

Not sure about 10.12.x as we haven't pushed it hard enough to see if we can lock up the Finder. Hope to hear something good from Apple Enterprise via Thijs. FWIW, we've disabled SMBv1 on all our Windows servers due to vulnerabilities in the protocol. This just started happening to us Wednesday. Finder crashes, if you try to Relaunch it just hangs. If you go to another app and get the Menu Bar back and Shut Down it doesn't shut down all the way. Hard shutdown required.

It's also preventing me from connecting to the Win 2012 server via our Sophos VPN. I have a Macbook sitting next to me running Sierra and it works fine. At least via the VPN using CIFS doesn't change anything, neither does changing SMB packet signing settings https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT205926.

Thijs, This is great - I wish that Apple had suggested this work around to me. I figured there was a way to disable SMB3 but couldn't find it. The docs I found on nsmb.conf on the Apple Developer site did not mention the protocolversmap feature.

I've had to support and troubleshoot a number of issues with CIFS and software that is establishing/maintaining it's own connection. So far this morning this one seems to resolutely resolve all issues until Apple has a patch for its broken SMB3 implementation with 10.13.2. Apologies in advance. I am a single MAC running in a windows environment and I am experiencing the Finder lock up with shares on the server described here. It is very much limiting my ability to work efficiently. Plus having to hard reboot is playing havoc with my attached USB Time Machine backup drive. Already had to erase it twice and I am having to disconnect it after a manual backup to maintain its integrity.

When I try to execute the code to limit SMB communications to SMB2 I get access denied. I have tried adding SUDO to each line but that doesn't work. I went to Apple support and tried to do it per this article but again access denied. Can someone here tell me how to execute the commands properly and how I can check that they were done. I assume that the /etc/nsmb.conf is a hidden file in a hidden folder under /system/library/ but that is just an assumption on my part. I do have Admin rights for my user.

For Mac High Sierra Full Last Version Attach Files To Evernote Ukulele Songs

Do I need to enable and log in as the root user (having read that this is potentially a dangerous thing to do). I know that I know enough to be dangerous but not enough to keep me out of trouble. Thanks in advance. So the 'protocolversmap=2' solution seems to work 50/50, the half that it doesn't work for receives an Access Denied when trying to authenticate against the server (Win 2012r2). In the server log I find the following message: 'SMB Session Authentication Failure Client Name: x.x.x.x Client Address: x.x.x.x:49219 User Name: DOMAIN user Session ID: 0x Status: The remote user session has been deleted. (0xC0000203) Guidance: You should expect this error when attempting to connect to shares using incorrect credentials.

This error does not always indicate a problem with authorization, but mainly authentication. It is more common with non-Windows clients. This error can occur when using incorrect usernames and passwords with NTLM, mismatched LmCompatibility settings between client and server, duplicate Kerberos service principal names, incorrect Kerberos ticket-granting service tickets, or Guest accounts without Guest access enabled' Any ideas? & Thank you, sorry for having to ask again: I pasted the code!/bin/sh echo 'default' /etc/nsmb.conf echo 'protocolversmap=2' /etc/nsmb.conf exit 0 in the terminal and this is what I get: Last login: Mon Jan 15 15:47:46 on console MacBook-Pro2: manu$!/bin/sh -bash:!/bin/sh: event not found MacBook-Pro2: manu$ MacBook-Pro2: manu$ echo 'default' /etc/nsmb.conf -bash: /etc/nsmb.conf: Permission denied MacBook-Pro2: manu$ echo 'protocolversmap=2' /etc/nsmb.conf -bash: /etc/nsmb.conf: Permission denied MacBook-Pro2: manu$ MacBook-Pro2: manu$ exit 0 No file has been created. Seems like I have no permission even though I have admin rights. It seems that I'm experiencing the same problem but 10.13.3 did not fix the problem for me. However, I also have about 10 machines that are on Mavericks or prior!

Only 2 clients are on 10.13.3 along with the server (also running the latest Server app). This problem definitely started when I upgraded the server to 10.13 in anticipation to accommodate the new machines that I'm installing tomorrow.

I also forced everyone to use SMB instead of AFP because I thought AFP was going away. Tomorrow, I'll install the new machines and everyone will be on 10.13.3 and everyone will be using AFP again. After reading this thread, I feel confident that this will fix this issue. But on a side note.

If Apple is going to be deprecating AFP, they really should have a smoother road map towards SMB. Unfortunately on one client 10.13.3 seemed to make things worse, if anything. Now she'll get errors like this attempting to connect to shares.sometimes. This is on a mac bound to AD, with the user logging onto the system with her AD credentials. Sometimes it's thrown while connecting to her network home, sometimes it it happens while connecting to our shared workgroups fileshare. Stangely we have another fileshare on the same server as the workgroups and she CAN connect to it. We're using DFS to connect, but the same error gets through trying to connect to the underlying server share.

Her permissions are correct, and because it's intermittent I'm fairly certain it's her machine. I've tried removing nsmb.conf and resetting it to what worked in 10.13.2 but no dice. I get the same error on her machine as myself or a test user, and that same test user has no issues logging on to my test machine.

Looking through a packet capture of an attempted connection I keep seeing Kerberos errors like this (from wireshark): 1179 10.128.206.125 10.128.211.158 KRB5 173 KRB Error: KRB5KRBERRRESPONSETOOBIG 10.128.211.158 is the end user's machine, the source is one of our domain controllers. Even tried removing it from our domain and setting her account as local. Looks for all the world like a bug, but I can't reproduce it; this is not a weirdly configured system, either, and it was just recently rebuilt from scratch.