5 ms·

And Apple could transition even easier now thanks to it controlling most Mac apps through the Mac Store. All Apple needs to do is announce they're going to enfo

by mtgx 10y ago

And Apple could transition even easier now thanks to it controlling most Mac apps through the Mac Store. All Apple needs to do is announce they're going to enforce ARM support in the Mac Store a year or two before doing it, and that's it. Also, isn't Apple already encouraging the use of some intermediary bitcode for iOS (and macOS?) apps? Wouldn't that already made apps architecture-agnostic?

RossBencina 10y ago
> thanks to it controlling most Mac apps through the Mac Store Serious question: Do you have any evidence to support that claim? I could well be in the minority, but I don't publish through the Mac app store and I don't know anyone else who publishes exclusively through the Mac app store (except Apple).
- izacus 10y ago
  Well you'll have to if Apple decides that ARM MacBooks will only be able to install apps from the Mac app store - they already have a precedent in iOS and precedent of pushing developers to do things their way.
  - rarepostinlurkr 10y ago
    iOS had a very different history with developers. The desktop isn't the mobile space. Desktop developers have their own solutions in place and have for a long time. You'd be forcing them to give up a ton, in exchange for nothing of value. I'd expect many would just stop developing applications at all instead of comply with store requirements as they stand right now. That's not to say those problems couldn't be resolved in the future.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      All nice and good, and where would those developers go, considering that both Google and Microsoft are following similar sandbox approaches? Those developers can choose between stay in business or go broke, because I doubt GNU/Linux or *BSD users would pay for desktop software as their current Mac OS X customers.
madeofpalk 10y ago
> controlling most Mac apps through the Mac Store You're not being serious are you? MAS holds such an insignificant role in Mac App development that any requirements it sets around the transition would weaken its cause. Also mo, bitcode would not be able to be used to facilitate an Intel to ARM transition - bitcode is still fairly processor-specific. Bitcode is more for being able to adapt to minor changes in instructions in the same arch
- Teever 10y ago
  Hypothetically, how do you think the market would respond if Apple said that apps could only be sold through the store?
  - rblatz 10y ago
    Considering that the only app I use on my mac from the AppStore is xCode, I'd say it would respond very negatively.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      If you use XCode you are already not the typical consumer.
      - madeofpalk 10y ago
        True, but last time I checked Xcode is one of the most popular apps in the Mac App Store. That says something
  - madeofpalk 10y ago
    With the restrictions it currently imposes (sandboxing), I think we would see a significant withdrawal from the Mac platform. Many developers would stop making apps (especially those that are for power users, which when turn more devs away from macs). I doubt Adobe Creative Suite (Photoshop) would be technically possible with sandboxing, so Adobe would withdraw from Mac. MS Office would probably be gone as well. Parallels and other virtualisation software would find it extreme difficult to run. Valve would have to pull Steam because you can be as sure as hell they aren't going to give Apple a 30% cut of Steam sales. There goes Skype as well. Without special deals with lots of developers, I doubt we would see many more apps on the App Store and instead we'll see the Mac be an unsuitable platform for many/most people. It would turn into a glorified Chromebook.
redial 10y ago
I don't think Adobe and Microsoft, the two biggest third party Mac developers, care what Apple imposes on the Mac App Store. And they certainly won't be too happy about having to rewrite, again, their applications (I think Office for Mac is not yet fully 64bits, but I could be wrong, haven't checked in a while.)
- arthurfm 10y ago
  > I don't think Adobe and Microsoft, the two biggest third party Mac developers, care what Apple imposes on the Mac App Store. Microsoft must care somewhat because they have spent a lot of time fully sandboxing Office 2016. Since OneNote is already available in the MAS [1], I reckon Microsoft will eventually add the remaining Office apps at some point in the future. > I think Office for Mac is not yet fully 64-bits Microsoft released the first 64-bit version of Office 2016 for Mac (15.25.0) last month [2] [3] [1] https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/microsoft-onenote/id784801555?mt=12 https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/microsoft-onenote/id78480155... [2] http://macadmins.software/ http://macadmins.software/ [3] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3179163 https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3179163
  - rarepostinlurkr 10y ago
    Now let's do all the other PaaS vendors. Steam, Battle.net, Origin, Adobe CC, SmithMicro... I'm sure I'm missing plenty more.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      Steam and Adobe, yes., but most Mac users could not care less for Battle.net, Origin, or SmithMicro. In fact, Battle.net, Origin, or SmithMicro would care more for Mac to do a rewrite than Apple would care to lose them. Besides, Apple changed to Intel and didn't give much of a care about MS or Adobe apps having to be rewritten.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      They would eventually need to do the same dance on Android, ChromeOS and Windows.

by mtgx 10y ago

RossBencina 10y ago

> thanks to it controlling most Mac apps through the Mac Store Serious question: Do you have any evidence to support that claim? I could well be in the minority, but I don't publish through the Mac app store and I don't know anyone else who publishes exclusively through the Mac app store (except Apple).

izacus 10y ago
Well you'll have to if Apple decides that ARM MacBooks will only be able to install apps from the Mac app store - they already have a precedent in iOS and precedent of pushing developers to do things their way.
- rarepostinlurkr 10y ago
  iOS had a very different history with developers. The desktop isn't the mobile space. Desktop developers have their own solutions in place and have for a long time. You'd be forcing them to give up a ton, in exchange for nothing of value. I'd expect many would just stop developing applications at all instead of comply with store requirements as they stand right now. That's not to say those problems couldn't be resolved in the future.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    All nice and good, and where would those developers go, considering that both Google and Microsoft are following similar sandbox approaches? Those developers can choose between stay in business or go broke, because I doubt GNU/Linux or *BSD users would pay for desktop software as their current Mac OS X customers.

madeofpalk 10y ago

> controlling most Mac apps through the Mac Store You're not being serious are you? MAS holds such an insignificant role in Mac App development that any requirements it sets around the transition would weaken its cause. Also mo, bitcode would not be able to be used to facilitate an Intel to ARM transition - bitcode is still fairly processor-specific. Bitcode is more for being able to adapt to minor changes in instructions in the same arch

Teever 10y ago
Hypothetically, how do you think the market would respond if Apple said that apps could only be sold through the store?
- rblatz 10y ago
  Considering that the only app I use on my mac from the AppStore is xCode, I'd say it would respond very negatively.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    If you use XCode you are already not the typical consumer.
    - madeofpalk 10y ago
      True, but last time I checked Xcode is one of the most popular apps in the Mac App Store. That says something
- madeofpalk 10y ago
  With the restrictions it currently imposes (sandboxing), I think we would see a significant withdrawal from the Mac platform. Many developers would stop making apps (especially those that are for power users, which when turn more devs away from macs). I doubt Adobe Creative Suite (Photoshop) would be technically possible with sandboxing, so Adobe would withdraw from Mac. MS Office would probably be gone as well. Parallels and other virtualisation software would find it extreme difficult to run. Valve would have to pull Steam because you can be as sure as hell they aren't going to give Apple a 30% cut of Steam sales. There goes Skype as well. Without special deals with lots of developers, I doubt we would see many more apps on the App Store and instead we'll see the Mac be an unsuitable platform for many/most people. It would turn into a glorified Chromebook.

redial 10y ago

I don't think Adobe and Microsoft, the two biggest third party Mac developers, care what Apple imposes on the Mac App Store. And they certainly won't be too happy about having to rewrite, again, their applications (I think Office for Mac is not yet fully 64bits, but I could be wrong, haven't checked in a while.)

arthurfm 10y ago
> I don't think Adobe and Microsoft, the two biggest third party Mac developers, care what Apple imposes on the Mac App Store. Microsoft must care somewhat because they have spent a lot of time fully sandboxing Office 2016. Since OneNote is already available in the MAS [1], I reckon Microsoft will eventually add the remaining Office apps at some point in the future. > I think Office for Mac is not yet fully 64-bits Microsoft released the first 64-bit version of Office 2016 for Mac (15.25.0) last month [2] [3] [1] https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/microsoft-onenote/id784801555?mt=12 https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/microsoft-onenote/id78480155... [2] http://macadmins.software/ http://macadmins.software/ [3] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3179163 https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3179163
- rarepostinlurkr 10y ago
  Now let's do all the other PaaS vendors. Steam, Battle.net, Origin, Adobe CC, SmithMicro... I'm sure I'm missing plenty more.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Steam and Adobe, yes., but most Mac users could not care less for Battle.net, Origin, or SmithMicro. In fact, Battle.net, Origin, or SmithMicro would care more for Mac to do a rewrite than Apple would care to lose them. Besides, Apple changed to Intel and didn't give much of a care about MS or Adobe apps having to be rewritten.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    They would eventually need to do the same dance on Android, ChromeOS and Windows.