4 ms·

> Update: Apple contacted me and told me they found evidence of App Store review manipulation. This is something I’ve never done. > Apple’s decision is final a

> Update: Apple contacted me and told me they found evidence of App Store review manipulation. This is something I’ve never done. > Apple’s decision is final and can’t be appealed. Enjoying the walled garden. This is why I always suggest to buy apps outside the store, directly from the developers' website.

citruspi 10y ago
> This is why I always suggest to buy apps outside the store, directly from the developers' website. This is something that I used to recommend as well, but then I ran into a licensing issue with an app. I'd purchased a license directly from the developer's website but due to either a bug in the application or a bug in the licensing server, activating the license would fail. I ended up re-purchasing it from the Mac App Store. I'm completely for putting money directly in developers' pockets and avoiding walled gardens, but what happens when the app requires activation against some licensing server and the company goes out of business? It's even worse when the company is a one man shop - if that one person decides to accept a full time job elsewhere, gets tired of supporting the software, or just gets hit by a bus... I have more faith in Apple supporting app store purchases long term than I do in indie developers supporting their licensing mechanisms, especially when they decide to discontinue support for an app or when they go out of business.
- ghostly_s 10y ago
  If the app was on the App Store, it would cease to be procurable entirely whenever your hypothetical developer missed their Developer Program payment, so I'm not sure I follow this reasoning.
  - citruspi 10y ago
    That's a good point, I haven't published anything on the App Store in a while and I'd forgotten that failing to renew the Developer Programme results in the app being pulled from the App Store. I'm not sure why, but I figured that the app would still be available for download by existing users from the "Purchased" tab. In that case, I suppose I'd have to recommend purchasing directly from developers, with the caveat that I have more faith in the licensing mechanisms for apps that are _actively_ supported and purchased from the Mac App Store than for apps that are _actively_ maintained and purchased directly from the developer. Either way, I've only had one or two issues with third party licensing mechanisms, so I suppose it isn't a big issue at the end of the day. Only other reason I'd recommend purchases from the Mac App Store for users that aren't technically inclined would be features like required sandboxing.
- salzig 10y ago
  I think the long term support for apps where the developer got hit by a bus/truck/whatever is to remove the app from the store.
danieldk 10y ago
This is why I always suggest to buy apps outside the store, directly from the developers' website. With trojaned downloads from hacked download sites becoming more commonplace (see e.g. Transmission) I started suggesting the opposite. I trust the Mac App store far more than the download site of some random software vendor who may have little experience with server maintenance. Moreover, App Store apps are required to be sandboxed. So, even if malicious software ends up in the App store, the damage is limited. (Of course, I agree that the removal of Dash totally sucks and Apple should rectify this ASAP.)
- vlozko 10y ago
  Most people want to point their finger at Apple here for being the bad guy but the reality is is that we're getting a one-sided view here and we're already getting out our pitchforks. Maybe, just maybe, the developer in question here did what Apple is accusing them of doing and isn't being completely forthcoming and honest about it.
  - LyndsySimon 10y ago
    I'm not saying they didn't, but I really don't see what they would have to gain by doing so.
  - Veen 10y ago
    Seems unlikely. It's a very popular app with a focused niche. Gaming the system doesn't really get the developer anything. He might have, but it would have been foolish of him — lots to lose and not much to gain.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

citruspi 10y ago

> This is why I always suggest to buy apps outside the store, directly from the developers' website. This is something that I used to recommend as well, but then I ran into a licensing issue with an app. I'd purchased a license directly from the developer's website but due to either a bug in the application or a bug in the licensing server, activating the license would fail. I ended up re-purchasing it from the Mac App Store. I'm completely for putting money directly in developers' pockets and avoiding walled gardens, but what happens when the app requires activation against some licensing server and the company goes out of business? It's even worse when the company is a one man shop - if that one person decides to accept a full time job elsewhere, gets tired of supporting the software, or just gets hit by a bus... I have more faith in Apple supporting app store purchases long term than I do in indie developers supporting their licensing mechanisms, especially when they decide to discontinue support for an app or when they go out of business.

ghostly_s 10y ago
If the app was on the App Store, it would cease to be procurable entirely whenever your hypothetical developer missed their Developer Program payment, so I'm not sure I follow this reasoning.
- citruspi 10y ago
  That's a good point, I haven't published anything on the App Store in a while and I'd forgotten that failing to renew the Developer Programme results in the app being pulled from the App Store. I'm not sure why, but I figured that the app would still be available for download by existing users from the "Purchased" tab. In that case, I suppose I'd have to recommend purchasing directly from developers, with the caveat that I have more faith in the licensing mechanisms for apps that are _actively_ supported and purchased from the Mac App Store than for apps that are _actively_ maintained and purchased directly from the developer. Either way, I've only had one or two issues with third party licensing mechanisms, so I suppose it isn't a big issue at the end of the day. Only other reason I'd recommend purchases from the Mac App Store for users that aren't technically inclined would be features like required sandboxing.
salzig 10y ago
I think the long term support for apps where the developer got hit by a bus/truck/whatever is to remove the app from the store.

danieldk 10y ago

This is why I always suggest to buy apps outside the store, directly from the developers' website. With trojaned downloads from hacked download sites becoming more commonplace (see e.g. Transmission) I started suggesting the opposite. I trust the Mac App store far more than the download site of some random software vendor who may have little experience with server maintenance. Moreover, App Store apps are required to be sandboxed. So, even if malicious software ends up in the App store, the damage is limited. (Of course, I agree that the removal of Dash totally sucks and Apple should rectify this ASAP.)

vlozko 10y ago
Most people want to point their finger at Apple here for being the bad guy but the reality is is that we're getting a one-sided view here and we're already getting out our pitchforks. Maybe, just maybe, the developer in question here did what Apple is accusing them of doing and isn't being completely forthcoming and honest about it.
- LyndsySimon 10y ago
  I'm not saying they didn't, but I really don't see what they would have to gain by doing so.
- Veen 10y ago
  Seems unlikely. It's a very popular app with a focused niche. Gaming the system doesn't really get the developer anything. He might have, but it would have been foolish of him — lots to lose and not much to gain.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]