4 ms·
For security and ease of use' sake it really is useful to provide a standardized interface for deploying applications through Apple's own update channels. I don
by sprout 16y ago
For security and ease of use' sake it really is useful to provide a standardized interface for deploying applications through Apple's own update channels. I don't see why Apple can't manage feature parity with most of the major Linux distributions. Something like universe in Ubuntu would greatly benefit OS X users.
That is very different from asking Apple to promote apps - just host them, police malicious apps, and take a small cut of profits for the service. Admittedly, that's a bit different from a package manager, but it's clear, consistent, and really the best option for Mac UX.
- tptacek 16y agoAnybody can build this function on OS X, not just Apple. If it's that valuable, make it and get people to sign up. Reasonable people can argue about the downsides of the iOS app stores, but I don't see how reasonable people could think that Apple should give an inch on it's Apple-branded OS X app store. The platform already has extremely good unrestricted third party development support.
- sprout 16y agoWhen it comes to security, people should not re-invent the wheel. An integrated installation and update method makes a lot of sense, and Apple negatively impacts the security of their ecosystem by using criteria beyond malicious intent to bar third-party vendors from the integrated system. They also reduce the quality of third-party software, as even blessed software developers will still have to put time into planning for pushing their own updates should they fail to win Apple's blessing.