5 ms·

> Apple does the very same thing. I understand that Apple does everything in its power to make the life of developers miserable (such as requiring a Mac to be

> Apple does the very same thing. I understand that Apple does everything in its power to make the life of developers miserable (such as requiring a Mac to be used for iOS development), but Mozilla were supposed to be the good guys on the web.

mkirklions 8y ago
Can we be friends? As a Dev, Apple has been my biggest obstacle for a mainstream app. I'm not sure if HN has lots of Apple fans, or Apple marketing patrols HN, but these comments are describing real problems but are constantly downvoted. EDIT: We have been found. These Apple accounts don't even respond to legitimate points.
- sctb 8y ago
  Please stop breaking the guidelines: > Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
zaarn 8y ago
I think you misunderstood there. Apple's primary aim by limiting the access to the store isn't to make devs miserable, it's to have users trust the app store. Mozilla's aim is (likely) the same. If a user finds an addon in Mozilla's addon store, then Mozilla wants the user to fully trust that this addon will not violate their privacy in unexpected ways or install malware on their computer or otherwise interfere with them. Similarly, Apple spends a lot of money on making sure the PR image of the app store is clean. People should be able to fully trust Apple's app store, in Apple's opinion. That doesn't mean there won't be addons you don't like, it just means that malicious behavior is not allowed. If the user doesn't like it they can remove it without consequence.
- mkirklions 8y ago
  >Apple's primary aim by limiting the access to the store isn't to make devs miserable, it's to have users trust the app store. What about when they force devs to buy their multi-thousand dollar ecosystem? That has nothing to do with quality apps. Also, by excluding the poor from developing for iOS, they are widening income inequality.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    That's an entirely separate decision from deciding to control what goes into the shop and by that not really part of the discussion, isn't it? And Apple asking for a fee to allow uploading apps is also a separate issue, after all, Mozilla is doing it without a fee by using volunteers to screen apps. Both points are true and a problem but it's distracting from what this is about, no?
    - mkirklions 8y ago
      These arent separate, situations do not exist in a bubble. These are Apple taking aggressive measures toward developers. Squeezing them and potentially blocking them from perfectly legitimate apps.
      - zaarn 8y ago
        They don't exist in a bubble, correct, they are however separate, but again, this is not what this is about. It still means you can separate the good ideas that apple has from the bad ideas. Not everything Apple does is inherently bad or evil because they do some evil or bad things, no? And this is simply extracting the good part of apple's store policy; patrolling and checking apps so that users can trust what is in the store.
  - Doctor_Fegg 8y ago
    I develop for iOS on a secondhand Mac mini and commodity keyboard, mouse and monitor. Total cost well under £600, let alone “multi-thousands of dollars”.
bigpicture 8y ago
> I understand that Apple does everything in its power to make the life of developers miserable All XCode projects are automatically code signed on every build. If you have a developer membership with Apple, it uses a certificate issued by Apple. If not, it's just a locally-generated certificate. If you use make or call Clang directly, obviously there is no signing process, but there is a command-line tool that you can use and integrate into your non-Xcode build process just fine.
- funklebunkle 8y ago
  How do I run XCode on Linux? Or do I have to spend $2k on a machine that will only be used to run a single build? Speaking of, how do I integrate that mess with my automated build systems? Also, how can I get it to sign stuff without forking over $100 every year?

mkirklions 8y ago

Can we be friends? As a Dev, Apple has been my biggest obstacle for a mainstream app. I'm not sure if HN has lots of Apple fans, or Apple marketing patrols HN, but these comments are describing real problems but are constantly downvoted. EDIT: We have been found. These Apple accounts don't even respond to legitimate points.

sctb 8y ago
Please stop breaking the guidelines: > Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

zaarn 8y ago

I think you misunderstood there. Apple's primary aim by limiting the access to the store isn't to make devs miserable, it's to have users trust the app store. Mozilla's aim is (likely) the same. If a user finds an addon in Mozilla's addon store, then Mozilla wants the user to fully trust that this addon will not violate their privacy in unexpected ways or install malware on their computer or otherwise interfere with them. Similarly, Apple spends a lot of money on making sure the PR image of the app store is clean. People should be able to fully trust Apple's app store, in Apple's opinion. That doesn't mean there won't be addons you don't like, it just means that malicious behavior is not allowed. If the user doesn't like it they can remove it without consequence.

mkirklions 8y ago
>Apple's primary aim by limiting the access to the store isn't to make devs miserable, it's to have users trust the app store. What about when they force devs to buy their multi-thousand dollar ecosystem? That has nothing to do with quality apps. Also, by excluding the poor from developing for iOS, they are widening income inequality.
- zaarn 8y ago
  That's an entirely separate decision from deciding to control what goes into the shop and by that not really part of the discussion, isn't it? And Apple asking for a fee to allow uploading apps is also a separate issue, after all, Mozilla is doing it without a fee by using volunteers to screen apps. Both points are true and a problem but it's distracting from what this is about, no?
  - mkirklions 8y ago
    These arent separate, situations do not exist in a bubble. These are Apple taking aggressive measures toward developers. Squeezing them and potentially blocking them from perfectly legitimate apps.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      They don't exist in a bubble, correct, they are however separate, but again, this is not what this is about. It still means you can separate the good ideas that apple has from the bad ideas. Not everything Apple does is inherently bad or evil because they do some evil or bad things, no? And this is simply extracting the good part of apple's store policy; patrolling and checking apps so that users can trust what is in the store.
- Doctor_Fegg 8y ago
  I develop for iOS on a secondhand Mac mini and commodity keyboard, mouse and monitor. Total cost well under £600, let alone “multi-thousands of dollars”.

bigpicture 8y ago

> I understand that Apple does everything in its power to make the life of developers miserable All XCode projects are automatically code signed on every build. If you have a developer membership with Apple, it uses a certificate issued by Apple. If not, it's just a locally-generated certificate. If you use make or call Clang directly, obviously there is no signing process, but there is a command-line tool that you can use and integrate into your non-Xcode build process just fine.

funklebunkle 8y ago
How do I run XCode on Linux? Or do I have to spend $2k on a machine that will only be used to run a single build? Speaking of, how do I integrate that mess with my automated build systems? Also, how can I get it to sign stuff without forking over $100 every year?