23 ms·

>Maybe Apple intends to change that some day, but that's speculation, not reality. I'd say it's pretty obvious that this is a desired outcome on Apple's part.

by nothis 7y ago

>Maybe Apple intends to change that some day, but that's speculation, not reality. I'd say it's pretty obvious that this is a desired outcome on Apple's part. You can either wait until it's too late or bring it up before it's happening.

scarface74 7y ago
So if it is the “desired outcome” why is it taking them over a decade? The Mac App Store was introduced in 10.6 - 7 releases ago.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  I obviously agree with you, but tiny nitpick—the App Store was not introduced in 10.6, it was added in a 10.6 point release. So your "7 releases ago" statement isn't quite accurate, although it depends on how you count.
nerdjon 7y ago
I don't think they ever will do that with Mac, and will be a key reason the platforms remain separate. They have to realize how popular Mac is for developers, going down this path would completely remove that market for them.
throwawaycert 7y ago
The scenario you propose would eliminate the ability to develop apps for iOS. Are you suggesting Apple is actively trying to kill the iOS app store?
- Crinus 7y ago
  Why would eliminate the ability to develop apps for the iOS? You could be able to download a development environment "app" from the Mac App Store just like now. You'd be a bit more confined inside the environment itself, but there is nothing that would prevent developing applications with Apple's own tools while disallowing installing anything outside of MAS.
  - throwawaycert 7y ago
    Any ability to execute arbitrary code is the ability to bypass the MAS. What's more, it's nice and efficient - iOS apps in development are compiled right to x86 machine code for the "simulator" that is little more than a thin VM. 100% of the projections I've seen about MacOS becoming a walled garden have been from people that don't actually have any real familiarity with Apple's ecosystem as developers.
    - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
      There are all sorts of restrictions Apple could place on software compiled "unofficially" with Xcode. For example, they could automatically sign it with testing certs that automatically expire after 7 days. macOS is a more open platform because Apple has decided to leave it that way, not because the property is literally essential for development.
      - throwawaycert 7y ago
        They already require periodic resigning of self-signed side-loaded apps on iOS, it doesn't stop even relatively casual users. (That's actually the funniest part about all this, now that I think about it. While everyone is wailing and gnashing their teeth about some speculative possibility that macOS ends up locked down like iOS, Apple has been making iOS more open.)
        Wowfunhappy 7y ago
        > it doesn't stop even relatively casual users. Huh? Is there a significant number of power users who are resigning their apps every seven days? I find this somewhat hard to believe, given just how annoying it is, combined with the three-app limit.
        throwawaycert 7y ago
        I didn't even know there was a three app limit on it. Most people don't use very many apps. But yes, quite a lot of us routinely sideload apps on non-jailbroken iOS devices.
Wowfunhappy 7y ago
Based on what? Have Apple executives said anything on the matter? Even vague warnings? You're relying on your own interpretations of their intentions. Over the years, Mac's defaults have changed to protect inexperienced users via restrictions like Gatekeeper and SIP. Apple has never attempted to make any of these systems mandatory. All it takes is a few terminal commands to gain complete kernel-level access to my system.
- Crinus 7y ago
  > Have Apple executives said anything on the matter? Even vague warnings? Because companies never lie or say that "we're not going to do XYZ" until next week/month/year where they go "XYZ is the new awesome". Expecting companies to be honest is like placing a cat near a canary and expecting them to be BFFs, especially when the topic is something that people have negative concerns about. It is MUCH better to be explicit and loud about what you do not want to see before it happens, than try to reverse a situation after it has already happened. You lose nothing by doing the former, even if there were never plans to do what you fear might happen.
  - edmundsauto 7y ago
    I tend to look at things from the lens of social capital. If I'm always yelling about something, it desensitizes them when something bad actually happens. The "boy who cried wolf" is the downside, and being explicit and loud about something that hasn't even happened and (to most people's eyes) isn't in the works... It marginalizes you. A lot.
jmull 7y ago
> I'd say it's pretty obvious that this is a desired outcome on Apple's part. I don’t see that. Why do you think it will happen?

by nothis 7y ago

scarface74 7y ago

So if it is the “desired outcome” why is it taking them over a decade? The Mac App Store was introduced in 10.6 - 7 releases ago.

Wowfunhappy 7y ago
I obviously agree with you, but tiny nitpick—the App Store was not introduced in 10.6, it was added in a 10.6 point release. So your "7 releases ago" statement isn't quite accurate, although it depends on how you count.

nerdjon 7y ago

I don't think they ever will do that with Mac, and will be a key reason the platforms remain separate. They have to realize how popular Mac is for developers, going down this path would completely remove that market for them.

throwawaycert 7y ago

The scenario you propose would eliminate the ability to develop apps for iOS. Are you suggesting Apple is actively trying to kill the iOS app store?

Crinus 7y ago
Why would eliminate the ability to develop apps for the iOS? You could be able to download a development environment "app" from the Mac App Store just like now. You'd be a bit more confined inside the environment itself, but there is nothing that would prevent developing applications with Apple's own tools while disallowing installing anything outside of MAS.
- throwawaycert 7y ago
  Any ability to execute arbitrary code is the ability to bypass the MAS. What's more, it's nice and efficient - iOS apps in development are compiled right to x86 machine code for the "simulator" that is little more than a thin VM. 100% of the projections I've seen about MacOS becoming a walled garden have been from people that don't actually have any real familiarity with Apple's ecosystem as developers.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    There are all sorts of restrictions Apple could place on software compiled "unofficially" with Xcode. For example, they could automatically sign it with testing certs that automatically expire after 7 days. macOS is a more open platform because Apple has decided to leave it that way, not because the property is literally essential for development.
    - throwawaycert 7y ago
      They already require periodic resigning of self-signed side-loaded apps on iOS, it doesn't stop even relatively casual users. (That's actually the funniest part about all this, now that I think about it. While everyone is wailing and gnashing their teeth about some speculative possibility that macOS ends up locked down like iOS, Apple has been making iOS more open.)
      - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
        > it doesn't stop even relatively casual users. Huh? Is there a significant number of power users who are resigning their apps every seven days? I find this somewhat hard to believe, given just how annoying it is, combined with the three-app limit.
        throwawaycert 7y ago
        I didn't even know there was a three app limit on it. Most people don't use very many apps. But yes, quite a lot of us routinely sideload apps on non-jailbroken iOS devices.

Wowfunhappy 7y ago

Based on what? Have Apple executives said anything on the matter? Even vague warnings? You're relying on your own interpretations of their intentions. Over the years, Mac's defaults have changed to protect inexperienced users via restrictions like Gatekeeper and SIP. Apple has never attempted to make any of these systems mandatory. All it takes is a few terminal commands to gain complete kernel-level access to my system.

Crinus 7y ago
> Have Apple executives said anything on the matter? Even vague warnings? Because companies never lie or say that "we're not going to do XYZ" until next week/month/year where they go "XYZ is the new awesome". Expecting companies to be honest is like placing a cat near a canary and expecting them to be BFFs, especially when the topic is something that people have negative concerns about. It is MUCH better to be explicit and loud about what you do not want to see before it happens, than try to reverse a situation after it has already happened. You lose nothing by doing the former, even if there were never plans to do what you fear might happen.
- edmundsauto 7y ago
  I tend to look at things from the lens of social capital. If I'm always yelling about something, it desensitizes them when something bad actually happens. The "boy who cried wolf" is the downside, and being explicit and loud about something that hasn't even happened and (to most people's eyes) isn't in the works... It marginalizes you. A lot.

jmull 7y ago

> I'd say it's pretty obvious that this is a desired outcome on Apple's part. I don’t see that. Why do you think it will happen?