3 ms·

> I don’t see how it’s Apple’s strategy to pull mobile use cases back to the Mac - that seems to be something you are inferring but I don’t see anything that de

> I don’t see how it’s Apple’s strategy to pull mobile use cases back to the Mac - that seems to be something you are inferring but I don’t see anything that demonstrates it. SwiftUI and Catalyst, Apple's biggest developer technology pushes since Swift, both are explicitly for this purpose. Not to mention Apple themselves porting a bunch of their own apps from iOS to Mac, and then all the previous technologies that have gone from iOS to Mac. And Apple Arcade being mainly about mobile games on the Mac. > However the security strategy Apple is adopting seems to me to be nothing to do with mobile, and everything to do with a globally connected world where personal data is valuable and subject to attack. The apps that people use Macs for listed here like Adobe CS, Sketch, Ableton, etc... don't harvest data the same way mobile apps do. That's not their business model. The security model is about mobile apps like Facebook/Instagram/WhatsApp, etc... whose business model is about harvesting data. But nobody runs apps like that on desktop, therefore the security model is less relevant for the platform. And again, the reason Apple is pushing it is because they are just blanket applying their mobile app strategy to the desktop even though it doesn't make sense there. > I also note that you are increasing the conflation of ‘major creative apps’ with ‘Tools for thought’. Yes, I'm explicitly talking about the major creative apps in this conversation. If you're talking about apps like MindNode, then I agree that an app like that is being served pretty well by Apple's technology stack today, but then there's not much to talk about there :) The point about "processing power, storage, input method, and screen size" is a valid counter hypothesis, personally I disagree, and I think the evidence points to the security model having a devastating impact on these types of apps by how sandboxing impacted the creative app market on macOS. But I can certainly understand a different perspective here.

zepto 7y ago
The security model isn’t just about data harvesting, although it does attempt to contain that. It is also about prevention of malware and exploits. Apple can’t control the attack surface of of 3rd party apps, but it can contain the damage caused if they are exploited. Those major creative apps are gigantic attack surfaces. Beyond plugins - what is this ‘devastating impact’ sandboxing has had?
- robenkleene 7y ago
  Agreed on all your points about the security model. None of these things are black and white, it's more like each platform is a recipe and right now Apple is adding way too much salt to macOS. The devastating impact isn't the plugins themselves, it's that no major creative apps are sandboxed in the Mac App Store, and the apps did invest in Apple technology stack are struggling for relevance. The devastating impact is in the lack of apps, and the problems the current apps are running into. I expect you're response will be: These apps are declining for other reasons, but I disagree and see a simple pattern: Apple had a strategy of supporting creating apps from 2000-2010 and creative apps thrived on their platforms, their policy was to work against creative apps from 2010-2020, and those apps stopped thriving. Simple cause and effect.
  - zepto 7y ago
    Hmm - this seems like circular reasoning. I don’t see Apple working against creative apps at all. I see them as securing the platform in a way that is vital to the future. The makers of these creative apps simply don’t care about security and have chosen not to invest in it. The makers of creative apps are therefore working against users over time.

zepto 7y ago

The security model isn’t just about data harvesting, although it does attempt to contain that. It is also about prevention of malware and exploits. Apple can’t control the attack surface of of 3rd party apps, but it can contain the damage caused if they are exploited. Those major creative apps are gigantic attack surfaces. Beyond plugins - what is this ‘devastating impact’ sandboxing has had?

robenkleene 7y ago
Agreed on all your points about the security model. None of these things are black and white, it's more like each platform is a recipe and right now Apple is adding way too much salt to macOS. The devastating impact isn't the plugins themselves, it's that no major creative apps are sandboxed in the Mac App Store, and the apps did invest in Apple technology stack are struggling for relevance. The devastating impact is in the lack of apps, and the problems the current apps are running into. I expect you're response will be: These apps are declining for other reasons, but I disagree and see a simple pattern: Apple had a strategy of supporting creating apps from 2000-2010 and creative apps thrived on their platforms, their policy was to work against creative apps from 2010-2020, and those apps stopped thriving. Simple cause and effect.
- zepto 7y ago
  Hmm - this seems like circular reasoning. I don’t see Apple working against creative apps at all. I see them as securing the platform in a way that is vital to the future. The makers of these creative apps simply don’t care about security and have chosen not to invest in it. The makers of creative apps are therefore working against users over time.