5 ms·

Apple is also working against itself in that department. As far as I know a webapp does not need to be approved by Apple to go live.

by Hamcha 6y ago

klelatti 6y ago
I think you're confusing the Mac with iOS. Native Mac apps don't have to be approved by Apple unless they are on the Mac App Store.
- izacus 6y ago
  Apple has made publishing apps without their approval significantly harder during last couple of years. With pretty much mandatory notarization there were several app developers who just stopped developing macOS software due to increasing amount of restrictions and process involved.
  - klelatti 6y ago
    Very fair comment. I guess that most developers don't see it as a huge issue though (I've not seen any issues with Apps that I use on Catalina). Direction of travel is towards more onerous Apple involvement.
    - 05 6y ago
      To the contrary, most apps I have to install from outside the App Store now aren’t signed and need the workaround (right click, Open, OK the scary dialog, open again) to run.
      - zepto 6y ago
        Are you really ‘scared’ by the dialog?
      - klelatti 6y ago
        Agreed but I think it's stretching it a bit call it a 'workaround' when it essentially tells you what to do :)
      - fedorareis 6y ago
        You make this sound like a new problem. You have had to do that for unsigned apps for years and at least in my experience the majority of apps that come from outside the App Store are unsigned. This has been a thing for so long that I almost instinctively right click, Open the first time I run an app I downloaded from the internet
- reportingsjr 6y ago
  It looks like Apple is pushing towards having a single app store, see the news about the new macs being able to run iOS apps. I can definitely see them eventually moving to only allowing apps from the iOS store installed on macs, the same as how ipads and iphone are now.
  - varispeed 6y ago
    I wonder if the next step after that will be Apple dictating what new apps are desirable in the app store and then a bit further Apple making apps themselves and only outsourcing the support or signing franchise deals. Once the hardware could only be repaired by Apple, they could move completely into a subscription model where you could subscribe to e.g. Office or Streamer package that would include a laptop for two years and a predefined set of applications.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Why would anyone subscribe to that?
      - varispeed 6y ago
        You will find that many people would pay for having their worry about choosing the right laptop and software completely removed. They also won't have to worry about repairs etc. as long as any damage would be accidental or from a manufacturing fault.
        zepto 6y ago
        That’s already why people buy apple and AppleCare. What you are describing is taking this even further in the direction of an information appliance. I am unconvinced that there is any benefit that your model provides that Apple does not already. You can already just buy a Mac with AppleCare and install MS office from the App Store. People may want their choices to be simplified, but they are also going to need to be able to use whatever important new thing comes along. E.g. Zoom or Slack.
- whywhywhywhy 6y ago
  Do you not think we're moving towards a future where both platforms converge into just iOS? Think we can't ignore that the iOS install base has been larger than the MacOS install base. Start looking at it that way and the iOS way of doing things is the norm in the eyes of Apple and MacOS is the odd one out.
  - jamil7 6y ago
    > Do you not think we're moving towards a future where both platforms converge into just iOS? Could be, but as far as the new cross platform frameworks are shaping up right now it looks like their strategy is slightly different. Apple is seemingly creating a developer ecosystem to loosley describe interfaces and share them between platforms while they ultimately decide how your UI is rendered. Maybe you're right and one day that means flicking a switch and everything is unified. I also look at something like iPadOS for instance which started as extremely similar to iOS and has now diverged and become it's own thing, different to both the Mac and iPhone.
  - m463 6y ago
    "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." There should be limits on this. It's sad to be the baby outside the window, drenched in bathwater.
    - Ericson2314 6y ago
      I think the bathwater is the least of the defenestrated baby's problems. :)
zepto 6y ago
The assumption that Apple wants to approve all apps is wrong. Apple sees App Store apps, and web apps as having different advantages, and it is in their interest to have the best platform for both. It’s not just me saying this, they keep saying it too, and proving it by investing in making web apps run better.
- oarsinsync 6y ago
  > Apple sees App Store apps, and web apps as having different advantages, and it is in their interest to have the best platform for both. It’s not just me saying this, they keep saying it too, and proving it by investing in making web apps run better. The method to pin a webapp to the home screen is substantially worse than it used to be. There was a period where javascript running in Safari ran significantly faster than javascript running in a webapp opened from the home screen, or in any other app opening a web view. Is that still the case, or did they decide to share that function?
  - pvg 6y ago
    It hasn't been the case for years.
- mikenew 6y ago
  And yet they've completely nerfed PWAs on iOS. So they can say what they like; I don't believe it.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Not everything they do will fit your view of how they should support the web. Believe whatever you like. But this means you are also choosing to ignore absolutely enormous investments at every level of the stack that they have made to increase web performance, adopt standards and improve web user experience.
    - rictic 6y ago
      It's hard to square the claim that they've made enormous investments when you compare feature support against budget. Apple's operating budget is 200x Mozilla's ($85B vs $0.45B), and yet Safari lags significantly behind Firefox in features (and for some the use cases, in performance as well). Disclosure: I work at Google on JS libraries, and at one point was in the Chrome org, but my opinions are my own.

Apple is also working against itself in that department. As far as I know a webapp does not need to be approved by Apple to go live.

by Hamcha 6y ago

Apple is also working against itself in that department. As far as I know a webapp does not need to be approved by Apple to go live.

klelatti 6y ago

I think you're confusing the Mac with iOS. Native Mac apps don't have to be approved by Apple unless they are on the Mac App Store.

izacus 6y ago
Apple has made publishing apps without their approval significantly harder during last couple of years. With pretty much mandatory notarization there were several app developers who just stopped developing macOS software due to increasing amount of restrictions and process involved.
- klelatti 6y ago
  Very fair comment. I guess that most developers don't see it as a huge issue though (I've not seen any issues with Apps that I use on Catalina). Direction of travel is towards more onerous Apple involvement.
  - 05 6y ago
    To the contrary, most apps I have to install from outside the App Store now aren’t signed and need the workaround (right click, Open, OK the scary dialog, open again) to run.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Are you really ‘scared’ by the dialog?
    - klelatti 6y ago
      Agreed but I think it's stretching it a bit call it a 'workaround' when it essentially tells you what to do :)
    - fedorareis 6y ago
      You make this sound like a new problem. You have had to do that for unsigned apps for years and at least in my experience the majority of apps that come from outside the App Store are unsigned. This has been a thing for so long that I almost instinctively right click, Open the first time I run an app I downloaded from the internet
reportingsjr 6y ago
It looks like Apple is pushing towards having a single app store, see the news about the new macs being able to run iOS apps. I can definitely see them eventually moving to only allowing apps from the iOS store installed on macs, the same as how ipads and iphone are now.
- varispeed 6y ago
  I wonder if the next step after that will be Apple dictating what new apps are desirable in the app store and then a bit further Apple making apps themselves and only outsourcing the support or signing franchise deals. Once the hardware could only be repaired by Apple, they could move completely into a subscription model where you could subscribe to e.g. Office or Streamer package that would include a laptop for two years and a predefined set of applications.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Why would anyone subscribe to that?
    - varispeed 6y ago
      You will find that many people would pay for having their worry about choosing the right laptop and software completely removed. They also won't have to worry about repairs etc. as long as any damage would be accidental or from a manufacturing fault.
      - zepto 6y ago
        That’s already why people buy apple and AppleCare. What you are describing is taking this even further in the direction of an information appliance. I am unconvinced that there is any benefit that your model provides that Apple does not already. You can already just buy a Mac with AppleCare and install MS office from the App Store. People may want their choices to be simplified, but they are also going to need to be able to use whatever important new thing comes along. E.g. Zoom or Slack.
whywhywhywhy 6y ago
Do you not think we're moving towards a future where both platforms converge into just iOS? Think we can't ignore that the iOS install base has been larger than the MacOS install base. Start looking at it that way and the iOS way of doing things is the norm in the eyes of Apple and MacOS is the odd one out.
- jamil7 6y ago
  > Do you not think we're moving towards a future where both platforms converge into just iOS? Could be, but as far as the new cross platform frameworks are shaping up right now it looks like their strategy is slightly different. Apple is seemingly creating a developer ecosystem to loosley describe interfaces and share them between platforms while they ultimately decide how your UI is rendered. Maybe you're right and one day that means flicking a switch and everything is unified. I also look at something like iPadOS for instance which started as extremely similar to iOS and has now diverged and become it's own thing, different to both the Mac and iPhone.
- m463 6y ago
  "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." There should be limits on this. It's sad to be the baby outside the window, drenched in bathwater.
  - Ericson2314 6y ago
    I think the bathwater is the least of the defenestrated baby's problems. :)

zepto 6y ago

The assumption that Apple wants to approve all apps is wrong. Apple sees App Store apps, and web apps as having different advantages, and it is in their interest to have the best platform for both. It’s not just me saying this, they keep saying it too, and proving it by investing in making web apps run better.

oarsinsync 6y ago
> Apple sees App Store apps, and web apps as having different advantages, and it is in their interest to have the best platform for both. It’s not just me saying this, they keep saying it too, and proving it by investing in making web apps run better. The method to pin a webapp to the home screen is substantially worse than it used to be. There was a period where javascript running in Safari ran significantly faster than javascript running in a webapp opened from the home screen, or in any other app opening a web view. Is that still the case, or did they decide to share that function?
- pvg 6y ago
  It hasn't been the case for years.
mikenew 6y ago
And yet they've completely nerfed PWAs on iOS. So they can say what they like; I don't believe it.
- zepto 6y ago
  Not everything they do will fit your view of how they should support the web. Believe whatever you like. But this means you are also choosing to ignore absolutely enormous investments at every level of the stack that they have made to increase web performance, adopt standards and improve web user experience.
  - rictic 6y ago
    It's hard to square the claim that they've made enormous investments when you compare feature support against budget. Apple's operating budget is 200x Mozilla's ($85B vs $0.45B), and yet Safari lags significantly behind Firefox in features (and for some the use cases, in performance as well). Disclosure: I work at Google on JS libraries, and at one point was in the Chrome org, but my opinions are my own.