2 ms·
Except on Windows, you can establish that trust level with stores as you go along, instead of having just one store. For example, I trust Steam, GOG, Epic's st
by smileybarry 6y ago
Except on Windows, you can establish that trust level with stores as you go along, instead of having just one store.
For example, I trust Steam, GOG, Epic's store (though I don't use Epic's because I don't want to fragment my library), and a whole assortment of developers specifically.
Also, it's not 2007 anymore, if you trust a developer you can almost always guarantee the app came from the trusted source through code signing. Almost everything is code-signed nowadays. If it isn't, Windows lets you know about it. If it's also not a popular app, the platform actively alerts you about it. VirusTotal and other reputation services also help you make an informed decision on whether an app is trustworthy or not.
- anko 6y agoI think you're missing the point. There is no problem with multiple stores existing as a model. In fact, on android you can have that. If you like multiple stores, and you want the hassle of using reputation services to manage which things you trust, that's fine. Nobody is saying that you can't. But by going against Apple's store as part of the platform model, you want to stop people from having a simpler option. They are deciding that simpler option when they buy into the platform. My mum HATES PCs but loves her iPad because she doesn't have to deal with antivirus updates or downloading dodgy software. She doesn't have to understand multiple stores. With a multi store model, there is an incentive for competition on store pricing. How do you compete on pricing alone with other stores? You reduce the quality of your review process. It's the only way to compete on cost. And that's what forcing multiple stores does.