5 ms·

Currently isn't... but Apple is moving toward AppStore on OS/X...

by pulse7 6y ago

breakfastduck 6y ago
Politely disagree
- The_Colonel 6y ago
  Well Apple definitely wants to go that way, but it's unclear if users will rebel enough for Apple to give it up. My guess is that Apple will make it step by step more difficult to install non-store apps so that people get used to it and only then cut it off.
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    I disagree, I think they want the average user to use the Mac App Store, but installing non app store apps is never going to go away.
- chungus_khan 6y ago
  Even if they don't the notarization requirement is a strong first step to at minimum a games console-style licensing program, or further integration with the existing developer program. It would be nice for Apple to not do this, but if they can keep their ARM chips highly competitive it would be insanely lucrative to do so. Corporations are for-profit entities first and foremost.
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    It's no harder to install a non app store app today than it was when I got my first mac. So I'm not sure why this opinion is held so strongly. It wouldn't be lucrative, because all the pro users (basically the mac userbase) would just not buy one. What's the point in getting one over an iPad?
    - est31 6y ago
      > What's the point in getting one over an iPad? Better keyboard, larger screen, more connectors. And despite a lot of devs using macs, most of the userbase aren't devs, but are instead designers, artists, or just average people like college students etc. Most of those don't need third party stores, or execute any type of software outside of an apple approved list. Give them their specialist DAW, Adobe suite, etc. and they are content.
      - breakfastduck 6y ago
        Irrelevant. If developers abandon a platform (no matter how small a percentage they are) then the platform dies. Especially one like macOS where the only true environment to develop native compatibility is one of their machines itself.
  - pulse7 6y ago
    And there is another strong factor: stock holders want to maximize the profits. Apple has learnt how to earn from AppStore. So the natural way would be to try to earn the same money on OS/X with Mac AppStore...
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      It's irrelevant. Apple could stop this any second by making homebrew break. They havent, it works fine on M1 and it can run x86 through rosetta. If apple wanted to shut down alternative app stores macports and homebrew would already be dead.
ubermonkey 6y ago
LOL. FUD strikes again! There's no evidence that this is true.
dsabanin 6y ago
If they block installation of non AppStore apps it will be a big mistake for them. It will just make Linux and open source more popular again and Apple will slowly start loosing the developers and power users, again. Others will eventually follow. Combined with already risky move to ARM, they have to be crazy to go that route. I think digital signatures are purely a security measure, and the dev account requirements are a way to establish some kind of chain of trust to the developer, to prevent bad actors from signing up on the spot and pushing out tons of malware unimpeded.

Currently isn't... but Apple is moving toward AppStore on OS/X...

by pulse7 6y ago

Currently isn't... but Apple is moving toward AppStore on OS/X...

breakfastduck 6y ago

Politely disagree

The_Colonel 6y ago
Well Apple definitely wants to go that way, but it's unclear if users will rebel enough for Apple to give it up. My guess is that Apple will make it step by step more difficult to install non-store apps so that people get used to it and only then cut it off.
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  I disagree, I think they want the average user to use the Mac App Store, but installing non app store apps is never going to go away.
chungus_khan 6y ago
Even if they don't the notarization requirement is a strong first step to at minimum a games console-style licensing program, or further integration with the existing developer program. It would be nice for Apple to not do this, but if they can keep their ARM chips highly competitive it would be insanely lucrative to do so. Corporations are for-profit entities first and foremost.
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  It's no harder to install a non app store app today than it was when I got my first mac. So I'm not sure why this opinion is held so strongly. It wouldn't be lucrative, because all the pro users (basically the mac userbase) would just not buy one. What's the point in getting one over an iPad?
  - est31 6y ago
    > What's the point in getting one over an iPad? Better keyboard, larger screen, more connectors. And despite a lot of devs using macs, most of the userbase aren't devs, but are instead designers, artists, or just average people like college students etc. Most of those don't need third party stores, or execute any type of software outside of an apple approved list. Give them their specialist DAW, Adobe suite, etc. and they are content.
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      Irrelevant. If developers abandon a platform (no matter how small a percentage they are) then the platform dies. Especially one like macOS where the only true environment to develop native compatibility is one of their machines itself.
- pulse7 6y ago
  And there is another strong factor: stock holders want to maximize the profits. Apple has learnt how to earn from AppStore. So the natural way would be to try to earn the same money on OS/X with Mac AppStore...
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    It's irrelevant. Apple could stop this any second by making homebrew break. They havent, it works fine on M1 and it can run x86 through rosetta. If apple wanted to shut down alternative app stores macports and homebrew would already be dead.

ubermonkey 6y ago

LOL. FUD strikes again! There's no evidence that this is true.

dsabanin 6y ago

If they block installation of non AppStore apps it will be a big mistake for them. It will just make Linux and open source more popular again and Apple will slowly start loosing the developers and power users, again. Others will eventually follow. Combined with already risky move to ARM, they have to be crazy to go that route. I think digital signatures are purely a security measure, and the dev account requirements are a way to establish some kind of chain of trust to the developer, to prevent bad actors from signing up on the spot and pushing out tons of malware unimpeded.