>But if you followed the complicated procedure for installing the file manually (the one they just made impossible), then you were clearly on you own, and if yo

>But if you followed the complicated procedure for installing the file manually (the one they just made impossible), then you were clearly on you own, and if you have a bad user experience it's on you. We'd like to think that, but in reality the people doing the complicated stupid things are not always the same as the people using the product and complaining / demanding refunds from the developer. True story, back when the intel macs first came out, I was working for Apple retail. I had a customer come in angry as a hornet and demanding a refund because the computer they bought was crashing all the time, it still had viruses all over it and nothing worked any better than their old PC so why did they pay extra for a mac? Thing was, what they were describing seeing and doing on their computer didn't sound like they were using a mac at all. I asked the customer to show me what was going on, and when they pulled it out and turned it on, it booted right into windows. Turns out after they bought their new computer, they gave it to their nephew to help set it up. Well apparently the nephew decided that what they really needed was to run windows on their new intel mac, and went through the process of installing boot camp, repartitioning the whole system to shrink the mac OS partition as small as boot camp would let them, and configure the computer to boot to windows automatically. My customer had effectively been using an expensive windows laptop for a few months, with all the problems that entailed, plus the additional problems of not getting proper system support. This was around the time that macbooks needed firmware updates to eliminate a crash, a firmware update that was only delivered via OS X software update, which the customer had no idea even existed on their computer. So even though boot camp was a complicated procedure at the time, with lots of dialogs explaining exactly what you were doing, and what was and wasn't supported, the end user wasn't the one who went through the process. They were the one who was pissed off though. And I saw (and have seen elsewhere in tech) the same sort of thing play out over and over and over again, where someone's clever tech friend sets them up with some unsupported setup, and leaves them on their own to then try to get support from the manufacturer who rightfully doesn't support the issue. Apple gives iOS developers a way to mark their apps as compatible or not with mac os, and they're implementing an actual check or block on that. I fail to see how that's any worse than Apple offering a "minimum OS version" check in their frameworks and enforcing not running an app that a developer specifies isn't compatible with an older version OS either.