20 ms·

GitHub Should Start an App Store

814 points by quaintdev 6y ago

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
0df8dkdf 6y ago
Hmmm the main issue is not an App Store. It is rather how Android is packaged. There is F-Droid type of store out there, it is just that it is not in the play store. As for iOS there really no proper way to install except jailbreaking any way. The bottom we don't need another App Store, rather a FOSS distribution of OS for Android (e.g: https://www.replicant.us/about.php https://www.replicant.us/about.php ) that kind like the Debian distro for desktop Linux. As for iOS, is Darwin still open source, maybe a distro for iPhone with an open source Darwin fork?
- jhasse 6y ago
  Darwin is only the kernel. iOS is closed-source.
  - 0df8dkdf 6y ago
    For sure, the same way Linux is only the kernel. If you ask Stallman, he will say GNU/Linux. ;-)
    - jhasse 6y ago
      yeah, so? Android's user-space is still mostly open-source. What's open-source of iOS is basically useless for developing an alternative OS for iPhones.
- fluidcruft 6y ago
  F-Droid doesn't enroll as device administrator on your phone. I think Microsoft could easily pull that off if they wanted to which would let them push updates and manage applications the way Google does. My workplace already basically runs BYOD devices through some Microsoft Azure management thing.
  - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
    There is an extra thing you can do to make fdroid admin but it requires root. It does allow auto updates though.
Pfhreak 6y ago
Sounds like a great way to create incentives that undermine githubs mission while simultaneously taking a huge amount of developer resources for a product that will have niche interest at best. Building app stores is hard. Moderating app stores is hard. Both are significantly different from running GitHub. While I appreciate the author's intent here, this just doesn't feel like it was deeply thought out.
- fbelzile 6y ago
  I don't know though, Microsoft already runs multiple app stores (Xbox & Windows, Edge). I don't see why they couldn't build it out for another platform or at least figure out some kind of arms-reach integration with Github -> Microsoft Store. This could be a nice come back into the mobile sphere they lost out on. As a developer, I completely agree that Microsoft earned my trust over the years.
  - acct776 6y ago
    There's pushback on another app store from Microsoft because nobody wants more walled gardens. The pendulum has shifted, and it's swinging towards PWA. Per Microsoft, Outlook is now a progressive web app. App stores are dying - they're just going to take a bit to timeout.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - krisgenre 6y ago
      >>The pendulum has shifted, and it's swinging towards PWA Didn't Firefox recently announce they're discontinuing PWA features?
      - crocodiletears 6y ago
        Only for desktop, I think.
      - 6y ago
joana035 6y ago
> Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. Let's wait and see history repeating itself. I don't buy that and I will never forget.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
carapace 6y ago
> They were awesome during youtube-dl debacle. The debacle IMO was all the folks who thought GH taking down youtube-dl was newsworthy at all in the first place. The infantile dependency is the problem, not the lack of yet another gatekeeper. > I trust [MS] more than Apple and Google. Thank you for the LOL. Look, VSCode is nice but don't be so naive. Anyone can start an "app store", but can they make money at it? If MS thought they could make money running an app store would they hesitate? (Also, they already have an app store.)
COGlory 6y ago
This is a great idea. I can't wait for my favorite apps to get banned by yet another centralized authority!
- rvz 6y ago
  Exactly. I'm afraid all the reasons the author lists, just boils down to: 'GitHub (Microsoft) should host all our apps because they listen to their users!' What could possibly go wrong?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
garrepi 6y ago
> Unlike Google they actually listen to their users. They were awesome during youtube-dl debacle. I wouldn't say they were "awesome" during the youtube-dl stuff. They were slow to respond and non-transparent about what was happening behind the scenes. Also, user's have been calling for GitHub to terminate their contract with ICE for a long time now[0] to no avail. GitHub is better than most, no doubt, when it comes to "listen[ing] to their users" but they still have a ways to go. [0](https://github.com/drop-ice/dear-github-2.0 https://github.com/drop-ice/dear-github-2.0)
- notsureaboutpg 6y ago
  GitHub won't terminate any contract with ICE now that they are owned by Microsoft, who has a ton of government and military contracts
- acct776 6y ago
  In contrast, I was surprised with how "quickly" it was resolved, compared to my expectation. MS is beholden to US.gov through contract cash and unspoken agreements - those ties are lessening, but are still pretty deep.
  - rovr138 6y ago
    It wasn't an issue with the US government.
    - acct776 6y ago
      If it has to do with copyright in the US, the bureaucrats are always involved.
- nabla9 6y ago
  If there is stance to be made, it should be principled. Today it's just companies reacting to any specific issue internet mob in social media has. They ban specific people or organizations based on mob activity.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
rvz 6y ago
> They already host source code of millions of apps. Release integration should be trivial to implement. So that it too can become an Apple / Google App Store where it can also control which apps, repositories are allowed or not? Essentially you're moving to another centralised platform, but the reason is because they 'listen to their users'? No thanks and no deal. Hosting an app repository on your own website is fine and already decentralised. So far, Cydia and F-Droid are doing it right with being a potential alternative App Store.
jberryman 6y ago
I'm not sure what my point is here exactly, but: debian has had an "app store" for 20+ years that works brilliantly, can be trusted not to fuck with or spy on you, has never pulled youtube-dl/nmap/etc (as far as I know), (while also being naturally free of forum software for white supremacists (bonus!))
- jcastro 6y ago
  You're being quite selective here, sure the Debian way has it's positives but let's not pretend that model is free of problems -- there's been plenty of software that has been removed or is not allowed in Debian, and once you want a newer version of something that isn't in there then getting what you want can be difficult if you're not an expert, etc.
- ljm 6y ago
  Debian's software repo is fantastic but has a deliberately high barrier to entry and chooses stability above all else. Hosting your own apt repo isn't as difficult as it looks (all you need is a static file server) so it's a nice way to host your software if you have a collection of it.
WhoIsSatoshi 6y ago
I am totally behind that. The Ethos of the platform and the visibility it has are priming it for acceptance and its own market. When Open Source crystallizes around it, this could be the spark to break the duopoly of the mobile platforms (by framing a hypothetical future alternative), AND provide Desktop OS's an Ethos-First platform for releases, where the developers would want to be on their best behavior from the get-go.
karakanb 6y ago
I have a question regarding the moderation needs of stores: why exactly do we need stores for mobile devices, whereas we don't have any store or moderation for installing application on computers, or visiting websites? Except various edge cases, you can technically visit any website that is served from any server, or you can install any application that has the correct binaries for your platform. What makes mobile devices different in this regard?
- zests 6y ago
  A walled garden is a plus for most consumers. Especially non-technical consumers who want to download something and be sure it's not spyware that will brick their phone. If you want to be able to install anything you can buy a pinephone but I can't imagine it would be fun to install anything on a pinephone. Apple offers a walled garden as an offering to i-device users. Other companies try to mimic Apple's success. Mobile devices simply do not have the same "must be able to install anything" requirements that a standard computer has.
  - amelius 6y ago
    > If you want to be able to install anything you can buy a pinephone but I can't imagine it would be fun to install anything on a pinephone. If an application is properly sandboxed, and I can fully control the permissions of that sandbox, then I see no problems with that.
  - MayeulC 6y ago
    > I can't imagine it would be fun to install anything on a pinephone. It's actually fun to do "apk add audacity" (yeah, there's also multiple gui frontends...) and have it installed and working as well as on desktop. OK, that one uses a traditional desktop interface, but it is still usable. Plug it into a docking station and use a mouse and keyboard + screen if you prefer. Okay, that's not really sideloading, especially as each distro has its packaging format. You can use flatpaks for this (and they are sandboxes), some CIs provide builds as flatpaks (KDE does this). One issue is that Linux executables are still very much architecture-dependent.
sschueller 6y ago
All fine and good but what we need first is an antitrust case against apple and google just like we had against Microsoft back in the day when internet explorer was pre-installed. Just now we have a situation where you can't even install an alternative app store in one platform and the other one is crippled. And don't tell me apple has a small market share or you can use another vendor. Back when Microsoft was being forced to open up it was as extremely easy to install another browser and they still had to go to court.
georgyo 6y ago
Branding does matter, but friction would be extremely rough. Windows is ironically an extremely open system. All users are very used to doing what other platforms would call side loading. And all apps on windows have developed their own methods for receiving updates. The Microsoft store for windows is pretty sad. Not because the interface sucks, at least not more so than google or apple ones, but because there isn't a real incentive for developers or users to use it. Searching for a ssh client on the windows store shows ZERO free options, and all of them look worse than PuTTY. They are in the windows store strictly for visibility; which is a good use of an app store. But without the major players who don't need the limited visibility of that store, they users won't think to look there for their needs as well. If Microsoft rebranded their app store the Github app store, Or made some easy pipeline for github actions to publish to their store; there would be a fair amount of people yelling "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" as well as fearing that microsoft is using the good will of GitHub to get to a similar world of the closed gardens of the others. Lastly, Microsoft has not done so well in the mobile phone markets. Creating an android store similar to F-Droid would be a hard sell and limited appeal. Google very likely won't let you install the windows app store from the google app store. Apple will never allow a competitor on their platform _at all_ unless legally required. I don't see how a GitHub app store could succeed.
- benibela 6y ago
  I have plans to put my Windows apps in the Microsoft store, because I have heard it is cheaper than getting a code signing certificate which would be renewed yearly But I switched to Linux, so I could not use any of the Microsoft tooling. Unless the store deployment can run on WINE?
  - Kwpolska 6y ago
    You should set up a Windows VM. Not only for the store tooling, but also to have a way to test your software on the platform you’re offering it on.
- pier25 6y ago
  > but because there isn't a real incentive for developers or users to use it Not true. It solves app distribution, install, and updates. We used it for an education app a couple of years ago and it was great. Before that we used Electron with Squirrel and it was horrible for our users. For some reason the app wasn't installed in the start menu and if they deleted the desktop shortcut it was impossible for them to find it again.
jariel 6y ago
We need multiple app stores with legislation on providing access and default searches, much in the same way EU will require devices to allow users to select default search etc.. A good amount of competition will help solve a lot of problems, and very strongly highlight the ant-competitive practices inherent in these value chain verticalizations. I respect Google wants to form a Union to influence who can and cannot be on YouTube, at the same time, I want absolutely nothing to do with some foreign special interest group dictating content to me, so let's have some choice, thanks.
villasv 6y ago
> They already host source code of millions of apps. Release integration should be trivial to implement. Release integration is trivial for anyone. It's the easiest and most irrelevant part of the app stores. > Unlike Google they actually listen to their users. They were awesome during youtube-dl debacle. And controversial on others, like shutting down Popcorn Time's repository. As any other, they'll listen if there's enough outcry. > Backed by Microsoft. Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. I trust them more than Apple and Google. This is situational and opportunistic. It can change any day. In fact, managing an important app store is exactly one way to re-(un)-balance this relationship. > They could finally give the desktop the app store it deserves Microsoft won't have GitHub compete with the Microsoft Store and its newer efforts like winget. It would unermine their unifying vision that has been in the works for years for no benefit. > This is a minor but users will be able to raise issues with developers directly instead writing comments over app pages which I think you would agree completely suck. Sure, lets pipe user feedback directly into GitHub issues. Good luck with that if you have a hundred issues a day. I don't think there's a single angle that would paint this as a good idea. Phone manufacturers like Samsung are in a much much better position to try. And indeed they have been trying an failing.
- trident5000 6y ago
  If you think Microsoft wont turn their back and get on the ban/censorship train like any other company I believe that would be a mistake. They will have some "woke" employees and journalists grill the executives and then they will cave to mob rule just like the rest.
  - villasv 6y ago
    > they will cave to mob rule just like the rest Would they? Microsoft is still serving ICE, despite all the "grilling".
  - kibwen 6y ago
    Is hand-wringing over "woke" bogeymen the next evolution of grousing unironically about "SJWs"?
u678u 6y ago
I was thinking why we need an app store at all. It does make sense for security and discoverability. However maybe it makes sense to have multiple app stores. So you my phone I could have a Google one and Microsoft one and maybe a new company that specializes in this.
aero-glide2 6y ago
We need an app store which isn't hosted by the big 4
BaggaDonuts2 6y ago
Not gonna happen. Anyone could start an App Store and use GH’s api’s to file issues with developers repos anyway. Microsoft owns App Center (formerly Hockey App) which allows apps to send diagnostics to devs for crashes and the like. I’d expect similar features for GH in the longer term future. But an App Store - prob not. Apple is particularly difficult to develop on and deploy to their store as it is. You can only deploy to test devices with custom policies (app center makes this easier) or jailbreak your device. There’s no way Apple will ever release their monopoly on their App Store. So you’d be looking at an android only App Store (plus windows for whatever that is worth)
AndrewKemendo 6y ago
I thought from reading the headline it was a genius idea, but I think after reflection there are at least two major barriers to this working: 1. There is no GitOS. So the target environment would be so variable and high friction that it's unclear to me how GitHub would manage clean builds and installation. 2. I'd say MOST repos aren't anywhere near ready to run. Making an automated binary/msi/apk/ pathway would almost certainly lead to broken packages for the majority of repos.
alfonmga 6y ago
I don't trust Microsoft.
titzer 6y ago
Please don't. This is where I put my code right now. Don't become irrelevant garbage like SourceForge from which we'll all have to migrate anyway.
2Gkashmiri 6y ago
isnt there already f-droid which is doing a slow but nonetheless a great job?
Gedrovits 6y ago
They have "Releases" which can be improved to provide binaries considered as "App Store". Just download the proper release for your platform and Rock'n'Roll.
ksec 6y ago
This doesn't answer the question, an App Store for what? iOS / Mac? Appel doesn't even allow anything alike on iOS, and for Mac, Apple could pull out developer certificate for whatever reason. Android? Will that be bundled by Phone markers? If not how are the 2.5B of Google Android users going to get it? Windows, what are the benefits? I am not understand the reason other than I want an App Store that is not coming from Big Tech. And arguably Github is part of Big Tech ( Microsoft ).
epanchin 6y ago
I would love a github logo on other app stores; verifying the tag hosted on github was compiled and released to the app store without modification.
mapgrep 6y ago
People are raising some good concrete objections but I wonder if there isn’t the kernel of a good idea here. Maybe GitHub should be offering additional services to better help pipe projects into all kinds of app distribution mechanisms. App stores, platform package managers (apt dnf ports homebrew), language package managers (gems pip maven CPAN npm etc), stand-alone installers (dmgs install exe-s), maybe even containers. These services could form a layer with some autonomy from the underlying project — the author of the project rarely handles alll (or sometimes any) of the distro channels. Anecdotally I feel like most of this stuff happens outside of GitHub, which is fine and actually good, but maybe there are things GitHub could do to smooth the process? To help the original authors arrange things in releases or set metadata in a way that’s useful downstream to packagers? But some of it happens in projects already, sometimes for a desktop type app you’ll see a dmg or some other installer right in the project files. This could probably be more standardized.
- tom_mellior 6y ago
  > But some of it happens in projects already, sometimes for a desktop type app you’ll see a dmg or some other installer right in the project files. This could probably be more standardized. I agree with your interpretation. GitHub already allows projects to publish release builds. They could provide a new search form that looks somewhat like an "app store" where you could search for ready-to-install packages.
turbinerneiter 6y ago
> Backed by Microsoft. Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. I trust them more than Apple and Google. Maybe we shouldn't trust MS, but ourselves. A MS controlled App Store is as bad or good as a Google or Apple controlled App store. Good for some peace of mind and trust, that they won't distribute malware ( ... already broken tough), bad for the fact that they control it we would still rely on the benevolence of a dictator.
- worik 6y ago
  Yes, this. Some of us remember Microsoft setting personal computing back ten years by using their market power to foist sub par, frankly rubbish, system software on computer users. There is no sign they have changed their business practices. It is just now they are the underdog. Full respect is due to MS for turning their business around, but they are playing catchup now. If they ever get back out in front, watch out!
ratsmack 6y ago
A better solution would be an entirely community driven app store that is not beholden to any corporate influence.
- danShumway 6y ago
  FDroid exists already. Okay, it doesn't host proprietary apps, but whatever. The point is, this isn't a tech problem anymore, it's not a problem where someone can just make a new platform to solve everything. Google has contracts with phone manufacturers that ban them from adding 3rd-party app stores alongside Google Play. And none of these app stores are going to show up on iOS. It's a cultural/legal problem at this point. Otherwise, community maintained (even private) software repos are already a thing. We don't really need people to build more of them, we need people to start using them, and for mobile platforms to support them.
  - ratsmack 6y ago
    >Google has contracts with phone manufacturers that ban them from adding 3rd-party app stores alongside Google Play. That's kinda like Microsoft requiring a payment for every PC sold whether their OS was installed or not. Predatory contracts from a monopolistic company... who would have thought.
johnisgood 6y ago
It is almost like the author forgot that GitHub is owned by Microsoft (despite mentioning it, sigh). "Tired of big tech censoring apps? Let's have big tech manage an app store, that'll solve it". or "Tired of one big tech censoring apps? Let's have another one, the one and only!". Plus I am sure others have mentioned it by now but GitHub Issues for user feedback is going to suck big time.
- fullstackwife 6y ago
  This idea would take it to another level, because it would also mean that the "big tech is in control of my source code and release process".
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
GriffonWizard 6y ago
Here's a question: Why do we even need app stores? Why can't we all get comfortable downloading from the Web on mobile like we are on the desktop? The only benefit to them I see is discoverability, so instead of building "stores" why don't we build collections of applications from around the Web and display them in an app store-like interface. Developers can submit applications, they will show up in our "store" making them searchable and discoverable by users, and when users hit download it will take them to the developers Website to download and install an apk or whatever.
monadic3 6y ago
This is a comically terrible idea.
quaintdev 6y ago
Author here, I am afraid my blog is hosted on a Raspberry PI and it might go down because of HN traffic. If that happens, the mirror of the post is at https://telegra.ph/GitHub-Should-Start-An-App-Store-01-31 https://telegra.ph/GitHub-Should-Start-An-App-Store-01-31 Did not expected this to blow up. Thanks for the critical feedback. You guys are tough crowd :)
- ben_ 6y ago
  I like what you've done with hugo!
  - quaintdev 6y ago
    Thanks to Austin at https://austingebauer.com/about/ https://austingebauer.com/about/ for creating the devise theme.
- jitendrac 6y ago
  Do you Host it at Home with static IP or DynDNS?? and which internet service provider do you use? Edit:Found its BSNL
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
    Hosting with a dynamic IP is not particularly hard. I had a raspberry pi ping my IP back to the dns server minutely and it worked well.
    - jitendrac 6y ago
      would you mind sharing the script? I earlier used noip.com,and my router's dyndns, I will love doing it other way.
beckman466 6y ago
'GitHub Should Start an App Store' ...or we should all join the distributed app revolution made possible by holochain's DHT+git+signatures+gossip Rails-like distributed app framework, and use holo's app store to download and use fully distributed apps [1]? [1] http://holo.host http://holo.host
tutfbhuf 6y ago
No, they shouldn't. Centralized App Stores isn't the way to go, look at recent examples of (temporarily) removed Apps like Matrix from Play Store. A decentralized App Store (e.g. based on IPFS) would be great.
- confiq 6y ago
  Why there is no regulation about this? My hardware and I do with that whatever I want...
rmsaksida 6y ago
I think what's more important is somehow getting Apple to allow alternative app stores in their phones. While Android phones are the most popular in many (most?) countries, iPhones are still very common and make it so solutions in one distribution platform don't extend to all phone users. Once a competitor is able to operate in both Android and iOS, I think we will see a real threat to official app stores, whether it's Github behind it or someone else.
- warrenm 6y ago
  Like it or not, pretty much the whole reason Apple only has The One True App Store™ is to ensure at least some amount of review of QA is done before unleashing apps on its customers. Does that get abused? Arguably - yes. Is it overall a good trade-off? Depends on your use case. Want "full" control of your whole mobile device? Get a Pine phone or rooted Android, etc What any app you download to be highly-likely to be free of bugs and spyware? Go for an iOS device
  - rmsaksida 6y ago
    I disagree. Technically, Android doesn't have a One True App Store. But in practice, Google Play is the standard app store and 99% of users use it exclusively, at least in the West. It is in fact the one true app store for Android. So Google does in fact control the Android app store (the one that counts, anyway). The reason why Google Play has so many shitty apps is because Google simply doesn't care about curation in the same way Apple does. That's true for every Google product, by the way. They strongly favor algorithmic curation, while Apple also relies heavily on human curation. If Apple allowed alternative app stores, nothing would change as far as the standard iOS app store is concerned. 99,99% of users would keep using the Apple app store unless there was a very compelling reason for using an alternative.
Ericson2314 6y ago
Who needs app stores?...
justplay 6y ago
Sorry to be skeptical, but as the web is already evolving at a faster pace, and if web-assembly succeeds, we might don't even need another app/play store.
vijaybritto 6y ago
>Unlike Google they actually listen to their users. Beg to differ. They have far less problems to worry about when hosting the only the source code. Now if they host entire apps they will most likely be required to moderate the content in the apps. Its not a random company. MS will want to maintain their brand image and regulations. This will lead to the same problems sooner or later.
heavyset_go 6y ago
GitHub is unable to enter the mobile app distribution market because Apple and Google leverage their monopolies in the mobile OS market to limit competition, or outright ban it, in the mobile app distribution space. It'll take some serious antitrust action before real competition will be allowed to improve costs and experiences for developers and users alike when it comes to mobile app distribution. In the meantime, Apple and Google will continue to keep a stranglehold on the app distribution market like they have for over a decade now.
- confiq 6y ago
  there is Amazon Appstore!
  - thekyle 6y ago
    Also, the Galaxy store and F-droid
    - heavyset_go 6y ago
      Google has restricted Android such that only the Play Store can implement background installation of apps, batch installations and automatic upgrading of installed apps. F-Droid can implement those if you give it root access, but manufacturers go out of their way to prevent users from rooting their devices. I need a Samsung phone to use the Galaxy Store.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    I have the Amazon Appstore on my Android phone. Google does not allow Amazon to compete on feature parity with the Play Store. Amazon's Appstore cannot do background installation of apps, batch installation of apps, or automatic upgrades if the device isn't an Amazon device.
    - confiq 6y ago
      > background installation of apps I wish google would not do that...
0xbadcafebee 6y ago
Screw app stores. Mobile is the only place where you have to use a portal to install an app, and it's just a power play. Let me just install an app by browsing a regular website, not being funneled through somebody's portal. That's how every other computer in history has installed apps. It's not perfect but it certainly has none of the downsides of app stores.
disposekinetics 6y ago
No one should have an 'app store', the entire concept is user hostile. A general purpose computer should be able to execute what I wish it to execute and it's inexcusable that a company would think they know better.
wgm 6y ago
Homebrew for Mac essentially is a GitHub App Store for many though not all projects.
neiman 6y ago
Switch Google with Microsoft? The king is dead long live the king?
jugg1es 6y ago
I would support github creating a different entity that could act like an app store, but I do not think that github.com is best served by pivoting to anything other than what it does right now.
- xenihn 6y ago
  Why do people keep referring to Github as Github and not Microsoft when discussing business decisions? Github is not "backed" by Microsoft. Microsoft owns them. Github is Microsoft. This article is asking Microsoft to start an App Store, which they have already done. It's called Windows Phone Store. The article should be asking Microsoft to rebrand Windows Phone Store, not asking Github to make a new app store altogether. I see the same thing happen with Twitch and Amazon. It feels like people don't understand how much influence and control is exerted on even the most independent subsidiaries, and how that control only increases year-over-year. Especially when it comes to something that generates money.
  - jugg1es 6y ago
    Not sure what your point is. There is still a brand called GitHub. It's the same reason people call it YouTube instead of Google.
  - tester756 6y ago
    As far as I've hear Github works significantly independently from MS. >The core message everybody on today’s call stressed was that GitHub will continue to operate as an independent company. >n our interview, he also stressed that his focus will be on making “GitHub better at making GitHub” and that he plans to do so by bringing Microsoft’s resources and infrastructure to the code hosting service, while at the same time leaving it to operate independently. >We are committed to being stewards of the GitHub community, which will retain its developer-first ethos operate independently and remain an open platform
petters 6y ago
Not sure about the app store, but: it would be great if GitHub could provide binaries that were guaranteed to be built from a certain commit.
- dane-pgp 6y ago
  At the very least, that should be provided for NPM packages, since Microsoft now own NPM. Having those packages verifiably built from source could technically be done by any trusted third party, so it's a pity that this project didn't take off: https://hackernoon.com/what-if-we-could-verify-npm-packages-c2a319cff758 https://hackernoon.com/what-if-we-could-verify-npm-packages-...
newbie578 6y ago
I could see GitHub having an App Store, would like to have them as an alternative to Apple, but that is not the optimal solution. I do not wish for 10 App Store's to exist in the world and have to distribute to each one. There already is the best platform available, it is called the Web. The problem is Apple purposely holding back PWAs so they can keep earning their Apple Mafia Cut. I truly belive that for most apps excluding games, PWAs are the way to go. Truly cross platform, low on download speed, and can have almost identical functionality like most of the apps. That is why I am stocked for Flutter Web, when it gets production ready, it can truly be a game changer. I am currently forced to make mobile apps, since PWAs are just not that popular nor ideal (Apple problems as I stated above), but I am using Flutter which is honestly fun and the best solution. Make Apple (and Google, although they already have access on most of it) to their API, that is most notably the ability for PWAs to push notifications.
meerita 6y ago
It sounds a good idea, but The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The only way to ensure pure, non controlled by corp distribution of software is and was BitTorrent. Microsoft may be good today, but may not in the future.
throwaway1986_ 6y ago
No. Stop it. This is NOT what GitHub is for. Yes, it has become a place for software where users may download packaged "apps" from. But this is only a byproduct of GitHub hosting software. Do not ruin GitHub for me please. I don't wanna sound like a jerk, but I don't wanna have to deal with the same people who leave horrible comment on the App Store and Play Store. I'm sure you have good intentions, but this is a really stupid idea.
jsharf 6y ago
Along these lines, it would be really cool to see GitHub begin to approach the source code infrastructure that Google has internally. If they added a good build system (heck, just use bazel) and a feature to build code in the cloud, and a web IDE and better code review system (of course, all with open protocols — it’s git after all), we could have a much more standardized open source environment— the overhead to working on a new open source project would be lower since you wouldn’t have to figure out how to build it. It would also make it significantly easier to add dependencies and integrate software together.
jsharf 6y ago
Along these lines, it would be really cool to see GitHub begin to approach the source code infrastructure that Google has internally. If they added a good build system (heck, just use bazel) and a feature to build code in the cloud (of course, all with open protocols — it’s git after all), we could have a much more standardized open source environment— the overhead to working on a new open source project would be lower since you wouldn’t have to figure out how to build it or how to build dependencies. It would also make it significantly easier to add dependencies and integrate software together.
danShumway 6y ago
But... why? Github has very few attributes that make it suitable as an app store. Sure, you could add payments on top of it, you can make an interface for downloading releases or subscribing. Or anyone else could build an app store and just use Github repos as an upstream if they care about that stuff. The Github API is good, it wouldn't be hard to for any existing app store to add more integration. And how would this help with anything? Is Microsoft better positioned than Amazon to get apps onto Android devices? Is anyone positioned to get a 3rd-party app store on iOS? What does this solve that FDroid doesn't already solve, how would it better than what we have, and what does Github's core functionality (hosting source code) have to do with distributing apps? If the goal is just to have reproduceable builds or something, most consumers don't care about that. I don't understand what's unique about Github that means they would have any advantage in this space. Most of what the author is saying is that they trust Microsoft. But Microsoft has an app store. Why wouldn't they just focus on improving that? If they can't get that store on Linux or iOS, why would Github be different? I really just don't get what Github could do that would make me as a consumer prefer it over FDroid as a distribution channel. And Windows is already a reasonably open platform already. Certainly on Linux, there's no advantage whatsoever. I feel like there's something I'm missing, I don't understand the gist of what the poster is trying to say. I don't get what the point would be. The only thing I can think of would be adding better support for payments and buying things from repos. But going down that path is problematic because the whole point of Github is that the releases and code that you list is public. A tightly integrated system that made paywalled build artifacts would be a downside, not an upside. The stuff they're already doing with sponsorships is a much better direction for them to go.
pjmlp 6y ago
So what happened to Github is the enemy and everyone should move into Gitlab?
grishka 6y ago
One more app store run by an American corporation is the last thing we need right now.
bullen 6y ago
The only thing that matters is recurring payments with automatic VAT! Nobody provides this service yet?! If you just want to sell a one-off app use itch.io, they charge and pay VAT for you! (but they don't have recurring)
TiccyRobby 6y ago
You already have a decentralized app store, namely Fdroid. I think it is pretty decent too. And it is the furthest we can go in decentralized app store right now.
ok123456 6y ago
If you want an "App Store" of open source software install gentoo.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
cool-RR 6y ago
More like, someone should make an app store that uses any compliant repo as an app.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ChuckMcM 6y ago
I don't disagree with the theory, but note that Microsoft already has a store. Perhaps the answer here is 'Microsoft should expand its store from just Windows to Windows and github stuff." It will be interesting if a 'pay per use' model for software can emerge in the independent/casual source market.
yepguy 6y ago
How about an app mall rather than an app store? Like F-Droid with multiple repositories (the "stores" in this metaphor), but also supporting authentication, paid apps, and store fronts to display recommendations and stuff.
hardsoftnfloppy 6y ago
> Github is Microsoft > Have you ever used the Windows Store? /thread
nhoughto 6y ago
You build an App Store if you own the platform, not just because you want to.
l0k3ndr 6y ago
It surprises me that how much dependent we have become on these big corps (here it's a choice between Microsoft and Google in the article). But at the same time, Wikipedia exists and is an awesome thing without being owned by these firms. Brings me to the question which I don't have any answer - Why can't we have a open source app store totally developed and run by community and which recovers it's hosting cost with privacy-friendly ads and certain share of app revenues? It can host itself on a combination of clouds, and whether an app can be removed or kept; would be decided by community voting; not just whim of a bigco.
jijji 6y ago
I think ICANN would be a more appropriate app store than Microsoft. At least its an impartial non-profit, instead of a for-profit org that has a colorful history of screwing over almost everyone.
forbiddenvoid 6y ago
Or we could just stop using app stores. Honestly, I've yet to find an argument for the existence of an app store that holds water. Let people install what they want. Provide reasonable paths to update and upgrade and cut out the middle layer. The layer of control that Google and Apple exert over people is anti-competitive. But the answer isn't competing app stores. I don't need someone to tell me what I can or can't install on the operating system on my device.
- risho 6y ago
  all you need to do is look at the windows ecosystem vs the linux one to realize how important a software hub is. windows is a place where people download random one off pieces of software that may or may not be safe, will likely never be updated, and will sit and rot on your computer until the end of time, and are entirely unvetted whereas linux maintains all of your software for you, keeps it frequently up to date, manages dependencies and does at least SOME level of vetting. there definitely are problems with current implementations of app stores in phones, but the idea in general has been a huge boon for security and maintainability. if you think that android would be better off without google play you are insane. people would be running insecure nonsense that would be doing stuff like stealing their bank information and all sorts of stuff. if your problem is the fact that apple restricts people's ability to run software that they haven't explicitly allowed, then I agree, that is a problem. that isn't a problem on google as you can install any apk you want.
  - deathanatos 6y ago
    I think it's easy enough to imagine implementations that allow the addition of software vendors to the package system that permits regular updates. Many of the Linux package managers (e.g., Apt, Portage) permit this; for example, on Gentoo, I install Steam by adding Valve (/Steam) as a place that the package manager can obtain packages from. That's not to say Apt/Portage are by any means perfect; the nature of how they are configured is definitely not going to be friendly to your typical Windows user. But I think it is possible to wrap that in a UI that adequately expresses "okay, you're adding the ability to install software from this vendor, and [the package manager] will help keep it patched & up-to-date." I think we also need to combine that with better security models, so that desktop software isn't necessarily granted access to everything by default. But UI design trends have spent the last decade "simplifying" UIs down so much that they fail to solve the problem at hand.
franciscop 6y ago
> This is a minor but users will be able to raise issues with developers directly instead writing comments over app pages which I think you would agree completely suck. Would love to hear OSS App authors thoughts on this. I've seen some complaining about the review system on the App Stores, but I think it could also add a lot of maintenance burden, so wondering what they think.
zoobab 6y ago
TOS feudalism no thank you.
zoobab 6y ago
TOS feudalism dictated by Microsoft, euh no thank you.
rychco 6y ago
In some ways I feel like this is coming in the not-so distant future. You can already auto update releases every commit, get paid via sponsor, and receive “reviews” (issues). It’s inching steadily towards an App Store already. They seem to be adding social media features too, the user profile README being the most notable example recently. Edit: It’s interesting to notice throughout the comment section all the places where ‘App Store’ has been (presumably) automatically capitalized.
john_moscow 6y ago
The reason why centralized app stores (and autocratic dictatorships) suck is because once you delegate enough power to a single entity, they will ALWAYS have an incentive to start using this power to protect their own interest and not yours. The arguments like "unlike Google, they actually listen to their users" sound similar to "this guy is a complete tyrant, but look, his interests are aligned with ours, for now". History has shown where this road goes. I think, the only way to have a fair "app store" is to somehow model the recommendation mechanics of the pre-monopoly era. 50 years ago you would learn about a new product from your friends (i.e. people you trust) or a newspaper you would buy (i.e. the "influencer" you trust). Each person had their own circle of friends and trusted "influencers", and made their decisions based on them. There wasn't any central authority that could apply the same ranking algorithm to what 100 million different people get to see. This could be modeled fairly well with decentralized mechanisms. Where the weight/rating of an app is different for each user, and it strictly comes from the approval of that app by the people they trust. If you get too much spam this way, just track down the source in your trust network and untrust them.
- ohazi 6y ago
  They're not really app stores, but community-managed free software repositories (e.g. Debian) work astoundingly well next to the shit-show that is every commercial app store I've ever seen.
Thaxll 6y ago
It's very naive to think an alternative store would prevent "issues" we see with Google or Apple. Looking at the story for Elements app they most likely had childporn hosted on the matrix.org server, any compagny would have done the same. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25974512 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25974512
einpoklum 6y ago
GitHub is a US company, or rather part of one (Microsoft). It iss subject to US government diktats, like National Security Letters, NSA spying, US sanctions banning certain countries and people/users, etc. Indeed, GitHub has already acted upon such pressures or commands, as has been covered here on HN if I'm not mistaken. So GitHub will not be fundamentally better than Google in this respect.
liopleurodon 6y ago
we need to get out of this "app store" paradigm. it has ruined everything
davesque 6y ago
I think this is a really really bad idea. No more app stores. As a developer, app stores have always seem totally stupid to me. I remember when computers were actually things that you felt like you owned completely. Now, your computer is owned by people that run app stores. Github still seems like it's a company that understands its role as an intermediary. It hasn't yet tried to take over the world like everyone else and I hope it never does.
- dukeyukey 6y ago
  Snap and apt are basically app stores, albeit ones where everything is free. They're just repositories of trusted programs that are easy install and easy to keep updated.
  - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
    Snap is another locked down platform where the Canonical repo is hardcoded in to the tool. Flatpak is a much better platform where you can specify your own repo source like flathub or any other source you want.
- Forge36 6y ago
  To a degree: pre-internet security relied very heavily on: physical access, physical software (Floppy Disk or CD and bought at a physical store). With both of those restrictions eliminated with the internet there's two security venues: bugs in Software with remote access without authentication, and code execution access (currently handled via several security access levels). The later has proven difficult as it's gone from "1" unlimited via physical access to "distrust the user". App stores being the latest version of trust with perhaps Apple iPhone as one of the highest examples and most restrictive (presently in the name of user privacy vs Facebook). Github is also "1:many" in terms of supported devices supported. Once an app store exists, the number supported platforms is constrained. The door is opened to competitors to host both a repository and an app store for another platform. Omitting the app store the ecosystem remains neutral to which device runs the end result
- xenadu02 6y ago
lmeyerov 6y ago
I fully expect Azure Marketplace and Github to integrate. -- Brand: A rebrand may make sense too, similar to GitHub Actions incorporation of azure automation. But probably less so given the wider non-dev audiences who would consume this stuff: They'll trust MS over GH. -- B2B: This already covers cloud apps. I see GH as one of the bigger advantages Microsoft has over Amazon + Google as server software moves more and more to a 'shift left' world. AFAICT, this is less of a question of 'if' and more of 'when'. Unfortunately for everyone, MS is historically slow here. A surprise push here may end up being Teams. Consumer seems a lot harder, but maybe: - Desktop: MS has a big consumer games division (XBox..). Doing MS Desktop Games via a MS App Desktop Store, similar to Google Play for driving Android marketplace, may work for pushing regular consumer apps as well. They can already do for Windows (if they haven't, I don't follow), and maybe compelling enough for Apple to want to bring to OS X? - Mobile: This is about Microsoft's ability to win over or open Apple, Google, and the top 10 Android vendor for fairly controlled mobile experience.. which is historically unlikely..
audiodude 6y ago
Can someone remind me, and I mean this seriously, why we decided that we need app stores to begin with? Why can't I just go on a website and download an apk?
jhokanson 6y ago
Maybe somewhat off topic ... I don't sell anything on any App stores currently but I do like the idea of having some way of creating "applications" that are a bit more discoverable. Last I checked GitHub search is pretty awful for discovery (maybe I'm wrong on that?). I could imagine an interface where it would be easier to browse "apps" that do something specific. Mathworks (MATLAB) has a decent version of this: https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/ https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/ People can provide feedback and ratings which makes it easy to see when projects are dead or when there are big issues that aren't being fix. You can also reference other projects - "This project is like that project but it is faster ..." I don't think PyPi is all that good for this. Also, I've never really invested the effort to learn how to deploy an application to PyPi whereas something that simply points to my repo may be valuable? Anyway, the main problem I want solved is not having people discover my code (although that would be great too), but being able to find other code more easily so I don't need to constantly reinvent the wheel.
thayne 6y ago
> They could finally give the desktop the app store it deserves IMO the the package managers for most linux distros are better than either mobile app store. There is also flathub and the snap store. Macs of course have the apple app store, and homebrew is fairly prevalent as well. Even windows has AppGet and unofficial package managers like chocolatey. Maybe none of these are what the author thinks desktop "deserves", but if so, then what would be? And why would GitHub be any better at it than any of its tried and tested predecessors
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  Most desktop app stores suck because they have nothing in them because developers stay far away if given the choice. No developer would willingly give away 30% of their profits and face being randomly removed if they can just provide the app directly to users.
prakhargurunani 6y ago
PayTM's CEO Vijay Shekhar Sharma has already started working for a Google Play alternative for India.
higerordermap 6y ago
> Backed by Microsoft. Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. I trust them more than Apple and Google Maybe currently they are more developer friendly. But it changed under current CEO. That means bus factor is 1. What one CEO does, other may undo. Doesn't sound wise to rely on MS.
rixtox 6y ago
What we need is actually the Matrix protocol for app distribution. That is, a decentralized yet federated platform replacement for App Store. So the longevity and transparency of the platform is ensured by the distributed property.
onenightnine 6y ago
bitbucket app store.
ascorbic 6y ago
GitHub is a brand for developers. It would make no sense for Microsoft to start using it for anything as consumer-facing as an app store. It might, perhaps, be worth doing for a dev-focussed store, but I'm not sure of the value of that. A more realistic option would be to seamlessly integrate GitHub releases with a Microsoft app store.
rufi 6y ago
this is need of the hour..
WolfOliver 6y ago
Is there an open source app store for self hosting for desktop applications? For buying/selling licenses and distributing updates.
zapf 6y ago
No it shouldn't. We can do without one more centralised gateway to apps.
pankajdoharey 6y ago
I think instead of Depending on Microsoft, there should be a Decentralised App Store, Github too from time to time has blocked many repos. Just in 2019 they banned Developers from Iran and Syria. One cant depend on Corporations to protect our freedom. If you wanna do it right do it yourself.
- warrenm 6y ago
  >there should be a Decentralised App Store You mean like downloading a tarball and compiling it yourself? Yeah - that is totally a Good Idea™
  - pankajdoharey 6y ago
    Why does it need to be a tarball? Why cant it be like Brew, Apt or RPM ?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
moondev 6y ago
Homebrew / linuxbrew ?
GRBurst 6y ago
Why don't they cooperate with f-droid? So many open source app on github are already on f-droid

814 points by quaintdev 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Hmmm the main issue is not an App Store. It is rather how Android is packaged. There is F-Droid type of store out there, it is just that it is not in the play store. As for iOS there really no proper way to install except jailbreaking any way. The bottom we don't need another App Store, rather a FOSS distribution of OS for Android (e.g: https://www.replicant.us/about.php https://www.replicant.us/about.php ) that kind like the Debian distro for desktop Linux. As for iOS, is Darwin still open source, maybe a distro for iPhone with an open source Darwin fork?

jhasse 6y ago
Darwin is only the kernel. iOS is closed-source.
- 0df8dkdf 6y ago
  For sure, the same way Linux is only the kernel. If you ask Stallman, he will say GNU/Linux. ;-)
  - jhasse 6y ago
    yeah, so? Android's user-space is still mostly open-source. What's open-source of iOS is basically useless for developing an alternative OS for iPhones.
fluidcruft 6y ago
F-Droid doesn't enroll as device administrator on your phone. I think Microsoft could easily pull that off if they wanted to which would let them push updates and manage applications the way Google does. My workplace already basically runs BYOD devices through some Microsoft Azure management thing.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  There is an extra thing you can do to make fdroid admin but it requires root. It does allow auto updates though.

Pfhreak 6y ago

Sounds like a great way to create incentives that undermine githubs mission while simultaneously taking a huge amount of developer resources for a product that will have niche interest at best. Building app stores is hard. Moderating app stores is hard. Both are significantly different from running GitHub. While I appreciate the author's intent here, this just doesn't feel like it was deeply thought out.

fbelzile 6y ago
I don't know though, Microsoft already runs multiple app stores (Xbox & Windows, Edge). I don't see why they couldn't build it out for another platform or at least figure out some kind of arms-reach integration with Github -> Microsoft Store. This could be a nice come back into the mobile sphere they lost out on. As a developer, I completely agree that Microsoft earned my trust over the years.
- acct776 6y ago
  There's pushback on another app store from Microsoft because nobody wants more walled gardens. The pendulum has shifted, and it's swinging towards PWA. Per Microsoft, Outlook is now a progressive web app. App stores are dying - they're just going to take a bit to timeout.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - krisgenre 6y ago
    >>The pendulum has shifted, and it's swinging towards PWA Didn't Firefox recently announce they're discontinuing PWA features?
    - crocodiletears 6y ago
      Only for desktop, I think.
    - 6y ago

joana035 6y ago

> Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. Let's wait and see history repeating itself. I don't buy that and I will never forget.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

carapace 6y ago

> They were awesome during youtube-dl debacle. The debacle IMO was all the folks who thought GH taking down youtube-dl was newsworthy at all in the first place. The infantile dependency is the problem, not the lack of yet another gatekeeper. > I trust [MS] more than Apple and Google. Thank you for the LOL. Look, VSCode is nice but don't be so naive. Anyone can start an "app store", but can they make money at it? If MS thought they could make money running an app store would they hesitate? (Also, they already have an app store.)

COGlory 6y ago

This is a great idea. I can't wait for my favorite apps to get banned by yet another centralized authority!

rvz 6y ago
Exactly. I'm afraid all the reasons the author lists, just boils down to: 'GitHub (Microsoft) should host all our apps because they listen to their users!' What could possibly go wrong?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

garrepi 6y ago

> Unlike Google they actually listen to their users. They were awesome during youtube-dl debacle. I wouldn't say they were "awesome" during the youtube-dl stuff. They were slow to respond and non-transparent about what was happening behind the scenes. Also, user's have been calling for GitHub to terminate their contract with ICE for a long time now[0] to no avail. GitHub is better than most, no doubt, when it comes to "listen[ing] to their users" but they still have a ways to go. [0](https://github.com/drop-ice/dear-github-2.0 https://github.com/drop-ice/dear-github-2.0)

notsureaboutpg 6y ago
GitHub won't terminate any contract with ICE now that they are owned by Microsoft, who has a ton of government and military contracts
acct776 6y ago
In contrast, I was surprised with how "quickly" it was resolved, compared to my expectation. MS is beholden to US.gov through contract cash and unspoken agreements - those ties are lessening, but are still pretty deep.
- rovr138 6y ago
  It wasn't an issue with the US government.
  - acct776 6y ago
    If it has to do with copyright in the US, the bureaucrats are always involved.
nabla9 6y ago
If there is stance to be made, it should be principled. Today it's just companies reacting to any specific issue internet mob in social media has. They ban specific people or organizations based on mob activity.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

rvz 6y ago

> They already host source code of millions of apps. Release integration should be trivial to implement. So that it too can become an Apple / Google App Store where it can also control which apps, repositories are allowed or not? Essentially you're moving to another centralised platform, but the reason is because they 'listen to their users'? No thanks and no deal. Hosting an app repository on your own website is fine and already decentralised. So far, Cydia and F-Droid are doing it right with being a potential alternative App Store.

jberryman 6y ago

I'm not sure what my point is here exactly, but: debian has had an "app store" for 20+ years that works brilliantly, can be trusted not to fuck with or spy on you, has never pulled youtube-dl/nmap/etc (as far as I know), (while also being naturally free of forum software for white supremacists (bonus!))

jcastro 6y ago
You're being quite selective here, sure the Debian way has it's positives but let's not pretend that model is free of problems -- there's been plenty of software that has been removed or is not allowed in Debian, and once you want a newer version of something that isn't in there then getting what you want can be difficult if you're not an expert, etc.
ljm 6y ago
Debian's software repo is fantastic but has a deliberately high barrier to entry and chooses stability above all else. Hosting your own apt repo isn't as difficult as it looks (all you need is a static file server) so it's a nice way to host your software if you have a collection of it.

WhoIsSatoshi 6y ago

I am totally behind that. The Ethos of the platform and the visibility it has are priming it for acceptance and its own market. When Open Source crystallizes around it, this could be the spark to break the duopoly of the mobile platforms (by framing a hypothetical future alternative), AND provide Desktop OS's an Ethos-First platform for releases, where the developers would want to be on their best behavior from the get-go.

karakanb 6y ago

I have a question regarding the moderation needs of stores: why exactly do we need stores for mobile devices, whereas we don't have any store or moderation for installing application on computers, or visiting websites? Except various edge cases, you can technically visit any website that is served from any server, or you can install any application that has the correct binaries for your platform. What makes mobile devices different in this regard?

zests 6y ago
A walled garden is a plus for most consumers. Especially non-technical consumers who want to download something and be sure it's not spyware that will brick their phone. If you want to be able to install anything you can buy a pinephone but I can't imagine it would be fun to install anything on a pinephone. Apple offers a walled garden as an offering to i-device users. Other companies try to mimic Apple's success. Mobile devices simply do not have the same "must be able to install anything" requirements that a standard computer has.
- amelius 6y ago
  > If you want to be able to install anything you can buy a pinephone but I can't imagine it would be fun to install anything on a pinephone. If an application is properly sandboxed, and I can fully control the permissions of that sandbox, then I see no problems with that.
- MayeulC 6y ago
  > I can't imagine it would be fun to install anything on a pinephone. It's actually fun to do "apk add audacity" (yeah, there's also multiple gui frontends...) and have it installed and working as well as on desktop. OK, that one uses a traditional desktop interface, but it is still usable. Plug it into a docking station and use a mouse and keyboard + screen if you prefer. Okay, that's not really sideloading, especially as each distro has its packaging format. You can use flatpaks for this (and they are sandboxes), some CIs provide builds as flatpaks (KDE does this). One issue is that Linux executables are still very much architecture-dependent.

sschueller 6y ago

All fine and good but what we need first is an antitrust case against apple and google just like we had against Microsoft back in the day when internet explorer was pre-installed. Just now we have a situation where you can't even install an alternative app store in one platform and the other one is crippled. And don't tell me apple has a small market share or you can use another vendor. Back when Microsoft was being forced to open up it was as extremely easy to install another browser and they still had to go to court.

georgyo 6y ago

Branding does matter, but friction would be extremely rough. Windows is ironically an extremely open system. All users are very used to doing what other platforms would call side loading. And all apps on windows have developed their own methods for receiving updates. The Microsoft store for windows is pretty sad. Not because the interface sucks, at least not more so than google or apple ones, but because there isn't a real incentive for developers or users to use it. Searching for a ssh client on the windows store shows ZERO free options, and all of them look worse than PuTTY. They are in the windows store strictly for visibility; which is a good use of an app store. But without the major players who don't need the limited visibility of that store, they users won't think to look there for their needs as well. If Microsoft rebranded their app store the Github app store, Or made some easy pipeline for github actions to publish to their store; there would be a fair amount of people yelling "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" as well as fearing that microsoft is using the good will of GitHub to get to a similar world of the closed gardens of the others. Lastly, Microsoft has not done so well in the mobile phone markets. Creating an android store similar to F-Droid would be a hard sell and limited appeal. Google very likely won't let you install the windows app store from the google app store. Apple will never allow a competitor on their platform _at all_ unless legally required. I don't see how a GitHub app store could succeed.

benibela 6y ago
I have plans to put my Windows apps in the Microsoft store, because I have heard it is cheaper than getting a code signing certificate which would be renewed yearly But I switched to Linux, so I could not use any of the Microsoft tooling. Unless the store deployment can run on WINE?
- Kwpolska 6y ago
  You should set up a Windows VM. Not only for the store tooling, but also to have a way to test your software on the platform you’re offering it on.
pier25 6y ago
> but because there isn't a real incentive for developers or users to use it Not true. It solves app distribution, install, and updates. We used it for an education app a couple of years ago and it was great. Before that we used Electron with Squirrel and it was horrible for our users. For some reason the app wasn't installed in the start menu and if they deleted the desktop shortcut it was impossible for them to find it again.

jariel 6y ago

We need multiple app stores with legislation on providing access and default searches, much in the same way EU will require devices to allow users to select default search etc.. A good amount of competition will help solve a lot of problems, and very strongly highlight the ant-competitive practices inherent in these value chain verticalizations. I respect Google wants to form a Union to influence who can and cannot be on YouTube, at the same time, I want absolutely nothing to do with some foreign special interest group dictating content to me, so let's have some choice, thanks.

villasv 6y ago

> They already host source code of millions of apps. Release integration should be trivial to implement. Release integration is trivial for anyone. It's the easiest and most irrelevant part of the app stores. > Unlike Google they actually listen to their users. They were awesome during youtube-dl debacle. And controversial on others, like shutting down Popcorn Time's repository. As any other, they'll listen if there's enough outcry. > Backed by Microsoft. Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. I trust them more than Apple and Google. This is situational and opportunistic. It can change any day. In fact, managing an important app store is exactly one way to re-(un)-balance this relationship. > They could finally give the desktop the app store it deserves Microsoft won't have GitHub compete with the Microsoft Store and its newer efforts like winget. It would unermine their unifying vision that has been in the works for years for no benefit. > This is a minor but users will be able to raise issues with developers directly instead writing comments over app pages which I think you would agree completely suck. Sure, lets pipe user feedback directly into GitHub issues. Good luck with that if you have a hundred issues a day. I don't think there's a single angle that would paint this as a good idea. Phone manufacturers like Samsung are in a much much better position to try. And indeed they have been trying an failing.

trident5000 6y ago
If you think Microsoft wont turn their back and get on the ban/censorship train like any other company I believe that would be a mistake. They will have some "woke" employees and journalists grill the executives and then they will cave to mob rule just like the rest.
- villasv 6y ago
  > they will cave to mob rule just like the rest Would they? Microsoft is still serving ICE, despite all the "grilling".
- kibwen 6y ago
  Is hand-wringing over "woke" bogeymen the next evolution of grousing unironically about "SJWs"?

u678u 6y ago

I was thinking why we need an app store at all. It does make sense for security and discoverability. However maybe it makes sense to have multiple app stores. So you my phone I could have a Google one and Microsoft one and maybe a new company that specializes in this.

aero-glide2 6y ago

We need an app store which isn't hosted by the big 4

BaggaDonuts2 6y ago

Not gonna happen. Anyone could start an App Store and use GH’s api’s to file issues with developers repos anyway. Microsoft owns App Center (formerly Hockey App) which allows apps to send diagnostics to devs for crashes and the like. I’d expect similar features for GH in the longer term future. But an App Store - prob not. Apple is particularly difficult to develop on and deploy to their store as it is. You can only deploy to test devices with custom policies (app center makes this easier) or jailbreak your device. There’s no way Apple will ever release their monopoly on their App Store. So you’d be looking at an android only App Store (plus windows for whatever that is worth)

AndrewKemendo 6y ago

I thought from reading the headline it was a genius idea, but I think after reflection there are at least two major barriers to this working: 1. There is no GitOS. So the target environment would be so variable and high friction that it's unclear to me how GitHub would manage clean builds and installation. 2. I'd say MOST repos aren't anywhere near ready to run. Making an automated binary/msi/apk/ pathway would almost certainly lead to broken packages for the majority of repos.

alfonmga 6y ago

I don't trust Microsoft.

titzer 6y ago

Please don't. This is where I put my code right now. Don't become irrelevant garbage like SourceForge from which we'll all have to migrate anyway.

2Gkashmiri 6y ago

isnt there already f-droid which is doing a slow but nonetheless a great job?

Gedrovits 6y ago

They have "Releases" which can be improved to provide binaries considered as "App Store". Just download the proper release for your platform and Rock'n'Roll.

ksec 6y ago

This doesn't answer the question, an App Store for what? iOS / Mac? Appel doesn't even allow anything alike on iOS, and for Mac, Apple could pull out developer certificate for whatever reason. Android? Will that be bundled by Phone markers? If not how are the 2.5B of Google Android users going to get it? Windows, what are the benefits? I am not understand the reason other than I want an App Store that is not coming from Big Tech. And arguably Github is part of Big Tech ( Microsoft ).

epanchin 6y ago

I would love a github logo on other app stores; verifying the tag hosted on github was compiled and released to the app store without modification.

mapgrep 6y ago

People are raising some good concrete objections but I wonder if there isn’t the kernel of a good idea here. Maybe GitHub should be offering additional services to better help pipe projects into all kinds of app distribution mechanisms. App stores, platform package managers (apt dnf ports homebrew), language package managers (gems pip maven CPAN npm etc), stand-alone installers (dmgs install exe-s), maybe even containers. These services could form a layer with some autonomy from the underlying project — the author of the project rarely handles alll (or sometimes any) of the distro channels. Anecdotally I feel like most of this stuff happens outside of GitHub, which is fine and actually good, but maybe there are things GitHub could do to smooth the process? To help the original authors arrange things in releases or set metadata in a way that’s useful downstream to packagers? But some of it happens in projects already, sometimes for a desktop type app you’ll see a dmg or some other installer right in the project files. This could probably be more standardized.

tom_mellior 6y ago
> But some of it happens in projects already, sometimes for a desktop type app you’ll see a dmg or some other installer right in the project files. This could probably be more standardized. I agree with your interpretation. GitHub already allows projects to publish release builds. They could provide a new search form that looks somewhat like an "app store" where you could search for ready-to-install packages.

turbinerneiter 6y ago

> Backed by Microsoft. Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. I trust them more than Apple and Google. Maybe we shouldn't trust MS, but ourselves. A MS controlled App Store is as bad or good as a Google or Apple controlled App store. Good for some peace of mind and trust, that they won't distribute malware ( ... already broken tough), bad for the fact that they control it we would still rely on the benevolence of a dictator.

worik 6y ago
Yes, this. Some of us remember Microsoft setting personal computing back ten years by using their market power to foist sub par, frankly rubbish, system software on computer users. There is no sign they have changed their business practices. It is just now they are the underdog. Full respect is due to MS for turning their business around, but they are playing catchup now. If they ever get back out in front, watch out!

ratsmack 6y ago

A better solution would be an entirely community driven app store that is not beholden to any corporate influence.

danShumway 6y ago
FDroid exists already. Okay, it doesn't host proprietary apps, but whatever. The point is, this isn't a tech problem anymore, it's not a problem where someone can just make a new platform to solve everything. Google has contracts with phone manufacturers that ban them from adding 3rd-party app stores alongside Google Play. And none of these app stores are going to show up on iOS. It's a cultural/legal problem at this point. Otherwise, community maintained (even private) software repos are already a thing. We don't really need people to build more of them, we need people to start using them, and for mobile platforms to support them.
- ratsmack 6y ago
  >Google has contracts with phone manufacturers that ban them from adding 3rd-party app stores alongside Google Play. That's kinda like Microsoft requiring a payment for every PC sold whether their OS was installed or not. Predatory contracts from a monopolistic company... who would have thought.

johnisgood 6y ago

It is almost like the author forgot that GitHub is owned by Microsoft (despite mentioning it, sigh). "Tired of big tech censoring apps? Let's have big tech manage an app store, that'll solve it". or "Tired of one big tech censoring apps? Let's have another one, the one and only!". Plus I am sure others have mentioned it by now but GitHub Issues for user feedback is going to suck big time.

fullstackwife 6y ago
This idea would take it to another level, because it would also mean that the "big tech is in control of my source code and release process".
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

GriffonWizard 6y ago

Here's a question: Why do we even need app stores? Why can't we all get comfortable downloading from the Web on mobile like we are on the desktop? The only benefit to them I see is discoverability, so instead of building "stores" why don't we build collections of applications from around the Web and display them in an app store-like interface. Developers can submit applications, they will show up in our "store" making them searchable and discoverable by users, and when users hit download it will take them to the developers Website to download and install an apk or whatever.

monadic3 6y ago

This is a comically terrible idea.

quaintdev 6y ago

Author here, I am afraid my blog is hosted on a Raspberry PI and it might go down because of HN traffic. If that happens, the mirror of the post is at https://telegra.ph/GitHub-Should-Start-An-App-Store-01-31 https://telegra.ph/GitHub-Should-Start-An-App-Store-01-31 Did not expected this to blow up. Thanks for the critical feedback. You guys are tough crowd :)

ben_ 6y ago
I like what you've done with hugo!
- quaintdev 6y ago
  Thanks to Austin at https://austingebauer.com/about/ https://austingebauer.com/about/ for creating the devise theme.
jitendrac 6y ago
Do you Host it at Home with static IP or DynDNS?? and which internet service provider do you use? Edit:Found its BSNL
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  Hosting with a dynamic IP is not particularly hard. I had a raspberry pi ping my IP back to the dns server minutely and it worked well.
  - jitendrac 6y ago
    would you mind sharing the script? I earlier used noip.com,and my router's dyndns, I will love doing it other way.

beckman466 6y ago

'GitHub Should Start an App Store' ...or we should all join the distributed app revolution made possible by holochain's DHT+git+signatures+gossip Rails-like distributed app framework, and use holo's app store to download and use fully distributed apps [1]? [1] http://holo.host http://holo.host

tutfbhuf 6y ago

No, they shouldn't. Centralized App Stores isn't the way to go, look at recent examples of (temporarily) removed Apps like Matrix from Play Store. A decentralized App Store (e.g. based on IPFS) would be great.

confiq 6y ago
Why there is no regulation about this? My hardware and I do with that whatever I want...

rmsaksida 6y ago

I think what's more important is somehow getting Apple to allow alternative app stores in their phones. While Android phones are the most popular in many (most?) countries, iPhones are still very common and make it so solutions in one distribution platform don't extend to all phone users. Once a competitor is able to operate in both Android and iOS, I think we will see a real threat to official app stores, whether it's Github behind it or someone else.

warrenm 6y ago
Like it or not, pretty much the whole reason Apple only has The One True App Store™ is to ensure at least some amount of review of QA is done before unleashing apps on its customers. Does that get abused? Arguably - yes. Is it overall a good trade-off? Depends on your use case. Want "full" control of your whole mobile device? Get a Pine phone or rooted Android, etc What any app you download to be highly-likely to be free of bugs and spyware? Go for an iOS device
- rmsaksida 6y ago
  I disagree. Technically, Android doesn't have a One True App Store. But in practice, Google Play is the standard app store and 99% of users use it exclusively, at least in the West. It is in fact the one true app store for Android. So Google does in fact control the Android app store (the one that counts, anyway). The reason why Google Play has so many shitty apps is because Google simply doesn't care about curation in the same way Apple does. That's true for every Google product, by the way. They strongly favor algorithmic curation, while Apple also relies heavily on human curation. If Apple allowed alternative app stores, nothing would change as far as the standard iOS app store is concerned. 99,99% of users would keep using the Apple app store unless there was a very compelling reason for using an alternative.

Ericson2314 6y ago

Who needs app stores?...

justplay 6y ago

Sorry to be skeptical, but as the web is already evolving at a faster pace, and if web-assembly succeeds, we might don't even need another app/play store.

vijaybritto 6y ago

>Unlike Google they actually listen to their users. Beg to differ. They have far less problems to worry about when hosting the only the source code. Now if they host entire apps they will most likely be required to moderate the content in the apps. Its not a random company. MS will want to maintain their brand image and regulations. This will lead to the same problems sooner or later.

heavyset_go 6y ago

GitHub is unable to enter the mobile app distribution market because Apple and Google leverage their monopolies in the mobile OS market to limit competition, or outright ban it, in the mobile app distribution space. It'll take some serious antitrust action before real competition will be allowed to improve costs and experiences for developers and users alike when it comes to mobile app distribution. In the meantime, Apple and Google will continue to keep a stranglehold on the app distribution market like they have for over a decade now.

confiq 6y ago
there is Amazon Appstore!
- thekyle 6y ago
  Also, the Galaxy store and F-droid
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    Google has restricted Android such that only the Play Store can implement background installation of apps, batch installations and automatic upgrading of installed apps. F-Droid can implement those if you give it root access, but manufacturers go out of their way to prevent users from rooting their devices. I need a Samsung phone to use the Galaxy Store.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  I have the Amazon Appstore on my Android phone. Google does not allow Amazon to compete on feature parity with the Play Store. Amazon's Appstore cannot do background installation of apps, batch installation of apps, or automatic upgrades if the device isn't an Amazon device.
  - confiq 6y ago
    > background installation of apps I wish google would not do that...

0xbadcafebee 6y ago

Screw app stores. Mobile is the only place where you have to use a portal to install an app, and it's just a power play. Let me just install an app by browsing a regular website, not being funneled through somebody's portal. That's how every other computer in history has installed apps. It's not perfect but it certainly has none of the downsides of app stores.

disposekinetics 6y ago

No one should have an 'app store', the entire concept is user hostile. A general purpose computer should be able to execute what I wish it to execute and it's inexcusable that a company would think they know better.

wgm 6y ago

Homebrew for Mac essentially is a GitHub App Store for many though not all projects.

neiman 6y ago

Switch Google with Microsoft? The king is dead long live the king?

jugg1es 6y ago

I would support github creating a different entity that could act like an app store, but I do not think that github.com is best served by pivoting to anything other than what it does right now.

xenihn 6y ago
Why do people keep referring to Github as Github and not Microsoft when discussing business decisions? Github is not "backed" by Microsoft. Microsoft owns them. Github is Microsoft. This article is asking Microsoft to start an App Store, which they have already done. It's called Windows Phone Store. The article should be asking Microsoft to rebrand Windows Phone Store, not asking Github to make a new app store altogether. I see the same thing happen with Twitch and Amazon. It feels like people don't understand how much influence and control is exerted on even the most independent subsidiaries, and how that control only increases year-over-year. Especially when it comes to something that generates money.
- jugg1es 6y ago
  Not sure what your point is. There is still a brand called GitHub. It's the same reason people call it YouTube instead of Google.
- tester756 6y ago
  As far as I've hear Github works significantly independently from MS. >The core message everybody on today’s call stressed was that GitHub will continue to operate as an independent company. >n our interview, he also stressed that his focus will be on making “GitHub better at making GitHub” and that he plans to do so by bringing Microsoft’s resources and infrastructure to the code hosting service, while at the same time leaving it to operate independently. >We are committed to being stewards of the GitHub community, which will retain its developer-first ethos operate independently and remain an open platform

petters 6y ago

Not sure about the app store, but: it would be great if GitHub could provide binaries that were guaranteed to be built from a certain commit.

dane-pgp 6y ago
At the very least, that should be provided for NPM packages, since Microsoft now own NPM. Having those packages verifiably built from source could technically be done by any trusted third party, so it's a pity that this project didn't take off: https://hackernoon.com/what-if-we-could-verify-npm-packages-c2a319cff758 https://hackernoon.com/what-if-we-could-verify-npm-packages-...

newbie578 6y ago

I could see GitHub having an App Store, would like to have them as an alternative to Apple, but that is not the optimal solution. I do not wish for 10 App Store's to exist in the world and have to distribute to each one. There already is the best platform available, it is called the Web. The problem is Apple purposely holding back PWAs so they can keep earning their Apple Mafia Cut. I truly belive that for most apps excluding games, PWAs are the way to go. Truly cross platform, low on download speed, and can have almost identical functionality like most of the apps. That is why I am stocked for Flutter Web, when it gets production ready, it can truly be a game changer. I am currently forced to make mobile apps, since PWAs are just not that popular nor ideal (Apple problems as I stated above), but I am using Flutter which is honestly fun and the best solution. Make Apple (and Google, although they already have access on most of it) to their API, that is most notably the ability for PWAs to push notifications.

meerita 6y ago

It sounds a good idea, but The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The only way to ensure pure, non controlled by corp distribution of software is and was BitTorrent. Microsoft may be good today, but may not in the future.

throwaway1986_ 6y ago

No. Stop it. This is NOT what GitHub is for. Yes, it has become a place for software where users may download packaged "apps" from. But this is only a byproduct of GitHub hosting software. Do not ruin GitHub for me please. I don't wanna sound like a jerk, but I don't wanna have to deal with the same people who leave horrible comment on the App Store and Play Store. I'm sure you have good intentions, but this is a really stupid idea.

jsharf 6y ago

Along these lines, it would be really cool to see GitHub begin to approach the source code infrastructure that Google has internally. If they added a good build system (heck, just use bazel) and a feature to build code in the cloud, and a web IDE and better code review system (of course, all with open protocols — it’s git after all), we could have a much more standardized open source environment— the overhead to working on a new open source project would be lower since you wouldn’t have to figure out how to build it. It would also make it significantly easier to add dependencies and integrate software together.

jsharf 6y ago

Along these lines, it would be really cool to see GitHub begin to approach the source code infrastructure that Google has internally. If they added a good build system (heck, just use bazel) and a feature to build code in the cloud (of course, all with open protocols — it’s git after all), we could have a much more standardized open source environment— the overhead to working on a new open source project would be lower since you wouldn’t have to figure out how to build it or how to build dependencies. It would also make it significantly easier to add dependencies and integrate software together.

danShumway 6y ago

But... why? Github has very few attributes that make it suitable as an app store. Sure, you could add payments on top of it, you can make an interface for downloading releases or subscribing. Or anyone else could build an app store and just use Github repos as an upstream if they care about that stuff. The Github API is good, it wouldn't be hard to for any existing app store to add more integration. And how would this help with anything? Is Microsoft better positioned than Amazon to get apps onto Android devices? Is anyone positioned to get a 3rd-party app store on iOS? What does this solve that FDroid doesn't already solve, how would it better than what we have, and what does Github's core functionality (hosting source code) have to do with distributing apps? If the goal is just to have reproduceable builds or something, most consumers don't care about that. I don't understand what's unique about Github that means they would have any advantage in this space. Most of what the author is saying is that they trust Microsoft. But Microsoft has an app store. Why wouldn't they just focus on improving that? If they can't get that store on Linux or iOS, why would Github be different? I really just don't get what Github could do that would make me as a consumer prefer it over FDroid as a distribution channel. And Windows is already a reasonably open platform already. Certainly on Linux, there's no advantage whatsoever. I feel like there's something I'm missing, I don't understand the gist of what the poster is trying to say. I don't get what the point would be. The only thing I can think of would be adding better support for payments and buying things from repos. But going down that path is problematic because the whole point of Github is that the releases and code that you list is public. A tightly integrated system that made paywalled build artifacts would be a downside, not an upside. The stuff they're already doing with sponsorships is a much better direction for them to go.

pjmlp 6y ago

So what happened to Github is the enemy and everyone should move into Gitlab?

grishka 6y ago

One more app store run by an American corporation is the last thing we need right now.

bullen 6y ago

The only thing that matters is recurring payments with automatic VAT! Nobody provides this service yet?! If you just want to sell a one-off app use itch.io, they charge and pay VAT for you! (but they don't have recurring)

TiccyRobby 6y ago

You already have a decentralized app store, namely Fdroid. I think it is pretty decent too. And it is the furthest we can go in decentralized app store right now.

ok123456 6y ago

If you want an "App Store" of open source software install gentoo.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

cool-RR 6y ago

More like, someone should make an app store that uses any compliant repo as an app.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ChuckMcM 6y ago

I don't disagree with the theory, but note that Microsoft already has a store. Perhaps the answer here is 'Microsoft should expand its store from just Windows to Windows and github stuff." It will be interesting if a 'pay per use' model for software can emerge in the independent/casual source market.

yepguy 6y ago

How about an app mall rather than an app store? Like F-Droid with multiple repositories (the "stores" in this metaphor), but also supporting authentication, paid apps, and store fronts to display recommendations and stuff.

hardsoftnfloppy 6y ago

> Github is Microsoft > Have you ever used the Windows Store? /thread

nhoughto 6y ago

You build an App Store if you own the platform, not just because you want to.

l0k3ndr 6y ago

It surprises me that how much dependent we have become on these big corps (here it's a choice between Microsoft and Google in the article). But at the same time, Wikipedia exists and is an awesome thing without being owned by these firms. Brings me to the question which I don't have any answer - Why can't we have a open source app store totally developed and run by community and which recovers it's hosting cost with privacy-friendly ads and certain share of app revenues? It can host itself on a combination of clouds, and whether an app can be removed or kept; would be decided by community voting; not just whim of a bigco.

jijji 6y ago

I think ICANN would be a more appropriate app store than Microsoft. At least its an impartial non-profit, instead of a for-profit org that has a colorful history of screwing over almost everyone.

forbiddenvoid 6y ago

Or we could just stop using app stores. Honestly, I've yet to find an argument for the existence of an app store that holds water. Let people install what they want. Provide reasonable paths to update and upgrade and cut out the middle layer. The layer of control that Google and Apple exert over people is anti-competitive. But the answer isn't competing app stores. I don't need someone to tell me what I can or can't install on the operating system on my device.

risho 6y ago
all you need to do is look at the windows ecosystem vs the linux one to realize how important a software hub is. windows is a place where people download random one off pieces of software that may or may not be safe, will likely never be updated, and will sit and rot on your computer until the end of time, and are entirely unvetted whereas linux maintains all of your software for you, keeps it frequently up to date, manages dependencies and does at least SOME level of vetting. there definitely are problems with current implementations of app stores in phones, but the idea in general has been a huge boon for security and maintainability. if you think that android would be better off without google play you are insane. people would be running insecure nonsense that would be doing stuff like stealing their bank information and all sorts of stuff. if your problem is the fact that apple restricts people's ability to run software that they haven't explicitly allowed, then I agree, that is a problem. that isn't a problem on google as you can install any apk you want.
- deathanatos 6y ago
  I think it's easy enough to imagine implementations that allow the addition of software vendors to the package system that permits regular updates. Many of the Linux package managers (e.g., Apt, Portage) permit this; for example, on Gentoo, I install Steam by adding Valve (/Steam) as a place that the package manager can obtain packages from. That's not to say Apt/Portage are by any means perfect; the nature of how they are configured is definitely not going to be friendly to your typical Windows user. But I think it is possible to wrap that in a UI that adequately expresses "okay, you're adding the ability to install software from this vendor, and [the package manager] will help keep it patched & up-to-date." I think we also need to combine that with better security models, so that desktop software isn't necessarily granted access to everything by default. But UI design trends have spent the last decade "simplifying" UIs down so much that they fail to solve the problem at hand.

franciscop 6y ago

> This is a minor but users will be able to raise issues with developers directly instead writing comments over app pages which I think you would agree completely suck. Would love to hear OSS App authors thoughts on this. I've seen some complaining about the review system on the App Stores, but I think it could also add a lot of maintenance burden, so wondering what they think.

zoobab 6y ago

TOS feudalism no thank you.

zoobab 6y ago

TOS feudalism dictated by Microsoft, euh no thank you.

rychco 6y ago

In some ways I feel like this is coming in the not-so distant future. You can already auto update releases every commit, get paid via sponsor, and receive “reviews” (issues). It’s inching steadily towards an App Store already. They seem to be adding social media features too, the user profile README being the most notable example recently. Edit: It’s interesting to notice throughout the comment section all the places where ‘App Store’ has been (presumably) automatically capitalized.

john_moscow 6y ago

The reason why centralized app stores (and autocratic dictatorships) suck is because once you delegate enough power to a single entity, they will ALWAYS have an incentive to start using this power to protect their own interest and not yours. The arguments like "unlike Google, they actually listen to their users" sound similar to "this guy is a complete tyrant, but look, his interests are aligned with ours, for now". History has shown where this road goes. I think, the only way to have a fair "app store" is to somehow model the recommendation mechanics of the pre-monopoly era. 50 years ago you would learn about a new product from your friends (i.e. people you trust) or a newspaper you would buy (i.e. the "influencer" you trust). Each person had their own circle of friends and trusted "influencers", and made their decisions based on them. There wasn't any central authority that could apply the same ranking algorithm to what 100 million different people get to see. This could be modeled fairly well with decentralized mechanisms. Where the weight/rating of an app is different for each user, and it strictly comes from the approval of that app by the people they trust. If you get too much spam this way, just track down the source in your trust network and untrust them.

ohazi 6y ago
They're not really app stores, but community-managed free software repositories (e.g. Debian) work astoundingly well next to the shit-show that is every commercial app store I've ever seen.

Thaxll 6y ago

It's very naive to think an alternative store would prevent "issues" we see with Google or Apple. Looking at the story for Elements app they most likely had childporn hosted on the matrix.org server, any compagny would have done the same. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25974512 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25974512

einpoklum 6y ago

GitHub is a US company, or rather part of one (Microsoft). It iss subject to US government diktats, like National Security Letters, NSA spying, US sanctions banning certain countries and people/users, etc. Indeed, GitHub has already acted upon such pressures or commands, as has been covered here on HN if I'm not mistaken. So GitHub will not be fundamentally better than Google in this respect.

liopleurodon 6y ago

we need to get out of this "app store" paradigm. it has ruined everything

davesque 6y ago

I think this is a really really bad idea. No more app stores. As a developer, app stores have always seem totally stupid to me. I remember when computers were actually things that you felt like you owned completely. Now, your computer is owned by people that run app stores. Github still seems like it's a company that understands its role as an intermediary. It hasn't yet tried to take over the world like everyone else and I hope it never does.

dukeyukey 6y ago
Snap and apt are basically app stores, albeit ones where everything is free. They're just repositories of trusted programs that are easy install and easy to keep updated.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  Snap is another locked down platform where the Canonical repo is hardcoded in to the tool. Flatpak is a much better platform where you can specify your own repo source like flathub or any other source you want.
Forge36 6y ago
To a degree: pre-internet security relied very heavily on: physical access, physical software (Floppy Disk or CD and bought at a physical store). With both of those restrictions eliminated with the internet there's two security venues: bugs in Software with remote access without authentication, and code execution access (currently handled via several security access levels). The later has proven difficult as it's gone from "1" unlimited via physical access to "distrust the user". App stores being the latest version of trust with perhaps Apple iPhone as one of the highest examples and most restrictive (presently in the name of user privacy vs Facebook). Github is also "1:many" in terms of supported devices supported. Once an app store exists, the number supported platforms is constrained. The door is opened to competitors to host both a repository and an app store for another platform. Omitting the app store the ecosystem remains neutral to which device runs the end result
xenadu02 6y ago

lmeyerov 6y ago

I fully expect Azure Marketplace and Github to integrate. -- Brand: A rebrand may make sense too, similar to GitHub Actions incorporation of azure automation. But probably less so given the wider non-dev audiences who would consume this stuff: They'll trust MS over GH. -- B2B: This already covers cloud apps. I see GH as one of the bigger advantages Microsoft has over Amazon + Google as server software moves more and more to a 'shift left' world. AFAICT, this is less of a question of 'if' and more of 'when'. Unfortunately for everyone, MS is historically slow here. A surprise push here may end up being Teams. Consumer seems a lot harder, but maybe: - Desktop: MS has a big consumer games division (XBox..). Doing MS Desktop Games via a MS App Desktop Store, similar to Google Play for driving Android marketplace, may work for pushing regular consumer apps as well. They can already do for Windows (if they haven't, I don't follow), and maybe compelling enough for Apple to want to bring to OS X? - Mobile: This is about Microsoft's ability to win over or open Apple, Google, and the top 10 Android vendor for fairly controlled mobile experience.. which is historically unlikely..

audiodude 6y ago

Can someone remind me, and I mean this seriously, why we decided that we need app stores to begin with? Why can't I just go on a website and download an apk?

jhokanson 6y ago

Maybe somewhat off topic ... I don't sell anything on any App stores currently but I do like the idea of having some way of creating "applications" that are a bit more discoverable. Last I checked GitHub search is pretty awful for discovery (maybe I'm wrong on that?). I could imagine an interface where it would be easier to browse "apps" that do something specific. Mathworks (MATLAB) has a decent version of this: https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/ https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/ People can provide feedback and ratings which makes it easy to see when projects are dead or when there are big issues that aren't being fix. You can also reference other projects - "This project is like that project but it is faster ..." I don't think PyPi is all that good for this. Also, I've never really invested the effort to learn how to deploy an application to PyPi whereas something that simply points to my repo may be valuable? Anyway, the main problem I want solved is not having people discover my code (although that would be great too), but being able to find other code more easily so I don't need to constantly reinvent the wheel.

thayne 6y ago

> They could finally give the desktop the app store it deserves IMO the the package managers for most linux distros are better than either mobile app store. There is also flathub and the snap store. Macs of course have the apple app store, and homebrew is fairly prevalent as well. Even windows has AppGet and unofficial package managers like chocolatey. Maybe none of these are what the author thinks desktop "deserves", but if so, then what would be? And why would GitHub be any better at it than any of its tried and tested predecessors

SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
Most desktop app stores suck because they have nothing in them because developers stay far away if given the choice. No developer would willingly give away 30% of their profits and face being randomly removed if they can just provide the app directly to users.

prakhargurunani 6y ago

PayTM's CEO Vijay Shekhar Sharma has already started working for a Google Play alternative for India.

higerordermap 6y ago

> Backed by Microsoft. Microsoft has been playing good by the developers for years now. I trust them more than Apple and Google Maybe currently they are more developer friendly. But it changed under current CEO. That means bus factor is 1. What one CEO does, other may undo. Doesn't sound wise to rely on MS.

rixtox 6y ago

What we need is actually the Matrix protocol for app distribution. That is, a decentralized yet federated platform replacement for App Store. So the longevity and transparency of the platform is ensured by the distributed property.

onenightnine 6y ago

bitbucket app store.

ascorbic 6y ago

GitHub is a brand for developers. It would make no sense for Microsoft to start using it for anything as consumer-facing as an app store. It might, perhaps, be worth doing for a dev-focussed store, but I'm not sure of the value of that. A more realistic option would be to seamlessly integrate GitHub releases with a Microsoft app store.

rufi 6y ago

this is need of the hour..

WolfOliver 6y ago

Is there an open source app store for self hosting for desktop applications? For buying/selling licenses and distributing updates.

zapf 6y ago

No it shouldn't. We can do without one more centralised gateway to apps.

pankajdoharey 6y ago

I think instead of Depending on Microsoft, there should be a Decentralised App Store, Github too from time to time has blocked many repos. Just in 2019 they banned Developers from Iran and Syria. One cant depend on Corporations to protect our freedom. If you wanna do it right do it yourself.

warrenm 6y ago
>there should be a Decentralised App Store You mean like downloading a tarball and compiling it yourself? Yeah - that is totally a Good Idea™
- pankajdoharey 6y ago
  Why does it need to be a tarball? Why cant it be like Brew, Apt or RPM ?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

moondev 6y ago

Homebrew / linuxbrew ?

GRBurst 6y ago

Why don't they cooperate with f-droid? So many open source app on github are already on f-droid