6 ms·

> If I recall correctly, this was the case 15 (?) years back I recently installed Mac OS 9 on an emulator just to see what it was like. First thing I noticed w

> If I recall correctly, this was the case 15 (?) years back I recently installed Mac OS 9 on an emulator just to see what it was like. First thing I noticed was that there was a lot of third-party software that came with it both preinstalled and as extra on the installation CD. Heck, even iTunes used an installer made by a third party! That felt very un-Apple to me.

thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
iTunes came from an acquisition of SoundJam. Apple didn’t have much first party apps at the time, so it was important to include software to make the computer usable out of the box.
Terretta 6y ago
> even iTunes used an installer made by a third party! That felt very un-Apple to me. Yes, everything installed differently, updated differently, and maintaining currency across a large application set was unreasonable without third party subscriptions like “Mac Update”! It was crazy. And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem.
- pcr910303 6y ago
  > And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem. Well, to be fair the App Store isn’t really a viable solution to these problems to a fair bit of applications. The sandbox requirement makes a large portion of ‘useful’ apps unable in the App Store. Looks like most non-App Store apps use Sparkle[0] these days though, so it’s much better than before. [0]: https://sparkle-project.org https://sparkle-project.org
  - Terretta 6y ago
    It seemed at the time that Sparkle was part of what made Apple realize this was a legit pain point. Sherlock, Sparkle, Growl, if you demonstrate a gap in what should be built in, Apple will admit it and fill it in.
  - zepto 6y ago
    > Well, to be fair the App Store isn’t really a viable solution to these problems to a fair bit of applications. This used to be true, but every new release adds mechanisms to securely enable more capabilities. What examples are you thinking of that still can’t be done? > The sandbox requirement makes a large portion of ‘useful’ apps unable in the App Store. I don’t think this is true any longer.
  - dpkonofa 6y ago
    Sparkle is great but, for some reason, it never works on the apps that I have that use it. I check the box to automatically update apps in the future and I still get prompted every time there's an update. Even then, I hit the update button and the update fails and then I have to restart the app, try again, and then it succeeds... until the next time there's an update and the process starts all over again. At least with the App Store, all my apps update at night and they're ready to go when I need to use them.
- canadianfella 6y ago
  I’ve never seen the word currency used that way.
- SllX 6y ago
  The Mac App Store has multiple reasons for existing, but the whole gestalt of it is a mixed bag with both blessings and curses. Also the Mac App Store updating system is just damned terrible compared to the Sparkle updater. The only advantage it has is that it is centralized, but I have found it to be one of the slowest and buggiest parts of using the Mac App Store.
- grishka 6y ago
  > And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem. App Store is fine, as long as it's not the only way to the platform. If it's a curated catalog of apps + a hosting service + payment processing for those developers who want it, there's no problem with it existing. There is, however, a problem with how Apple keeps tightening its grip lately, and how current versions of macOS with default settings treat apps that haven't been vetted by Apple as if they're radioactive. That's still better than iOS, which outright refuses to run anything that isn't signed by Apple, but this overall direction is still troubling.
  - Terretta 6y ago
    But then we’re immediately in the anti-consumer user anxiety inducing situation we were in before — where you don’t know where or how to keep these things up to date or secure or remember where that license key is or how to cancel the subscription or etc. I deal with this with several dozen other tools on the Mac each using random store and key schemes. Lately I throw in the towel and switch to inferior tools in the app store if I can’t dig up the secret codes to the legacy hoops their devs want me to jump through. Charge me 30% more, no problem, just stop making me waste my time for things that are now solved problems. This overall simplification and end-to-end trusted curation direction is a minority but well heeled part of the market (happy to spend money on apps if it doesn’t waste their time), and a sort of grand experiment in what users want. If users want a free for all, the majority of the market is still buying those handsets. If not, the option to have a handheld appliance should be available to those who want it. Seems a shame to appeal to regulation to stomp on user choice where customers speak with their wallets that “please don’t make me think”.
    - jasonjayr 6y ago
      The problem is the operating system developers, instead of defining a standard component that could pull update lists from anywhere, just decided, "we shall make one store, and we shall be the gatekeepers" Imagine if windows (or MacOS) had a control panel where you could paste "Update subscription URLs", and uses crypto to verify licenses (optionally), and implemented binary diffs and what not, and provided a standard operating system component for navigating, purchasing, and installing/updating software? They were SO CLOSE with add/remove Programs, and it never went all the way. IIRC there is the Install-Package Powershell commandlet that might almost be that? But, I think it's still locked to Microsoft's store.
- zepto 6y ago
  > And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store It’s definitely not the majority of HN. You’ll notice sentiment varies a lot from thread to thread.
- oceanplexian 6y ago
  I remember it like it was yesterday. Before App Stores and widespread Internet access software had to ship relatively feee of bugs. There was no “We’ll fix it in post”. When you bought a game you got a physical copy of it, not a revocable license to an online service. Software wasn’t blocked from running on your device because the creators’ political views differed from the manufacturer. Best of all, when you purchased software it went directly to the developer instead of a rent-seeking middle-man like Apple or Google. Even security was better, because you weren’t forced to connect your computer to the Internet to use it. Yes, I’d say those days were an improvement over what we have now!
Lammy 6y ago
This is speculation, but this may be related to resource compression and them trying to get the iTunes download size as small as possible since so many people were on dialup at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26415883 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26415883 System 7 added that overall capability, and Apple shipped 4 different built-in resource compression algorithms over the years (the last of those added in OS 9), but it was equally possible for third parties to ship their own decompression routine's machine code along with the other resources. I remember iTunes using InstallerVISE, and I know VISE came with its own compression routines.

thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago

iTunes came from an acquisition of SoundJam. Apple didn’t have much first party apps at the time, so it was important to include software to make the computer usable out of the box.

Terretta 6y ago

> even iTunes used an installer made by a third party! That felt very un-Apple to me. Yes, everything installed differently, updated differently, and maintaining currency across a large application set was unreasonable without third party subscriptions like “Mac Update”! It was crazy. And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem.

pcr910303 6y ago
> And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem. Well, to be fair the App Store isn’t really a viable solution to these problems to a fair bit of applications. The sandbox requirement makes a large portion of ‘useful’ apps unable in the App Store. Looks like most non-App Store apps use Sparkle[0] these days though, so it’s much better than before. [0]: https://sparkle-project.org https://sparkle-project.org
- Terretta 6y ago
  It seemed at the time that Sparkle was part of what made Apple realize this was a legit pain point. Sherlock, Sparkle, Growl, if you demonstrate a gap in what should be built in, Apple will admit it and fill it in.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Well, to be fair the App Store isn’t really a viable solution to these problems to a fair bit of applications. This used to be true, but every new release adds mechanisms to securely enable more capabilities. What examples are you thinking of that still can’t be done? > The sandbox requirement makes a large portion of ‘useful’ apps unable in the App Store. I don’t think this is true any longer.
- dpkonofa 6y ago
  Sparkle is great but, for some reason, it never works on the apps that I have that use it. I check the box to automatically update apps in the future and I still get prompted every time there's an update. Even then, I hit the update button and the update fails and then I have to restart the app, try again, and then it succeeds... until the next time there's an update and the process starts all over again. At least with the App Store, all my apps update at night and they're ready to go when I need to use them.
canadianfella 6y ago
I’ve never seen the word currency used that way.
SllX 6y ago
The Mac App Store has multiple reasons for existing, but the whole gestalt of it is a mixed bag with both blessings and curses. Also the Mac App Store updating system is just damned terrible compared to the Sparkle updater. The only advantage it has is that it is centralized, but I have found it to be one of the slowest and buggiest parts of using the Mac App Store.
grishka 6y ago
> And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store which was created as to assist users and devs with that problem. App Store is fine, as long as it's not the only way to the platform. If it's a curated catalog of apps + a hosting service + payment processing for those developers who want it, there's no problem with it existing. There is, however, a problem with how Apple keeps tightening its grip lately, and how current versions of macOS with default settings treat apps that haven't been vetted by Apple as if they're radioactive. That's still better than iOS, which outright refuses to run anything that isn't signed by Apple, but this overall direction is still troubling.
- Terretta 6y ago
  But then we’re immediately in the anti-consumer user anxiety inducing situation we were in before — where you don’t know where or how to keep these things up to date or secure or remember where that license key is or how to cancel the subscription or etc. I deal with this with several dozen other tools on the Mac each using random store and key schemes. Lately I throw in the towel and switch to inferior tools in the app store if I can’t dig up the secret codes to the legacy hoops their devs want me to jump through. Charge me 30% more, no problem, just stop making me waste my time for things that are now solved problems. This overall simplification and end-to-end trusted curation direction is a minority but well heeled part of the market (happy to spend money on apps if it doesn’t waste their time), and a sort of grand experiment in what users want. If users want a free for all, the majority of the market is still buying those handsets. If not, the option to have a handheld appliance should be available to those who want it. Seems a shame to appeal to regulation to stomp on user choice where customers speak with their wallets that “please don’t make me think”.
  - jasonjayr 6y ago
    The problem is the operating system developers, instead of defining a standard component that could pull update lists from anywhere, just decided, "we shall make one store, and we shall be the gatekeepers" Imagine if windows (or MacOS) had a control panel where you could paste "Update subscription URLs", and uses crypto to verify licenses (optionally), and implemented binary diffs and what not, and provided a standard operating system component for navigating, purchasing, and installing/updating software? They were SO CLOSE with add/remove Programs, and it never went all the way. IIRC there is the Install-Package Powershell commandlet that might almost be that? But, I think it's still locked to Microsoft's store.
zepto 6y ago
> And yet, it seems majority of HN wants to rewind from the App Store It’s definitely not the majority of HN. You’ll notice sentiment varies a lot from thread to thread.
oceanplexian 6y ago
I remember it like it was yesterday. Before App Stores and widespread Internet access software had to ship relatively feee of bugs. There was no “We’ll fix it in post”. When you bought a game you got a physical copy of it, not a revocable license to an online service. Software wasn’t blocked from running on your device because the creators’ political views differed from the manufacturer. Best of all, when you purchased software it went directly to the developer instead of a rent-seeking middle-man like Apple or Google. Even security was better, because you weren’t forced to connect your computer to the Internet to use it. Yes, I’d say those days were an improvement over what we have now!

Lammy 6y ago

This is speculation, but this may be related to resource compression and them trying to get the iTunes download size as small as possible since so many people were on dialup at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26415883 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26415883 System 7 added that overall capability, and Apple shipped 4 different built-in resource compression algorithms over the years (the last of those added in OS 9), but it was equally possible for third parties to ship their own decompression routine's machine code along with the other resources. I remember iTunes using InstallerVISE, and I know VISE came with its own compression routines.