3 ms·

I'm sorry, what is the bit that is hard? * You have to setup the binary to build N times (done automatically if you use the tools apple provides while apparent

by olliej 3y ago

I'm sorry, what is the bit that is hard? * You have to setup the binary to build N times (done automatically if you use the tools apple provides while apparently not caring about developers) * In this case you have to setup a non-standard UI toolkit, which obviously is going to make things harder, and make that build universal as well. Qt claims to support mac and iOS so I'm surprised that doesn't happen by default * Codesign, which is a trivial step The hardest part here is just the "I don't want to make a native app so I'm going to build an entire 3rd party UI toolkit", which is not an argument that apple doesn't care about devs.

tumult 3y ago
Apple requires “notarization,” not just code signing. If you code sign your app and don’t “notarize” it, it will refuse to run. Like it will be harder for the end user to run it than if you had not code signed it at all. Submitting for “notarization” requires an Apple developer account with an active paid subscription and payment method. You have to upload it to Apple and wait for it to be approved in an asynchronous process which can sometimes take tens of minutes each time.
- chii 3y ago
  > sometimes take tens of minutes each time you only do that for the final build. It does prevent unscrupulous malware distributors, since there's now a paper trail linking it back to you if you did bad. Of course, this could be abused by apple to gatekeep, and it doesn't prevent the user from downloading the app and bypassing this security measure (so does not in actual fact stop all malware).
DiabloD3 3y ago
If I were to make a normal desktop app with a UI, I'd consider Qt before the rest of the toolkits (at least, until Iced finally catches up). Even on an OSX-only app, I'm sure as hell not using SwiftUI/UIKit/etc. Qt more consistently nails native apps, the so-called-native UI toolkit on any given OS doesn't. You seem to think "codesign" is the trivial step: it is not. Many many times that entire step has made it to the top of the front page on HN, on how many dev teams simply cannot get this to work right consistently, and will break in ways that cannot be debugged using the tool output or the documentation. Nobody has this level of problem on Windows: I just sign it using a valid cert, and its done. I don't need to buy a Microsoft-made computer or need to run Visual Studio or pay Microsoft $100 a year and then still have random reports of Windows users being unable to run my binary; however, HN has popularized countless stories of devs being forced to buy a Mac (which means no OSX in a VM, no OSX build farms, very spotty CI<->OSX integration), having to pay Apple $100 a year to notarize the signing (which they can also refuse to do, without recourse), having to use XCode (at least for the signing step), and they still have situations where the binary is not being signed and/or notarized, or OSX will randomly fail to run the binary, or it actively prevents users from running the binary without telling anyone why, but giving scary messages to non-tech users anyways. I'm sorry, but how the hell is a trillion dollar company getting this wrong? Apple has broken priorities, and shilling/fanboying for them on here is not going to fix the problem.
- olliej 3y ago
  If I were to make a normal desktop app for Mac I'd use AppKit. IMO, a lot of the UI things apple has introduced in the last few years have been attempting to get the people making apps for iOS to also make them for macOS in a way that isn't just an iOS app running on a larger screen. I guess the alternative is that everyone continues making these horrific apps built on top of chrome wrappers like electron, bring Sun's vision of everyone shipping a single crappy app to every platform. > I'm sorry, but how the hell is a trillion dollar company getting this wrong? Apple has broken priorities, and shilling/fanboying for them on here is not going to fix the problem. I'm sure you have a solution then? One that doesn't require the alternative of "every app must be from a central store that reviews and approves every app"? > shilling/fanboying for them on here is not going to fix the problem. Name calling and personal attacks doesn't help anyone, and it certainly doesn't inspire me to think you're willing to argue in good faith.
  - DiabloD3 3y ago
    Let me not mince words: People who are pro-Apple on HN have a long established history of not arguing in good faith. They belong to a cult, and viciously attack anyone who isn't part of the tribe; often attacking them for the same "crimes" that Apple itself is better known for. Also, yes, I have a solution, the same solution everyone eventually follows: they switch back to Windows, they get angry at Microsoft for whatever reason (Microsoft comes up with a good one every 7-8 years), and then they switch permanently to Linux. I used Linux as my primary, and only, desktop OS from when Windows 95 started shipping on PCs in 1996 to about 2015, where I allowed Windows back into my life. My laptop is a MBPR that very quickly proved that OSX is not, and never will be, prod ready (to my credit, I made it a year and a half before I gave up); it then got swapped to Windows, and ran that way for a few years until it now runs Linux. From my vantage point, Linux adoption on the desktop is an Eternal September, and I'm fine with it. Everyone makes it here sooner or later if they're serious about computers and/or software development. The solution to fixing Apple, however, is doing what Microsoft did: quiet fired/force retired Balmer, promoted a strong candidate from within, and let him right the ship; Apple needs to replace Tim Cook with whoever their equivalent of Satya Nadella is.
- 3y ago

by olliej 3y ago

tumult 3y ago

Apple requires “notarization,” not just code signing. If you code sign your app and don’t “notarize” it, it will refuse to run. Like it will be harder for the end user to run it than if you had not code signed it at all. Submitting for “notarization” requires an Apple developer account with an active paid subscription and payment method. You have to upload it to Apple and wait for it to be approved in an asynchronous process which can sometimes take tens of minutes each time.

chii 3y ago
> sometimes take tens of minutes each time you only do that for the final build. It does prevent unscrupulous malware distributors, since there's now a paper trail linking it back to you if you did bad. Of course, this could be abused by apple to gatekeep, and it doesn't prevent the user from downloading the app and bypassing this security measure (so does not in actual fact stop all malware).

DiabloD3 3y ago

If I were to make a normal desktop app with a UI, I'd consider Qt before the rest of the toolkits (at least, until Iced finally catches up). Even on an OSX-only app, I'm sure as hell not using SwiftUI/UIKit/etc. Qt more consistently nails native apps, the so-called-native UI toolkit on any given OS doesn't. You seem to think "codesign" is the trivial step: it is not. Many many times that entire step has made it to the top of the front page on HN, on how many dev teams simply cannot get this to work right consistently, and will break in ways that cannot be debugged using the tool output or the documentation. Nobody has this level of problem on Windows: I just sign it using a valid cert, and its done. I don't need to buy a Microsoft-made computer or need to run Visual Studio or pay Microsoft $100 a year and then still have random reports of Windows users being unable to run my binary; however, HN has popularized countless stories of devs being forced to buy a Mac (which means no OSX in a VM, no OSX build farms, very spotty CI<->OSX integration), having to pay Apple $100 a year to notarize the signing (which they can also refuse to do, without recourse), having to use XCode (at least for the signing step), and they still have situations where the binary is not being signed and/or notarized, or OSX will randomly fail to run the binary, or it actively prevents users from running the binary without telling anyone why, but giving scary messages to non-tech users anyways. I'm sorry, but how the hell is a trillion dollar company getting this wrong? Apple has broken priorities, and shilling/fanboying for them on here is not going to fix the problem.

olliej 3y ago
If I were to make a normal desktop app for Mac I'd use AppKit. IMO, a lot of the UI things apple has introduced in the last few years have been attempting to get the people making apps for iOS to also make them for macOS in a way that isn't just an iOS app running on a larger screen. I guess the alternative is that everyone continues making these horrific apps built on top of chrome wrappers like electron, bring Sun's vision of everyone shipping a single crappy app to every platform. > I'm sorry, but how the hell is a trillion dollar company getting this wrong? Apple has broken priorities, and shilling/fanboying for them on here is not going to fix the problem. I'm sure you have a solution then? One that doesn't require the alternative of "every app must be from a central store that reviews and approves every app"? > shilling/fanboying for them on here is not going to fix the problem. Name calling and personal attacks doesn't help anyone, and it certainly doesn't inspire me to think you're willing to argue in good faith.
- DiabloD3 3y ago
  Let me not mince words: People who are pro-Apple on HN have a long established history of not arguing in good faith. They belong to a cult, and viciously attack anyone who isn't part of the tribe; often attacking them for the same "crimes" that Apple itself is better known for. Also, yes, I have a solution, the same solution everyone eventually follows: they switch back to Windows, they get angry at Microsoft for whatever reason (Microsoft comes up with a good one every 7-8 years), and then they switch permanently to Linux. I used Linux as my primary, and only, desktop OS from when Windows 95 started shipping on PCs in 1996 to about 2015, where I allowed Windows back into my life. My laptop is a MBPR that very quickly proved that OSX is not, and never will be, prod ready (to my credit, I made it a year and a half before I gave up); it then got swapped to Windows, and ran that way for a few years until it now runs Linux. From my vantage point, Linux adoption on the desktop is an Eternal September, and I'm fine with it. Everyone makes it here sooner or later if they're serious about computers and/or software development. The solution to fixing Apple, however, is doing what Microsoft did: quiet fired/force retired Balmer, promoted a strong candidate from within, and let him right the ship; Apple needs to replace Tim Cook with whoever their equivalent of Satya Nadella is.
3y ago