3 ms·

And why not respect the platform you want to support? Just like you get various Linux/BSD distros and they all have a different take on packaging and distributi

by isodev 3y ago

And why not respect the platform you want to support? Just like you get various Linux/BSD distros and they all have a different take on packaging and distributions... you also have the way macOS does it. There is no inherent expectation that "what I do on Linux" will work on macOS... or every Linux even.

sigmoid10 3y ago
That's exactly what's happening. But while most software devs still steer around Apple for these kinda of things, Windows and Linux have figured out a way to work nicely together. If you want to ship from one of them to the other, it is trivial - which is by no means expected or how it always was. And it did make everyone's lives easier.
- isodev 3y ago
  To be exact though, Windows didn't figure out how to work together, they transplanted "a thing" (WSL) and I'm not sure that's a tool one can expect users who are not developers or IT folks to install or use. All "native" windows ways also require windowsy tooling (e.g. MSI, powershell etc...)
- threeseed 3y ago
  I have no idea what magical thing Windows and Linux have figured out. Is it WSL2 ? Because you can distribute Mac CLI apps exactly the same way. The issue here is with the code-signing process which is optional but recommended just like on Windows.
  - sigmoid10 3y ago
    It is "optional" in the sense that it removes hassle from the user. This is what the original article and my comment are all about. And don't get me started on building anything remotely more complex stuff for Mac from Windows or Linux. With the other too it's trivial to build and ship across by comparison.
    - AnonymousPlanet 3y ago
      I wouldn't call WSL hassle free for the user. Quite the contrary. And compiling stuff on Windows is a nightmare compared to Linux and macOS. It's become marginally better since you don't have to install the entire Visual Studio monstrosity anymore just to get a compiler that plays nice with the system. But it wasn't always like that. On macOS you could always install the necessary parts from Xcode without App store and activate it via command line.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >But while most software devs still steer around Apple for these kinda of things Do they? Between Homebrew, MacPorts, the hundreds of thousands of Mac App Store apps, indie dev apps distributed outside MAS, not to mention all major proprietary apps like Abobe Creative Suite, MS Office, Pro Tools, and so on, probably more software devs steer around Linux than Apple..

by isodev 3y ago

sigmoid10 3y ago

That's exactly what's happening. But while most software devs still steer around Apple for these kinda of things, Windows and Linux have figured out a way to work nicely together. If you want to ship from one of them to the other, it is trivial - which is by no means expected or how it always was. And it did make everyone's lives easier.

isodev 3y ago
To be exact though, Windows didn't figure out how to work together, they transplanted "a thing" (WSL) and I'm not sure that's a tool one can expect users who are not developers or IT folks to install or use. All "native" windows ways also require windowsy tooling (e.g. MSI, powershell etc...)
threeseed 3y ago
I have no idea what magical thing Windows and Linux have figured out. Is it WSL2 ? Because you can distribute Mac CLI apps exactly the same way. The issue here is with the code-signing process which is optional but recommended just like on Windows.
- sigmoid10 3y ago
  It is "optional" in the sense that it removes hassle from the user. This is what the original article and my comment are all about. And don't get me started on building anything remotely more complex stuff for Mac from Windows or Linux. With the other too it's trivial to build and ship across by comparison.
  - AnonymousPlanet 3y ago
    I wouldn't call WSL hassle free for the user. Quite the contrary. And compiling stuff on Windows is a nightmare compared to Linux and macOS. It's become marginally better since you don't have to install the entire Visual Studio monstrosity anymore just to get a compiler that plays nice with the system. But it wasn't always like that. On macOS you could always install the necessary parts from Xcode without App store and activate it via command line.
coldtea 3y ago
>But while most software devs still steer around Apple for these kinda of things Do they? Between Homebrew, MacPorts, the hundreds of thousands of Mac App Store apps, indie dev apps distributed outside MAS, not to mention all major proprietary apps like Abobe Creative Suite, MS Office, Pro Tools, and so on, probably more software devs steer around Linux than Apple..