4 ms·

What do HNers think about the Leap "app store"? I'm dying to get my hands on one of these awesome things and I have tons of use for it, but I'm seriously not i

What do HNers think about the Leap "app store"? I'm dying to get my hands on one of these awesome things and I have tons of use for it, but I'm seriously not interested in putting "apps" on Leap's "app store" and I don't like this trend at all. If, for example, Chrome adds APIs for extensions and apps to access Leap Motion, I want my cross-platform "app" to be discoverable on the Chrome store. With the app store nonsense (imo), I feel Leap is distracting themselves from the real task of getting their device out on every damn machine out there and getting their SDK into every dev's hands. Disagree? I'm all ears.

georgemcbay 14y ago
I agree. The benefit of these "app stores" is lost when they are so splintered. The current trend towards everyone having their own "app store" is almost as annoying as every app developer wanting to install their own update manager that starts on computer bootup. Screw that noise, just because I'm using your shit doesn't mean it is that important to me.
Lost_BiomedE 14y ago
I think the app store is a good idea for the business and consumers. They need a place where everyone knows leap apps can be found to help drive the consumer adoption. Now, the implementation and/or restrictions is the make or break. There isn't any reason that they couldn't make your example feasible.
- EliRivers 14y ago
  I remember when we would just use "the web" as a source of apps we could download (although we called them "programs" back then). Everyone knew about "the web" and it was easily searchable using search engines such as Google.
  - jacquesm 14y ago
    Then they used 'download.com' and 'tucows.com'.
    - EliRivers 14y ago
      Sadly, I expect many people did, rather than just going to the page of the people who actually made the software. With a "modern" app-store there's no choice, but using that kind of redistributor was just bloody silly.
      - travem 14y ago
        Actually I often had to warn friends and family against downloading random programs of the internet (as I am sure many of us have). Although to people who frequent hacker news it may be "bloody silly", for others having a "trusted" third party is often preferable to dealing direct for a whole host of reasons. See for example Amazon Marketplace, Etsy, eBay, etc...
    - knowaveragejoe 14y ago
      Wasn't it the best of both worlds though? Those sites had no vested interest in the platforms themselves and instead support all of the major ones, while still retaining incentive to root out malware. The only thing missing is a commerce system, no?
  - Kiro 14y ago
    I only remember all the struggle and I'm glad it's a thing of the past. App stores are so much more convenient.
    - vy8vWJlco 14y ago
      App stores can be very inconvenient for developers (the app store can veto you, even if you beg right), and for users, they remove (simply by hiding) much of the implied control that exists on the desktop, where one can manage applications as files. The filesystem is still there, but it is so buried it might as well not exist. They may be convenient, but they are not a substitute... It shouldn't be either-or, it should be both.
    - knowaveragejoe 14y ago
      ...it was a struggle?
  - chc 14y ago
    For anyone who didn't know: Mac and Next users have always informally called them apps. ".app" was actually the NeXTStep extension for program bundles (now carried over to Mac OS X).
- aufreak3 14y ago
  Won't a catalog or showcase site do? What if I want to make a mac or windows app that uses the LeapMotion controller if available, and dumbs down to the trackpad if not? i.e. the focus is not on the controller itself, but on the task I wish to achieve through it? > There isn't any reason that they couldn't make your example feasible. That can happen if they, for example, won't license their SDK to be bundled as APIs for "Chrome packaged apps". If they did, there may not be an incentive to have your app live on their app store. I don't at the moment know what's in their SDKs, but setting up an app store can introduce such (imho artificial) conflicts of interest. OTOH, it's their product and they may very well say "it's exclusive, folks". The irony is that I'm a bit pissed because I want this bad .. and without those ropes! Hope I'm not required to put apps on their store. Furthermore, I hope Wacom doesn't catch on to this trend and start a "Wacom App Store" as well.
debacle 14y ago
I agree. If you have a Windows 8 machine now, you have Amazon, Google, Apple, Windows, and Steam, all competing for you as a user of their "App store." When I envisioned a future of digital downloads, this is not what I imagined. Edit: I forgot Mozilla and Facebook.
nhangen 14y ago
I don't like it either. Perhaps there is room for someone to build an aggregation engine?
rhokstar 14y ago
>>With the app store nonsense (imo), I feel Leap is distracting themselves from the real task of getting their device out on every damn machine out there and getting their SDK into every dev's hands. Agree.

georgemcbay 14y ago

I agree. The benefit of these "app stores" is lost when they are so splintered. The current trend towards everyone having their own "app store" is almost as annoying as every app developer wanting to install their own update manager that starts on computer bootup. Screw that noise, just because I'm using your shit doesn't mean it is that important to me.

Lost_BiomedE 14y ago

I think the app store is a good idea for the business and consumers. They need a place where everyone knows leap apps can be found to help drive the consumer adoption. Now, the implementation and/or restrictions is the make or break. There isn't any reason that they couldn't make your example feasible.

EliRivers 14y ago
I remember when we would just use "the web" as a source of apps we could download (although we called them "programs" back then). Everyone knew about "the web" and it was easily searchable using search engines such as Google.
- jacquesm 14y ago
  Then they used 'download.com' and 'tucows.com'.
  - EliRivers 14y ago
    Sadly, I expect many people did, rather than just going to the page of the people who actually made the software. With a "modern" app-store there's no choice, but using that kind of redistributor was just bloody silly.
    - travem 14y ago
      Actually I often had to warn friends and family against downloading random programs of the internet (as I am sure many of us have). Although to people who frequent hacker news it may be "bloody silly", for others having a "trusted" third party is often preferable to dealing direct for a whole host of reasons. See for example Amazon Marketplace, Etsy, eBay, etc...
  - knowaveragejoe 14y ago
    Wasn't it the best of both worlds though? Those sites had no vested interest in the platforms themselves and instead support all of the major ones, while still retaining incentive to root out malware. The only thing missing is a commerce system, no?
- Kiro 14y ago
  I only remember all the struggle and I'm glad it's a thing of the past. App stores are so much more convenient.
  - vy8vWJlco 14y ago
    App stores can be very inconvenient for developers (the app store can veto you, even if you beg right), and for users, they remove (simply by hiding) much of the implied control that exists on the desktop, where one can manage applications as files. The filesystem is still there, but it is so buried it might as well not exist. They may be convenient, but they are not a substitute... It shouldn't be either-or, it should be both.
  - knowaveragejoe 14y ago
    ...it was a struggle?
- chc 14y ago
  For anyone who didn't know: Mac and Next users have always informally called them apps. ".app" was actually the NeXTStep extension for program bundles (now carried over to Mac OS X).
aufreak3 14y ago
Won't a catalog or showcase site do? What if I want to make a mac or windows app that uses the LeapMotion controller if available, and dumbs down to the trackpad if not? i.e. the focus is not on the controller itself, but on the task I wish to achieve through it? > There isn't any reason that they couldn't make your example feasible. That can happen if they, for example, won't license their SDK to be bundled as APIs for "Chrome packaged apps". If they did, there may not be an incentive to have your app live on their app store. I don't at the moment know what's in their SDKs, but setting up an app store can introduce such (imho artificial) conflicts of interest. OTOH, it's their product and they may very well say "it's exclusive, folks". The irony is that I'm a bit pissed because I want this bad .. and without those ropes! Hope I'm not required to put apps on their store. Furthermore, I hope Wacom doesn't catch on to this trend and start a "Wacom App Store" as well.

debacle 14y ago

I agree. If you have a Windows 8 machine now, you have Amazon, Google, Apple, Windows, and Steam, all competing for you as a user of their "App store." When I envisioned a future of digital downloads, this is not what I imagined. Edit: I forgot Mozilla and Facebook.

nhangen 14y ago

I don't like it either. Perhaps there is room for someone to build an aggregation engine?

rhokstar 14y ago

>>With the app store nonsense (imo), I feel Leap is distracting themselves from the real task of getting their device out on every damn machine out there and getting their SDK into every dev's hands. Agree.