4 ms·

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"

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).

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).