7 ms·

This is especially interesting for me because I am on the cusp of a technological coup in my own home. I've been a "PC" my whole life, and have somehow gotten

by jnem 12y ago

This is especially interesting for me because I am on the cusp of a technological coup in my own home. I've been a "PC" my whole life, and have somehow gotten away with never buying an Apple product, and never felt the lack. However, many of the reasons I avoided Apple in the past are now irrelevant, as all but Linux now attempt the same fascist business model (The rings/rules of Apple QA for software, and One store with which to rule them all). My go-to argument against Apple in the past was: "In order to get an application or piece of software into the Apple ecosystem, you have to go through Apple. Apple has a strict QA process, every app that gets into the store has to vetted by one of Apples legions of QA staff. This sounds good; we want quality apps. However, a great deal of Apple’s QA rules for acceptance aren’t just about app quality, but also nebulous ideas of morality and ethics. The problem with that is, when only one agency is in control of what is proper and what isn’t, we are left with a situation where one agency gets to control what you see, use, and by environmental influence—think. Now, imagine everyone exclusively owns an Apple product…” Ironically, this notion is very 1984, and my stance on it was a bit extremish to be sure, but hey, I’m a PC. Anyway, ever since Windows 8 and Windows Phone, it seems Microsoft has seen how completely Apple controls its own ecosystem, and wants a piece (complete with its own app ecosystem). Suddenly Babylon had arrived on my desktop. My initial thought was, “are we going to reach a situation where there are no more open platforms to develop for? Are we going to get to a point where software can only be deployed through stores run by the same folks who run my OS? Do I have to learn Linux?!” So, long ramble short, I’m thinking of joining the cult. A few years back I was given an iPad as a present. I initially resented it, labeling it a glorified TV-ala-Netflix device. I have since spent hundreds on app purchases. Is now a good time to put on my robes and worship at the altar of Jobs?

robin_reala 12y ago
I’m typing this on an Macbook in a house with just Macs and iDevices after getting back from work where everyone uses Macs, but honestly what’s wrong with just going down the Linux road? It’s politically better, hardware is as good as you want to buy and there’s no app store vetting (unless you install Steam).
- jnem 12y ago
  Agreed, I actually don't have anything against Linux other than the phobia and FUD of one who has never used it. It's on my todo list of weekend projects.
  - chris_mahan 12y ago
    I've been doing debian on server for years. I decided to go ubuntu 14.whatever on a laptop that had XP on it (Acer One) and keep it as-is, as a new user. I was pleasantly surprised. install was smooth, all hardware works, and I just installed firefox, and it all works (99% of flash works). I use it for gmail, facebook, twitter, ello, surfing, etc. The machine is underpowered for full-motion video, but oh well, it was $349 6 years ago. I use terminal to ssh into remote servers, and I've done no configuration at all on the machine. it works fine.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  There may be no app store vetting but is their developer fascism? (No offence meant). I only ask because I have seen the decline (in my opinion) of the desktop from GNOME2 to GNOME3 as they bin the traditional and usable desktop paradigm in favour of writing a WM for my mum to use, where desktop interaction is designed around "joy" and making window management "fun and refreshing" instead of flexible. Anything outside of this paradigm and simplification appears to be vehemently rejected (perhaps the CADT development model?), so isn't it just the same? (Of course, I may be subject to downvotes for this, but it is just an observation and not meant as a "flame"; from a developer perspective, aren't we just subject to the same bunch of rules but from different overlords?) And BTW, I was a happy Linux app developer until last week when I retired my crusty old VM, and have been using Linux since RedHat Apollo, so it's not a whimsical motion. I love Linux for my servers, just not desktop anymore.
  - frio 12y ago
    Sure, GNOME may have changed direction. The difference in Linux is (as you're probably aware) there are many, many usable alternatives. If Microsoft or Apple introduced some bad behaviour to their desktop environment, you'd be looking at changing your whole OS (and even hardware?) to find something new; not just `apt-get install kde`.
BigChiefSmokem 12y ago
Excellent anecdote. I share a similar story and one key thing I wanted to comment on was that there were never really any "open platforms" to begin with, not even on Linux. The fundamentals of that codebase might be available free for use, but the companies checking in code and building out distros are not doing it solely for the love of the game, their doing it to cut a profit as well. They would nail you to their garden if they could, and some already have! The classic example of a company that did this and ran with it is Apple. The fact of the matter is if you want people to use your technology at a mass scale you need to abide by the same fundamental business and market rules that the big boys do. So friend, free your mind from the chains of platform loyalty and go ahead and experience all the technologies available on all platforms, because at the end of the day that is what people like you and I truly want to do.
snowwrestler 12y ago
iOS is locked down, but on the Mac side, you do not need to go through Apple to get and install software, aside from OS X itself and its bundled apps. The Mac App Store provides convenience and security. It's not required, though. You can install whatever you want on your Mac, or load whatever website or web app you want.
- jnem 12y ago
  I understand what you are saying, but its always been surprising to me how many folks who use Macs in this era don't. Those that do know there is an alternative to the store often view such items as a perversion of their system. Apps from the store are like old friends and family; there is a certain sense of safety and familiarity. Apps outside the store are treated as strangers, eye contact with such software is not advised. Conversely, PC users tend to treat all software as guilty until proven innocent, and as a result many of us have developed our own workflow to determine quality and safety. I guess I've always associated using a PC with a more "trust-yourself" attitude, and Macs with "trust-the-system" attitude. Obviously a lot of this is irrational bias based on a life time of having lived on the other side.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    I get the opposite feeling. I would rather download a DMG and run the app instead of using the App Store, typically because I ran Windows for years and using an app store to install software feels alien. It feels like some part of the control of the system has been taken away from me. Entirely psychological I know.
driverdan 12y ago
I've been using Macs since 2010 and only bought one item from the Mac App Store (a cheap game) to test it out. You don't need to use it if you don't want to.
x0x0 12y ago
So mac's are (still, in case it needed to be said) open. Install and run what you want. There is a one-time toggle to disable running unsigned apps, and that's it. ios is still locked down, and it's great for 99.99999% of users. Think about it this way: if there's one platform you could recommend to a non-technical user, a user that wants to run apps, and still have a safe computing experience, what would it be? ios. There's nothing even close. My brother runs three restaurants and does all the bookkeeping. After having his computer hacked and almost losing $x00,000, he purchased a separate computer just for bookkeeping. That's a little ridiculous. My gf's parents had a similar situation while they where building a house and had a ton of cash in their bank accounts. They've been hacked before, but for them, ios is a safe platform to log in and do their banking. No other operating system today provides safety and ease of use.
archagon 12y ago
If you're anything like me — a longtime PC user who started using Macs a few years ago — you will be shocked by how good Mac software tends to be. One day, you'll find yourself sitting at your old PC, tearing your hair out over some stupid decision that the programmer made in building whatever free application you're using, when you'll suddenly realize: you're a Mac guy now. EDIT: Also, from what I've seen, Apple is pretty committed to keeping Mac development open. Microsoft seems to be going in the opposite direction these days.
- deong 12y ago
  Mac development is still reasonably open. Distribution on the Mac App Store is not, and the limitations are crippling. It's not a matter of convenience -- you simply can't sell a sophisticated application on the App Store, and increasingly, you can't take advantage of platform features without it. You want iCloud sync? Take out the ability for users to access their own home directories and files. Take out the ability to have plugins of any sort. Take out any functionality you wouldn't expect in an iPhone time-wasting app.
  - archagon 12y ago
    Yeah, but it's still better than the situation on the Windows side. In order to use the new Metro UI, Microsoft requires all apps to go through their app store. Remember: they've recently been dragged kicking and screaming from trying to hoist this UI on every Windows user. (You could draw the comparison to iCloud, but at least that's a service hosted by Apple on their own dime, not a native UI layer.) So far, Apple has made it clear that OSX is intended to remain an open OS. I expect that developers will be able to use OSX+'s new native features for many years to come, App Store, or no; in contrast, I don't see Microsoft permitting open development on anything but its rapidly aging Desktop. But yeah, I hope the App Store gets better. Pretty much any cool application idea I've had has required going outside the sandbox.
    - scholia 12y ago
      That's because Windows 8 includes the features of both iOS and Mac OS X. If Mac OS X could run iOS apps, do you reckon these would be supplied outside the Apple Store? You don't have to use Metro, of course. However, if you do, there are constraints that are required for a secure, always-connected, battery-powered device that are not required for a traditional desktop or laptop. > I don't see Microsoft permitting open development I don't understand this. There are several ways to develop Metro apps, including C# or C++ with XAML, C++ with DirectX, and JavaScript with HTML/CSS. Seems to me that Apple is more restrictive on both the iOS and Mac OS X sides. Even if you really mean "open deployment", it's not completely closed....
72deluxe 12y ago
"Suddenly Babylon had arrived on my desktop" Haha such a genius thing to say. I think most OS vendors are moving to this "app store" model as they see how they can easily distribute software and also railroad users and developers (for good or for bad). I'm not sure it's great (race to the bottom pricing + quality; see the Android Market for an example), but from a consumer perspective it is convenient.
kogarou 12y ago
The Mac ecosystem isn't walled like iOS. Its app store is just a convenience - most applications can be downloaded from their websites in the same way as the Windows EXEs you're familiar with. Apple isn't the final arbiter of what can be sold or what you can install.

by jnem 12y ago

robin_reala 12y ago

I’m typing this on an Macbook in a house with just Macs and iDevices after getting back from work where everyone uses Macs, but honestly what’s wrong with just going down the Linux road? It’s politically better, hardware is as good as you want to buy and there’s no app store vetting (unless you install Steam).

jnem 12y ago
Agreed, I actually don't have anything against Linux other than the phobia and FUD of one who has never used it. It's on my todo list of weekend projects.
- chris_mahan 12y ago
  I've been doing debian on server for years. I decided to go ubuntu 14.whatever on a laptop that had XP on it (Acer One) and keep it as-is, as a new user. I was pleasantly surprised. install was smooth, all hardware works, and I just installed firefox, and it all works (99% of flash works). I use it for gmail, facebook, twitter, ello, surfing, etc. The machine is underpowered for full-motion video, but oh well, it was $349 6 years ago. I use terminal to ssh into remote servers, and I've done no configuration at all on the machine. it works fine.
72deluxe 12y ago
There may be no app store vetting but is their developer fascism? (No offence meant). I only ask because I have seen the decline (in my opinion) of the desktop from GNOME2 to GNOME3 as they bin the traditional and usable desktop paradigm in favour of writing a WM for my mum to use, where desktop interaction is designed around "joy" and making window management "fun and refreshing" instead of flexible. Anything outside of this paradigm and simplification appears to be vehemently rejected (perhaps the CADT development model?), so isn't it just the same? (Of course, I may be subject to downvotes for this, but it is just an observation and not meant as a "flame"; from a developer perspective, aren't we just subject to the same bunch of rules but from different overlords?) And BTW, I was a happy Linux app developer until last week when I retired my crusty old VM, and have been using Linux since RedHat Apollo, so it's not a whimsical motion. I love Linux for my servers, just not desktop anymore.
- frio 12y ago
  Sure, GNOME may have changed direction. The difference in Linux is (as you're probably aware) there are many, many usable alternatives. If Microsoft or Apple introduced some bad behaviour to their desktop environment, you'd be looking at changing your whole OS (and even hardware?) to find something new; not just `apt-get install kde`.

BigChiefSmokem 12y ago

Excellent anecdote. I share a similar story and one key thing I wanted to comment on was that there were never really any "open platforms" to begin with, not even on Linux. The fundamentals of that codebase might be available free for use, but the companies checking in code and building out distros are not doing it solely for the love of the game, their doing it to cut a profit as well. They would nail you to their garden if they could, and some already have! The classic example of a company that did this and ran with it is Apple. The fact of the matter is if you want people to use your technology at a mass scale you need to abide by the same fundamental business and market rules that the big boys do. So friend, free your mind from the chains of platform loyalty and go ahead and experience all the technologies available on all platforms, because at the end of the day that is what people like you and I truly want to do.

snowwrestler 12y ago

iOS is locked down, but on the Mac side, you do not need to go through Apple to get and install software, aside from OS X itself and its bundled apps. The Mac App Store provides convenience and security. It's not required, though. You can install whatever you want on your Mac, or load whatever website or web app you want.

jnem 12y ago
I understand what you are saying, but its always been surprising to me how many folks who use Macs in this era don't. Those that do know there is an alternative to the store often view such items as a perversion of their system. Apps from the store are like old friends and family; there is a certain sense of safety and familiarity. Apps outside the store are treated as strangers, eye contact with such software is not advised. Conversely, PC users tend to treat all software as guilty until proven innocent, and as a result many of us have developed our own workflow to determine quality and safety. I guess I've always associated using a PC with a more "trust-yourself" attitude, and Macs with "trust-the-system" attitude. Obviously a lot of this is irrational bias based on a life time of having lived on the other side.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  I get the opposite feeling. I would rather download a DMG and run the app instead of using the App Store, typically because I ran Windows for years and using an app store to install software feels alien. It feels like some part of the control of the system has been taken away from me. Entirely psychological I know.

driverdan 12y ago

I've been using Macs since 2010 and only bought one item from the Mac App Store (a cheap game) to test it out. You don't need to use it if you don't want to.

x0x0 12y ago

So mac's are (still, in case it needed to be said) open. Install and run what you want. There is a one-time toggle to disable running unsigned apps, and that's it. ios is still locked down, and it's great for 99.99999% of users. Think about it this way: if there's one platform you could recommend to a non-technical user, a user that wants to run apps, and still have a safe computing experience, what would it be? ios. There's nothing even close. My brother runs three restaurants and does all the bookkeeping. After having his computer hacked and almost losing $x00,000, he purchased a separate computer just for bookkeeping. That's a little ridiculous. My gf's parents had a similar situation while they where building a house and had a ton of cash in their bank accounts. They've been hacked before, but for them, ios is a safe platform to log in and do their banking. No other operating system today provides safety and ease of use.

archagon 12y ago

If you're anything like me — a longtime PC user who started using Macs a few years ago — you will be shocked by how good Mac software tends to be. One day, you'll find yourself sitting at your old PC, tearing your hair out over some stupid decision that the programmer made in building whatever free application you're using, when you'll suddenly realize: you're a Mac guy now. EDIT: Also, from what I've seen, Apple is pretty committed to keeping Mac development open. Microsoft seems to be going in the opposite direction these days.

deong 12y ago
Mac development is still reasonably open. Distribution on the Mac App Store is not, and the limitations are crippling. It's not a matter of convenience -- you simply can't sell a sophisticated application on the App Store, and increasingly, you can't take advantage of platform features without it. You want iCloud sync? Take out the ability for users to access their own home directories and files. Take out the ability to have plugins of any sort. Take out any functionality you wouldn't expect in an iPhone time-wasting app.
- archagon 12y ago
  Yeah, but it's still better than the situation on the Windows side. In order to use the new Metro UI, Microsoft requires all apps to go through their app store. Remember: they've recently been dragged kicking and screaming from trying to hoist this UI on every Windows user. (You could draw the comparison to iCloud, but at least that's a service hosted by Apple on their own dime, not a native UI layer.) So far, Apple has made it clear that OSX is intended to remain an open OS. I expect that developers will be able to use OSX+'s new native features for many years to come, App Store, or no; in contrast, I don't see Microsoft permitting open development on anything but its rapidly aging Desktop. But yeah, I hope the App Store gets better. Pretty much any cool application idea I've had has required going outside the sandbox.
  - scholia 12y ago
    That's because Windows 8 includes the features of both iOS and Mac OS X. If Mac OS X could run iOS apps, do you reckon these would be supplied outside the Apple Store? You don't have to use Metro, of course. However, if you do, there are constraints that are required for a secure, always-connected, battery-powered device that are not required for a traditional desktop or laptop. > I don't see Microsoft permitting open development I don't understand this. There are several ways to develop Metro apps, including C# or C++ with XAML, C++ with DirectX, and JavaScript with HTML/CSS. Seems to me that Apple is more restrictive on both the iOS and Mac OS X sides. Even if you really mean "open deployment", it's not completely closed....

72deluxe 12y ago

"Suddenly Babylon had arrived on my desktop" Haha such a genius thing to say. I think most OS vendors are moving to this "app store" model as they see how they can easily distribute software and also railroad users and developers (for good or for bad). I'm not sure it's great (race to the bottom pricing + quality; see the Android Market for an example), but from a consumer perspective it is convenient.

kogarou 12y ago

The Mac ecosystem isn't walled like iOS. Its app store is just a convenience - most applications can be downloaded from their websites in the same way as the Windows EXEs you're familiar with. Apple isn't the final arbiter of what can be sold or what you can install.