Slashdot Mirror
Beware the Garden of Steven
theodp writes "With its forthcoming Lion Mac OS and new Apple-curated Mac Apps Store, Apple will be locking down top tier applications on the Mac similar to the way apps are locked down on the iPad and iPhone. Only by submitting their apps to Apple's store and giving up 30% of their receipts will developers get to take advantage of two new OS features. The first is Apple's new 'Launchpad,' a tool for easily opening application; the second is the ability to update apps to new versions with one click. It will be a lot easier to use apps bought from the Mac App Store than ones downloaded in the wild. It didn't have to be that way, says Valleywag's Ryan Tate: 'Apple could have enabled its Launchpad and auto-update features for all applications, sold through the Apple Store or not. For example, an open system for updating applications has been in use for years on Ubuntu... Ubuntu's 'Apt' (Advanced Packaging Tool) lets users install, update, and remove software of their choosing with a single command. There's a central list of apps curated by Ubuntu's maintainers, but users are free to add and install from other lists... But Apple seems to have made a very clear choice not to take the open route.' Longtime Apple developer Dave Winer was also concerned, tweeting during Apple's presentation 'Is this the end of the Mac as an open platform?' The news also prompted developer Anil Dash to call for an open alternative to the Mac App Store."
was never open.
blend? That IS the question.
Cheers.
Yours In Vladivostok,
Kilgore Trout
Can we seriously cool it with the 'OMG Lockdown!' claims? Yes, Apple introduced an app store for macs this week, but at the moment there are plenty of other ways to get applications, and use of said app store is certainly not required. When the lockdown is actually in place, then we can complain and move on from OS X to [insert your favorite Linux flavor here]. Let's stop rolling down this slippery slope already.
I can think of an open alternative to the Mac Store. I can think of a couple actually.
The battle between the kdawson haters and the Apple haters starts NOW!
Although clearly Apple has not yet closed down OS X - you would still be able to download and install apps from elsewhere I can't help but think this is just the stepping stone to eventual lock down of OSX. The Flash and Java exclusion timings are not mere coincidences. That would be a sad day indeed after Apple took so much from Open Source and used it to build the most closed down system you can imagine. It almost sounds like Apple is asking "Just how much can I get away with?". They will gauge the response, make sure they have enough developer backing to ride on and then one day close it all up. I am sure they will get enough people to both develop and buy apps and that's really going to be the driver to the lock down.
For example, an open system for updating applications has been in use for years on Ubuntu... Ubuntu's 'Apt' (Advanced Packaging Tool) lets users install, update, and remove software of their choosing with a single command. There's a central list of apps curated by Ubuntu's maintainers, but users are free to add and install from other lists.
Man, this "apt" business sounds amazing. Wouldn't it be great if Debian had something like this? Ubuntu should definitely contribute this "apt" upstream.
Of course, any developer who is serious about the future of computation, and who has at least some bit of self-esteem, wil not buy into this, and will just leave the Mac alone. Problem is that there will be developers that will fill in the market-gap thus created. It seems the Mac has got to the point where they have so much momentum that they can let the developers fight it out.
Jobs is turning Apple into the very thing he railed against in the early 80s. The hypocrisy is astounding.
Lets not let the tail wag the dog. APT was created on and used initially with Debian.
It's been adapted for numerous other platforms.... including to the iPhone/iPod Touch. It's what Cydia uses.
Fink also uses it for portions of package management.
many developers have been using sparkle to handle updates. Yes, it would be nicer if the OS checked and listed updates in one fell swoop (I use Coruscation to do it), but the existing situation isn't bad.
I have not seen any evidence that the Launchpad is limited ONLY to apps from the Mac App Store. What the Apple site says is that apps from the store are automatically added to Launchpad. That's not the same thing as saying "only" store apps are added to Launchpad. In fact what it says is "Your open windows fade away, replaced by an elegant, full-screen display of all the apps on your Mac." All the apps. (If there's a statement I'm not aware, please post a link...)
Including the apps in the update tool might be useful, but most apps on my Mac check for updates themselves when I start them. It's not like I have to remember to go out and check the Firefox or Adobe sites for patches myself.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Apple using logo of Belgian Neo-Nazi party
If this is true and they do decide to make the Launchpad available only to Mac App Store apps, Redmond shall be very pleased. Very pleased, indeed.
Longtime Apple developer Dave Winer was also concerned, tweeting during Apple's presentation 'Is this the end of the Mac as an open platform?'
If Apple is restricting operating system features to whitelisted applications, then it is, by definition, no longer an open platform. There are degrees of openness, of course, but given Apple's approach to the iPhone, my guess is that the Mac will eventually become a similar prison.
The news also prompted developer Anil Dash to call for an open alternative to the Mac App Store."
Rather, pick an open alternative to Apple. It's truly remarkable that Steve Jobs is finally starting to make Microsoft look good. And this comes at a time when Windows is, actually, looking halfway decent and MacOS is starting to look a little dated. If Ballmer has half a brain he'll exploit this to the max.
I guess Apple is expecting the same mindset that made the iPod and iPhone so phenomenally successful to carry over into the personal computer world. Time will tell, but truthfully I don't think much of the bulk of Macintosh users' hold on reality, so chances are, Jobs is going to be right once again. Enough people will stand for this that it will make a metric fuckton of money. That depresses me, somehow.
The amazing thing to me, speaking as someone who was in the ground floor of the personal computer revolution, and still has an Apple ][ Standard with the Integer ROM sitting on a shelf somewhere, is that it is Apple Computer that is pulling this crap on its users. It's the kind of thing that one would more reasonably have expected from the likes of the old IBM, or even MIcrosoft. But no, it comes from the company that once stood for freedom in computing.
No thanks. You've fallen a looong way, Mr. Jobs. What little respect I once had for you just jumped out the window.
In a world of does, Mac doesn't. How's that for a marketing tagline?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
It's in their DNA now, so many advantages to run things (and money) their way. I would not be surprised to see Macs diverge even further to fully closed systems that run only approved AppStore software. Not entirely Apple's idea, they actually copying Sony style, Sony stores and Sony's Playstation closed software model here.
He's a blogger, not a developer.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Why did Ubuntu get the credit for using this "open system" you speak of. Why not instead give credit to the other package managers that actually don't suck.
The news also prompted developer Anil Dash to call for an open alternative to the Mac App Store.
Wow, what an incredible idea. You mean, like, promoting your app and selling it on your own so that anyone can download it? Like we've been doing for years?
Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Apple isn't in the business of selling computers, they are in the business of selling a "user experience." That necessarily demands that His Jobsness controls as much of the platform as possible. This shouldn't be a surprise for anyone.
If you don't like it, don't use or develop for macs, pretty simple. Its Apple's platform, they are free to do with it as they wish. The rest of us can just ignore it and use whatever we prefer.
The runtimes just won't be provided as part of the Mac OS distribution anymore. That is a good thing because Mac OS used to always ship out-of-date versions of both runtimes, so they lacked features and/or were insecure.
On iOS you cannot load them if you want to. In Mac OS X you just have to go get the latest version straight from the source. That is a good thing IMO.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Does anyone remember people saying it was okay for Apple to lock down the iPhone because it's a device/gadget instead of a computer (whatever the hell that means)? I don't understand how people couldn't see this coming.
There's already an alternative to the Mac app store - it's called the internet.
There's plenty of freedom from Apple policies if you don't use them. And it's not like the current system is being replaced by the new one. Some people just like to get upset.
The thing I find interesting is that the new features are mostly just applications. I don't know of any real improvements to the operating system itself. It really does seem like it's done.
My understanding that an Apple announced an additional distribution channel using the Mac App store. Apple was not replacing the existing methods of retail, online, etc. Also Apple is not introducing any DRM to prevent installation. He also doesn't understand existing distribution systems today.
Apple could have enabled its Launchpad and auto-update features for all applications, sold through the Apple Store or not. For example, an open system for updating applications has been in use for years on Ubuntu, a Linux based operating system. Ubuntu's "Apt" (Advanced Packaging Tool) lets users install, update and remove software of their choosing with a single command.
So the author expects that somehow that apps not submitted to Apple will appear magically appear for auto-update? In the case of Ubuntu, there is a system to do handle updates. However, any code installed outside of the system (i.e. tarball or gzip) does not get auto-updated within the system.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Doesn't Apple know who they are messing with? We're computer programmers! If they mistreat us, we can just recreate the system with an Open Source clone and put them out of business. I propose a new project to do just that. We need to put the Apple clone on a firm foundation, so let's build it on a UNIX foundation. The BSD kernel is lighter than the Linux kernel, so we should start with that. Because this new UNIX core of an Apple clone is a new creation, we can give it a catchy name like "Creation" or maybe we can use the name of the guy who invented evolution. And we should use open source compilers. The GNU compilers have an objective C front end, so I propose that we use a GCC based compiler to build our system, the GUI, and tools.
Who's with me?
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
Developers had 15 years to try and make something. The only thing that has come close is Steam, and that was on Windows until a few months ago. Now Apple is making it easy to find, purchase and update applications it is suddenly a necessity. The funny thing is if such a thing already existed Apple would have promoted it.
"'Is this the end of the Mac as an open platform?"
It was open?
Seems pretty simple to me...
Develop for OSX, iOS and give a certain % to get your application on the largest established marketing and delivery vehicle worldwide or go elsewhere. The app store will draw people to your application from places most likely from areas some will never consider as part of their marketing/sales plans.
If people didn't see this coming years ago, and are going to continue to cry after the fact about how much apple tax is charged, then go develop your own solution.
I find myself skeptical of the launchpad claim. I suspect that someone if confusing code-signing here. since 10.4 apple has been ramping up the strictness of code signing for apps. as of 10.6 unsigned apps can no longer open ports on the firewall without explicit user permission and all unsigned apps spew warnings to the system.log when launched. This is actually mildly annoying if you are writing and testing compiled binaries for your own intranet since it means that you need to distribute a key to all the people on your intranet if you want the apps to not spew silent warnings to the system log. (e.g. commands that you want to run millions of times get slowed down by such spewing). But you can self sign things so this does not impede anything and is merely a minor nuiscance and I put up with it because of the obvious benefits to my own security for having signed apps.
I suspect what is going on for launchpad is that unsigned apps won't work in launchpad. Thus you have to have them signed by some one with a trusted cert for them to work out of the box. It may be that, and I don't know, that you could have the installer self-sign the app at install time as a work around.
ANyhow thats what I suspect. This is a sedeffect of the highly desirable code-signing and not just a requirement to pay apple to use an OS feature.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
"Is this the end of the Mac as an open platform?"
Praytell, when was the Mac ever an open platform?
Stupidity is an equal opportunity striker.
Fellow slashdotter Bill Dog
Only by submitting their apps to Apple's store and giving up 30% of their receipts will developers get to take advantage of two new OS features.
The first is Apple's new 'Launchpad,' a tool for easily opening application
Where exactly does it say that no apps except those bought from the App Store will be available in the Launchpad? Doesn't say that on Apple's page, and the way it's written doesn't even imply it, unless you're out looking for something to post an anti-Apple screed.
the second is the ability to update apps to new versions with one click.
Yeah, because no Mac applications currently have that ability. Oh, unless you count the ~750 listed here, that use Sparkle.
~Philly
You mean apt from Debian? Since a mac is BSD based you might want to do a little research on the ports system too. Please dont feed the Ubuntu fanboi's
Anil Dash is a developer? Uh, no he's not. From his own website, he's "a blogger, entrepreneur and geek living in NYC." Nothing about being a developer. So, a blogger posted something about Apple that will get the geeks all a-tizzy and it made it to the front page of Slashdot and will drive viewers to his site, generating ad revenue while being based on nothing informative and wiping people into a flamewar frenzy on slashdot. In other words, business as usual.
Please, feel free to discuss this FUD and base your thoughts on this Anil Dash fellow. He is, after all, a blogger "who's written over half a million words" so his opinion must be really important.
...we're emotionally hating on apple here over what we imagine will happen, not what actually has happened, please don't interrupt us.
This is what we do while we reinstall windows to get the cruft out.
If this is implemented as described I expect it to go over about as well as proposing a Wrist Slitting Barbie doll would. The simple fact is Microsoft has already tried something similar to this with their extortion masked as a security service that nags at the install when software isn't signed. It's not like launching an application from the Dock is terribly difficult now and a lot of apps have their own built-in check for updates anyway. Those two features simply won't matter. If anyone uses the app store it will be to distribute their app not to get features of questionable usefulness. And on top of that, this is just the sort of idiot move that would segment their userbase into people who think they need those features to use apps and those that are technical enough to do without.
Since segmenting their userbase wouldn't get them anything but less people using their new app store and providing new barriers to developers who might want otherwise consider porting their projects to the mac, I don't think they'll go that way. In both the long and short term it would just flat out be a bad move for them.
Guys. I've been an Amiga/PC/Red Hat person for years and got my first Mac Book Pro four months ago. The platform is "the most innovative and best platform" I have EVER USED. I have a new high end Windows 7-64 bit box sitting here collecting dust. The MAC is innovative right down to the power connector that is attached magnetically so it doesn't crack the solder joints in the motherboard when I trip over the laptop cord.
Based on what I have seen and the value and productivity increase I get from using the Mac, I am willing to let them be the gatekeeper. The Apple product is solid, stable, and (secure???) and by providing a gatekeeper to the store and features it limits the damage to the platform and (I hope) upholds standards.
There is a place for Open-ness and a place for megalomania, but I can get nearly any open source package for the Mac and any hooks to the "offlimit" API's will be worked around to make all the interface features available. I say let Apple keep growing and providing value and innovative products. If Apple fumbles the ball, we can revolt, but right now it's a very good platform on which to work extremely efficiently.
Anybody remember when FUD used to mean Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. Now it just means "not true". Back in the day something could be FUD and still be 100% true.
I know, I know, word meanings change, languages devolve over time....blah de blah. Still, I miss the days when English was a tool of subtlety and precision.
signed - Wistful Grammar Nazi.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
I wouldn't build an anyone-can-use-it-autoupdater into my operating system, either. What if a developer "goes rogue," and intentionally puts a Trojan in their update? Certainly the developer is to blame, but does Apple hold any liability for downloading and installing this malicious update? And I'm not talking about where blame should be placed in an ideal world, I'm talking about legal liability. Proving you're not to blame is a nightmare in the legal system, and even if you're 100% in the right, someone is going to sue you and waste your time and money anyway.
I'm no fan of Apple's walled garden, but this is clearly a CYA move, rather than a misguided attempt at preserving "experience".
You mean thepiratebay?
Downloading software from the internet is how you get trojans, the main threat to operating systems that don't completely suck. I encourage all of my clients to NEVER EVER install anything that's not in the iOS App Store, Ubuntu Software Center, Mac App Store, or Android Market. With the new Mac App Store, OS X has become the second desktop operating system I can recommend to people for regular use.
E.A. ~team contact, ubuntu NE LoCo
Given the success of Stream as well as Apple's own success with its mobile stores why would they not want to carry this over to the desktop? I can imagine someone somewhere in MS HQ is being chewed out for not having integrated something like this in Win7.
Exactly how well it will work with a software pool as big and diverse as what Windows supports is questionable. In addition to the trust factor for MS's image. So maybe for end users it might be meh but if there is one thing MS does well it is cater to larger scale implementations.
In fact for say a small office being able to manage your licensing in such a way would be better than the paper trail that one has to keep in case the BSA/MS/etc goons come around.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
The second is the ability to update apps to new versions with one click.
Huh. Someone didn't tell that to all of the developers that have been using the Sparkle framework for the last however long in their applications. While it's great that Apple is finally rolling this functionality into the OS as a native component, it's not like Mac applications have been without it up until now. Most of the decent ones have been using Sparkle for a few years, and it does this just fine. Now, if only they would buy out Growl, I'd be a happy man.
The chicken-little fear of OSX becoming "closed" ignores the reality: Macs have barely 10% marketshare, Cross-platform development is common and well understood these days, and if power users (who act as system evangelists) start abandoning OSX, Apple stands to lose LOTS of money.
The moment it becomes even difficult to do my daily job on a Mac is the day I go to Linux permanently... it's quite easy and usable today, but the Mac is more usable and affords me (with VMWare) the best OS for development for now.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
>For example, an open system for updating applications has been in use for years on Ubuntu... Ubuntu's 'Apt' (Advanced Packaging Tool) lets users install, >update, and remove software of their choosing with a single command.
Isn't that a Debian thing? I use Ubuntu, and use apt, but giving them credit for it seems unfair to Debian. Also, there is no mention of yum or any other such tool.
Currently the new app store is just one of many ways to get apps for your Mac. It has some good points and bad points, but the good one being that it will be easier for developers to get exposure as people will be all looking in one place for apps. The down side is that Apple has realised that taking a cut from other peoples work is by far the best way to make significant profits with minimum investment. The iOS app store has shown Apple that instead having to hire lots of highly skilled staff to build hardware and software it can simply act as a distribution chanel where it has to hold no inventory itself. Just like eBay they are taking a percentage of avery sale without having to make any investment in building the software themselves. Apple has no interest in locking down the MacOS just because of some control freaky, it is purely a profit motive. This is just the first step toward pushing all software sales via apple in order to raise profits. Clearly future editions of MacOS will gradually become more integrated with the App store, so new libraries will only be available to apps that come via the App store, then anything you launch that is not downloaded from the App store will stat displaying dire warnings about "this software has not been approved by apple your computer is at risk'. Untill eventually Apple stop providing development tools for development outside the App store environment until it is only possible to run unsigned apps in some sort of low performance protected sandbox. The more software purchases they can push through their store the more profit they make. Dont make the mistake of thinking that Apple haven't seen that opportunity and will milk it for all it is worth.
Not only is the insane stupidity rampant all over the Mac specific sites I go to, it's here.
Listen up maggots, if you count yourselves among the truly retarded who are worried about the Mac app store locking down your computer and being the only software distribution channel available for a Mac please... drown yourself in the nearest toilet. Really. It's for the good of the species.
I have never seen so much ridiculous paranoia. And even if Apple did... okay, so what? It ain't the only platform in town. You fucking dweebs are going on like it's the end of the fucking world.
Windows will follow suit in just one version!
The Zune store - which SLAVISHLY copies the entire iTunes / App store business and technology model - will be extendaed past Win Phone 7, right down to the desktop.
Pray that Intel gets here first. Then at least, you will have a federated ecosystem of public, corporate and commercial app stores, with flexible policy boundaries.
Otherwise, you are 4 years away from Palladium. Your PC is just like XBox 360!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
It's been around for a while. http://www.appbodgea.com/ And what about Cydia? You think those guys aren't ALL OVER this?
Opera and friends are touting HTML 5 and related technologies as the application future, where native apps will be superseded by cross-platform multimedia thingamagogs implemented using the open standards that apparently all browser manufacturers are completely in agreement on and that will be finalized any day now, served from the magic of Cloud Computing.
This would make a native app store moot, since you would just go to some vendor marketplace using your browser and install a HTML 5 app locally, and they would run fine no matter what modern browser you used.
Or are they just smoking crack?
or you could use only FLOSS applications...
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
The question is, why hasn't the open source community rallied around an open source store for Windows or OSX? Something like Synaptic with the concept of repositories and automated dependency resolution.
I hope that they do in the near future. Bonus points if installing any open source app from a website gives the option of installing the open source app store.
Mind you, the app store doesn't even need to be opensource. Ubuntu's synaptic has binary-only packages for flash. Wouldn't Adobe love to have everyone update to the latest version within days of a flash update coming out?
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
a tool for easily opening application
Really? The dock - which requires a whole one click of the mouse to start an application - is too difficult? Does the new tool read your mind?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
This already exists, and it's called Bodega. It hasn't caught on. There's also MacPorts and Homebrew, which are popular among devs but have no presence among regular users because they're for *nix command-line tools.
I believe the reason open app distribution systems like APT work so well on Linux is the "open culture": the vast majority of software Linux users want to run is Free Software. But can an APT-like system work as well with proprietary, for-sale apps? I know there are proprietary drivers and such on various repos, but I'm talking about stuff like Photoshop, Office, or the thousands of little paid apps you can get on iOS.
Yes, it'd be great if Mac users embraced FOSS more, but they won't do it as long as FOSS lags in ease of use and polish. And it will continue to do so because polish is hard work, and devs working for their bread are more willing to dish out the elbow grease. I'd love for this to change, but I don't really see how it can.
What about Microsoft and their app store in Windows 8 which does similar functionality?
I think what Microsoft and Apple are doing is getting a reliable and historically clean distribution mechanism (glorified repositories) working on their platforms. This way, Joe Sixpack either realizes he is doing something very wrong when a pr0n site is demanding he manually download and install something that isn't easily available from the store/repo.
Repos/stores like this make life easy for small developers. Application updates are easily propagated, and even if the store doesn't advertise the app, the vendor can always link to it and users can know it was at least vetted by someone before installing it.
I already posted twice about it in this thread (The first time I mistyped the URL). It works very similarly to Apple's App Store and it's up and running TODAY. It's called Bodega.
With the thought of Apple extracting 30% of sales, Adobe announces Adobe Linux with the full CS6 suite.
Place nail here >+
OK then, let me rephrase the assertion under discussion: Only applications provided with Mac OS X and applications downloaded from the App Store show up in At Eas^W^W Launchpad.
Apple is just prepping for Mac OS X 10.8 Caged Lion
Oh, come on! You've always known that developing for Apple is a privilege, and every privilege has a price.
what you said is not true. none of it.
I don't know of they are moving to complete lockdown, only the top at Apple knows. But what I do now is that:
a) Apple has screwed developer before
b) Apple makes a ton of money with the iPad/iPhone model of walled garden.
c) Jobs likes to take a boil the frog method in marketing by getting a little wedge towards what he wants, and when it's shown to be valuable, move even farther. He did it with the iPod, he did it with iTunes, he did it with the iPhone.
So ti's not hysteria to think he might be moving towards a completely locked down system. It doesn't mean they are or aren't moving that way.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
In Ubuntu and Debian, you are not limited to using the central repository with apt. You can add any third-party repositories to the list.
You can do the same with iOS devices.
Only if you represent a business with 500 or more employees, according to the page you linked.
In Ubuntu and Debian, you are not limited to using the central repository with apt. You can add any third-party repositories to the list.
But does APT support authentication for repositories? As far as I can tell, such would be needed in order to make a "store" (paywalled repository) like CNR.
Because the open source community would make an store that looks like this. They know that most people using Windows or OSX wouldn't use it until it looked something more like this, and that just isn't going to happen.
when was the Mac ever an open platform?
Mac OS X is not a free software platform, but it is an open platform to the same extent that the userspace of Windows is an open platform: the platform's maintainer lacks imprimatur power over applications on the platform. The userspace of Android is likewise an open platform unless you're on AT&T (which hides the "Unknown sources" checkbox on its handsets). This stands in sharp contrast to closed platforms such as iOS devices and virtually all video game consoles.
On a Mac running OSX, click the apple menu and there is an item called "Mac OS X software..." which launches the browser and brings you to essentially as what's been described as the Apple store. You can buy software, download trials, etc. Sure it's not the same as the App Store way of doing things, but it's not like the Mac didn't have a similar concept.
As far as installing stuff, I personally am not worried because the Mac is meant to be a general purpose tool that, since it has a command-line interface as part of the base OS, you have a guaranteed way to get into the guts of the OS and do all sorts of nice things.
If they announce that the terminal would not be an app available on the Mac, and that software can only be developed with "development" machines, then yes, I'm hanging it up and switching to a straight Linux machine. Until then, the Mac is still my choice for developing Unix software, as well as anything else I darn well please.
You mean like this?
Very few revolutionaries who gain power are better than what they replace. More often than not, they're the worst kind of dictators. This is why George Washington remains in such high esteem. Not only did he not become the next King George, he voluntarily stepped down after two terms--a tradition that was continued up to FDR, and then made an ammendment.
I can think of dozens of open alternatives to MacOS X.
GNUstep is a clone of Cocoa (formerly called OpenStep), the toolkit used by applications designed for Mac OS X. But as far as I can tell, it's not binary compatible with applications built with XCode. So you're at the mercy of your application publishers if you want anything ported to your open Mac clone. And no, not everything has a close substitute; GIMP lacks Photoshop's adjustment layers, for one.
Assuming any part of TFA is true, one has to wonder why apple would prostitute these two core features. Seems like a lazy ass excuse to pimp the apple store on the matured PC platform and is beyond me.
Guess what we learn about apple is:
1) Apple's desire to be the underdog will be guaranteed by replicating the Microsoft defective by design principle.
2) Apples just not as successful as we all thought, proof being point #1.
When they layoff most if the impact Apple workforce they will have a finger to point at the idiot who screwed with the working and successful Mac model.
Question is, will Steve share whatever hes been smoking? I'm all out of cool aid and bubblegum.
Now if we could only kill off all but 10 *nix distros we'd have a replacement for Apple in time for apples "sure thing" date to screw the Mac user base.
With the money I save in not hosting and distributing software, I only lose 30%, I GAIN access to a LARGE base of users PROVEN to be willing to pay for software through the store. How dare apple give developers a way to make money, they are so evil !
is sometimes compared to a Borg
04.50: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-iydbNlJfM
Enjoy :)
Also:
00.13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0kzI9m6gO0
01.00: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7cq_tSghgM
Apple garners widespread acclaim and adoption only to throw it all away in an effort to exert control over the platform and lock in it's audience...AGAIN!
If Apple wants to create an Application store on their own OS, why is that a problem?
Steam has an Application Store on both the Mac and Windows.
If someone wants to create a service exactly like Apple's they can, with additional features as they see fit. Apple isn't preventing that.
The fact that software developers will have an incentive to use Apple's method of distribution is based on THEM GETTING AN ADVANTAGE. If you have a better method to help developers make a living on Apple, then go ahead!
It isn't like the phone. The phone is locked down. The phone is closed.
The OS they give away the development software for free, there are even open source repositories that you can use to get X11/Unix software.
Whine Whine whine.
Fear, Uncertainty, Deception.
Duh, doubt is covered by the second word, can anybody read and parse anymore?
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
Except I want stuff thats actually useful and not a piece of crap.
This kind of panic has happened before. I don't understand why so many people freak out any time Apple gets serious about distribution.
Apple's decision to open its own retail stores nearly a decade ago was attacked as a move that would destroy Apple's retail presence and piss off consumers. One clever analyst told MacWorld: "It's another case of Apple being Jobs driven and not consumer driven." Guys like him got it completely backwards. Customers didn't actually enjoy having to look all over the place to find Apple products. Apple customers benefited from the stores. Developers benefited. Apple benefited.
A few years later, Apple created the App Store. It was widely derided as being overly restrictive for developers. There were a lot of statements about how it would strangle the platform. We all know how that turned out.
As for Winer, I think he'd rather Apple stick with the Mac as the future of the company. That ain't gonna happen. Consumers have voted with their wallets. They want an easier experience all the way 'round, from finding apps to purchasing and using them, and Apple is providing that. The company has become a global powerhouse over the last few years by giving people what they want; developers can either get on board with that and find ways to profit, or they can develop on other platforms.
There's a fair amount of snarkiness in the tech community about all those fools in the business world, about all the dinosaurs who can't keep up with the times, but when it comes right down to it, we're often just as attached to the status quo, and just as slow to react.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
This article is just blind; there's zero vision. Apple is just making apps easier to get without locking down the system.
There's already an app "store" for the Mac. It's called MacPorts. You just open the terminal window and type "port install " and it installs an app for you.
un-ALTERED reproduction and dissimination of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED
... but let's not be hasty.
Millions of Mac users have been conditioned since the beginning that they can get their software from anywhere they please. I don't think it is likely that Apple will close a platform that has been open for decades. If they tried, I think the outcry would give even stubborn Steve second thoughts.
And if it does come to pass? Save me a torch and a pitchfork.
Alternative App store, look at Bodega a Free (but not open source) app from http://appbodega.com/. Does pretty much what Apple's store does, gets apps, installs them and keeps them up to date. The Apple store might kill them but it's a nice little app to browse for stuff.
"The news also prompted developer Anil Dash to call for an open alternative to the Mac App Store." Yes. Lets call it something like macports or fink. Those would be good names.
Does that imply the Mac was an open platform once?
Only by submitting their apps to Apple's store and giving up 30% of their receipts will developers get to take advantage of two new OS features. The first is Apple's new 'Launchpad,' a tool for easily opening application
Was it explicitly stated that you can't add, for example, applications you've already bought to the Launchpad, or is that just somebody making a possibly-incorrect guess?
No, make no mistake about it -- if Apple wants control of a product space, they *will* make sure they get it, whether that means acquiring, ripping off, or otherwise replacing the existing solutions, they will find a way to do it.
And guess what Cornell's application updater/downloader/launcher system is called? Yup, "LaunchPad". Since 1993.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Lion is a way off. Plenty of time for tweaks and changes in the OS and the Services.
This.
Three or four years ago, everything was moving to Web-based apps where no one cared about what OS you are running - they only cared about what browser/JavaScript/CSS/HTML/rendering software you were using. But then iPhone and iPad and iOS came out started taking marketshare, and now we're back to platform-specific apps, and this time they are ultimately controlled by one company with a maniacal CEO. I wrote about this here and got responses that said that competition would solve everything, but sadly it hasn't happened. And now iOS-style lockdown is moving to PCs and turning them into appliances. I can't see how this is good.
Maybe three or four years ago, Web-based everything was a few too many years ahead of its time, but lets try to get back to that. That's the best way I can see to prevent completely locked-down platforms like this.
Apt is originally and still a Debian package manager. Ubuntu is the easy open version of Debian for those with limited mental dexterity, or just plain lazy like me. Installing Debian is the mental version of rock climbing. At least I can rockclimb mentally...
I wonder if Apple hires writers to post comments to popular geek sites to try to improve their overall image within those communities. Some of the comments posted here don't really sound the Slashdot I remember. Its clear to any true open source geek that Apple is bent on domination. They've essentially took a version of Unix, tweaked it, got a bunch of Linux users to switch over and even convinced them to start paying for simple apps that they would have never considered before (Textmate). There was that side and there was the iPod/iTunes side where the control mentality slowly grew to conquer the entire OS. Any 'real' geek can see straight through it and I'll toss all you Apple groupies who are sticking with the world domination bandwagon into the same group as I put all the Microsoft zombies. But somehow I think most of you blind Apple supporters commenting here are likely just paid Apple contributors. Influencing the comment flow on major sites is likely a really good way to counteract negative news posts.
All your apps are belong to us.
Yes, I was happy to get my Macbook Pro a few years ago and was happy I didn't have to compile any kernel drivers to get any of the hardware working. It was the Unix environment I knew and loved except that I had the added benefit of my hardware working out of the box. Its been a while since then and I'm tired of it to be honest. I'm jumping ship on this train to eventual complete control by Apple.
Only if you audit the source code and compile it yourself. But first you'll need to audit and bootstrap a compiler to make sure the compiler isn't trojaned.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
In my haste to refer to this crowd as a bunch of "[paranoid] fucking dweebs" I lost my opportunity to mod up posts like this. I thank you sir for not being a delusional apocalyptic moron. All the exaggerated gloom and doom on this thread makes me feel like I'm at a Pentecostal church.
And behold, I opened the third seal and there stood the Great and Terrible Jobs who unleashed his App Store upon the masses and all the world's computers were closed forever.
Paranoid fucking dweebs.
MS Money was discontinued in 2009. There won't be another release. Makes a bad gift. Wait - that's not irony, is it? Can I get an irony check over here?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Good Lord, people, get hold of yourselves...
Only one problem with this complete nonsense about the platform becoming "locked down" with the creation of the Mac App Store. It's a complete load of crap. The "Mac" and Mac OS X is and will continue to be a general purpose computer system, where you will _always_ be able to install software from any site on the web or install from any boxed CD or DVD or USB stick. The Mac App Store is a brilliant piece of marketing strategy that the Mac users will absolutely adore from day one. When it is in place Apple will have finally succeeded in getting the general public to use something that the Unix/Linux world has been madly barking about for decades: a nearly system-wide package management system. Only Apple will have managed to create a package management system that commercial entities will actually "buy into", so to speak, which has been the major flaw in the package management systems in the Unix/Linux world for so very long. Once again, without even breaking a sweat, Apple is about to something we wish we'd been able to do for the last couple of decades.
Mac OS X has had a sort of package management system (which works very well, BTW) for system updates for... well pretty much forever. Since its inception, I believe. But now, with a Mac App Store, users will have a single source to browse for and download both free and commercial software, have it _automatically_ install itself in the proper location with a single click*, and then keep dozens upon dozens of large and small apps completely up to date with a system-wide single-click update mechanism. Users will know that software from the Mac App Store has been vetted as being safe, having a certain quality level and not being completely pointless. Currently, most Mac applications are pretty smart about telling you there is an update available, and many of them will do a single-click download and update without much fuss. But this normally only happens when you run the app. Unfortunately, when you're starting an app it's usually because you want to use it, so it's kind of a pain to be constantly having one individual app after another telling you there is an update available. With the Mac App Store the users will have a central place to look for and receive notices of application updates, and a single button that will download and apply all relevant updates.
The moment the Mac App Store was revealed I immediately saw that it would change the way the typical Mac user will manage software on their computer, and everyone else will once again be stuck trying to cobble something together and catch up. Microsoft will desperately attempt to have something similar in place in the next version of Windows. Of course they will fail horribly, as usual. What will happen is that the Mac platform will continue to accelerate and gain more and more users on into the foreseeable future, because Apple is completely boxing in all market demographics. Between the iPhone, the iPad and now a new mind-bogglingly simple to use Mac platform, the PC world is going to be in serious trouble. Mark my words. Remember, the paying market could not care less about the kinds of "openness" we're always worrying about here on /. They want stuff that's as easy to use as their TV, and Apple is the only one giving them what they want.
Trust me folks, this is going to be _big_. The few developers who complain that the Mac App Store is too tightly controlled and refuse to use it will unfortunately be completely drowned out by the thundering horde who will be rushing to use it and showering praise on it for the next decade. Those of us "in the know" will continue to download apps from the general internet and use our general purpose computers as general purpose computers. That simply won't change. If it does change somewhere down the line, there's always Linux. Ten years from now I'm sure Linux will be kicking some major ass and still be just as open as ever. And even if the Mac platform keeps growing phenomenally the way it h
Because of the tendency of those package managers to screw up systems with dependency hell by destroying the main system installed binary versions. If you think DLL hell is bad, dependency hell is even worse.
Mac software should store dependencies either in the app package itself or in an Application support folder and NOT interfere with the base install of the OS.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
The very fact that we're having this discussion implies that there's a business model associated with being a one-stop third-party repository for all platforms, handling software sale (if cost), download, install, payment processing, vetting software vendors, uninstallation, recommendation, rating and reviewing, and that such a business will be profitable. Since it's a business model, at this moment there are businessmen all over the country filing papers for the corporations that are going to get in on the ground level. There will no doubt be several competing businesses offerring you this boon next month, each advertising "exclusives" and vying for your attention.
The obvious thing to do is to patent an API for the arbitrage of trust and control in competing integrated software market distributors and updaters, so that licensees could implement customer-driven subrogation and promotion of their preferred software markets and still perform their search and update duties in a fashion coordinated with each other. Then lock it in a drawer and forget about it for ten years.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
"That's the best way I can see to prevent completely locked-down platforms like this." Like what? The Mac isn't locked down. Apple has said they have no plans to lock it down.
Any conjecture that they are going to lock it down is just that... conjecture. It has no more basis in reality that saying that Windows is going to be locked down soon.
I'm laughing at the "superior" product.
But please, let someone tell me why they're hitching themselves to this boat anchor.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Because the open source community would make an store that looks like this. They know that most people using Windows or OSX wouldn't use it until it looked something more like this, and that just isn't going to happen.
How about something that looks like this?
The big thing that will save OS X from the same lockdown as iOS is that developers need to use these machines to write the software. What self-respecting developer would ever commit to developing for a platform on a machine they could not install whatever tools they pleased on?
In OS X Lion the Launchpad will beat the old Spotlight by being able to read your mind and sometimes even launch apps before you realize you want them!
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
so......just by glancing over the story I get the feeling that Apple has dropped the ball, kicked it under a car, and the car is driving away with said ball grinding underneath only to burst after a few hundred yards...Whats next, OS that run from the Apple servers to ensure people can only operate certain programs at certain times and only if they have been over paid for the luxury of having your hand held while trying to get work done. This enterprising of our recreation is making me angry. At a point in time it was about who had the best product, While people are creating home brew and jailbreaks to compensate for the demands of consumers the companies are all about lawsuits and copyright infringement against paying customers in the vain attempt to keep stock holders happy...not the consumer. So whatever...this made my mind up for me...I will NEVER buy a Mac...and as unstable as Windows have been every OS they release I still have the very real option to get this computer to do what I want it to as apposed as to asking permission signed in blood every time I want to install or modify the system. The industry are insane if they think it's right to sell something and assume they can restrict the use of said product.
IMHO Lion is DOA out of the box.... it has features no one wants on the mac.
Imagine you've got a program called "Opera Browser" and you are Not distributed through the app store. That means you won't be able to use the LaunchPad and 1-Click Updates. Wouldn't that tend to make your program less attractive than, say, Apple Safari which DOES have those abilities?
Imagine you've got a program called "Firefox Browser" and you are Not distributed through Microsoft. That means you won't be able to use the Automatic Updates control panel. Wouldn't that tend to make your program less attractive than, say, Microsoft Internet Explorer which DOES have those abilities?
See ... stupid question is still stupid question.
There's a fair amount of confusion as to the various ports systems on Mac.
http://darwinports.com/ claims to be the "original" Darwin Ports.
http://www.macports.org/ claims the above is an imposter. But the thing is, darwinports.com has a really nice command summary for every individual package. (I.e., go to terminal, type "sudo port install bzr ", etc.) This is better than MacPorts which only has a generic help for all apps.
And then there's Fink, http://www.finkproject.org/.
Anybody want to comment on the best/recommended system?
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Its a good post but I think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Software_Center has a nicer screenshot. The new version of the Software Centre is excellent, and anyone capable of getting an app on a smartphone will enjoy this even more :)
to avoid apple products.
Why on Earth would anyone buy one of these things?
Yes they can, I'll explain.
Actually no you don't, you can set up your own repository and point people to that in order to update. I don't know of a Linux distro that forbids the addition of thrid party repo's (there probably is one though). Certainly not Ubuntu, RH or Debian.
Now at the moment Apple are not restricting programs not installed via their repo and it's not like they have a history of locking down platforms in order to prevent thrid party sources of applications from being used...
No...
Wait...
They do and it's bigger then OS X. A quite ominous precedent.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Guess Apple is trying to find out how much abuse their fanboys and -girls will take ... how long before no software will be allowed installed unless it comes through the app store? How long, until root rights are removed from the owner's hands for the sake of "safety and comfort of use"? ...
And face it - over the long run, the extra 30% on the app price will come out of the customers' pockets, not the developers
I'm betting on mandatory code signing for applications outside the Mac App Store, making freeware impossible and shareware only available if the App Store censor allows it by 10.9. All for the customers' own good, you understand (viruses, uncertainty of downloading off the internet, and stuff).
At that point the web browser starts to become less important as newspapers can be accessed by (paid-for) apps.
You don't understand how code signing works do you? Any app can sign it's own code when you install it. it's called self signing. You don't need apple's permission. More over anyone who buys a Thawte (or other) registered code signing certificate can by pass self-signing without apple's permission.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
It is a strange world indeed when I turned down getting a mac for a pc running Windows and .NET over macOSX and Java for web development work. Oracle and Apple are just plain scary and it turns out Microsoft is the one who is the least evil when they were in power.
If I had Adobe Dreamweaver, Office, and Free Java or .NET on Linux I would switch to it.
For this reason I never bought an iPhone. My phone is mine and not Sprint or Apple's. Why is this even legal? What is next? Getting a call by Ford on which streets to drive on the car you purchased. Oh, thats right I didn't actually buy my car. I only purchased a right to drive it. Silly me I agreed to it by turning the key .... nauseates.
I think a fresh lawsuit is needed by the EFF or some liberal group to challenge these rights. We are so far behind Europe and Asia it is not even funny due to stupid greed like this.
http://saveie6.com/
An "open" app store is a good idea. But it's too bad (and ironic) it will have taken an event like this to prod developers to try to make it slick and popular and to make everything worth having available there. At least fink and macports have already existed for quite a while now. But a unified store for both closed-source and open-source software, and friendly enough for non-geeks to use, is another step beyond. What we will probably get instead will be several open app stores, all of them incomplete.
I've been thinking it would be nice if any operating system could treat the whole universe of available software as if it was readily available: e.g. you could right-click a document and "open with" an application you don't have yet, transparently. Sometimes it would be fulfilled by installing free software, sometimes by prompting you to buy the app, sometimes by using a free cloud app and sometimes by renting a non-free cloud app (filtered according to your preferences of course). Same deal with spotlight, perhaps (although it could get cluttered, showing more stuff that you don't have than stuff that you do). VMs can enable using non-native apps too, so those could also be made available if there is no other choice.
It's not just Apple. The industry has been slowly honing and marketing DRM-only trusted computing type of boxes and delivery systems for about a decade now.
They're smart. They know that they can't just go from something like Windows XP to a completely locked down box and expect anyone to buy it. The idea is to gradually introduce this in the current generation devices such that at the end anything free (while possible) is a couple generations behind (and pretty sucky by comparison). Critical mass in market penetration is a tidal force.
Progression goes something like this
1) Game Console (cheaper than a computer, but _IS_ a computer ... you just can't run anything not blessed by the manufacturer. But it's OK ... it's only a console)
2) The whole idea of "Apps" for your phone. Different enough not to be a computer -- applications around 1990 shareware quality and cost a couple of dollars each. Useful because of new context.
3) The iPad (a bit above the phone...state of the art device -- but still a tablet, not a computer -- don't you worry)
4) Some sort of "app store" for the desktop that's the path of least resistance. Still, nothing "mandatory" per se on the desktop. [CURRENT ARTICLE]
5) ???
6) "Apps" instead of programs on any device you might care to own. Write free stuff if you want -- you'll only reach the jailbreaker fringe. (See Windows Phone 7 restrictions on free (as in beer) software).
7) Requirement of "Apps" instead of spyware-laden programs (if you can run them at all) by schools, corporations, etc. Very scary trojans. Reports of contaminated compiler chains in the wild (See http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/ken/trust.html ). Couple people have their bank accounts stolen by free software where the source code looks perfectly innocent. The FUD can create itself at this point...
8) PROFIT!!!
(and I mean profit -- why not code up a simple app and let MS/Apple/et al. market it for you in exchange for 50% of the profits -- it's a win-win scenario in the short run).
If you think the FSF will save you, remember that they don't make hardware. State of the art hardware is manufactured by corporations who have every interest in embracing DRM. You don't want free software stuck on the 2020 equivalent of the Arduino 10 years from now.
Any solutions?
It's cool that Apple will help indie startups to do the marketing of their apps. What I'm worried most about is whether they will start to impose their idea of "quality" control as they have for the iPhone app store: nothing off-color, no scripting languages (or outright requirement to use Objective C and Cocoa rather than say Qt and C++), must follow their UI design guidelines, etc. Of course it's going to be difficult for them to rein stuff like that in since MacOS is not a new platform. But I think they really shouldn't try as hard as they have on the iPhone, and it's going to suck even harder if they do try.
... when Apple locks the computers in exactly the same way as they do their portable devices?
How do you load applications for the iPhone from the internet without hacking it? (in the US this may be even illegal!).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Is this the end of the Mac as an open platform?'
For someone to have EVER considered the Mac an open platform on any level is freaking disturbing. From hardware to software, it is the most closed platform in the world.
Just because they ripped of XNU and it uses UNIX underpinnings as a model does not make it open in any sense of the imagination. If this is the standard of 'open' then Windows NT is also an open platform, as it has a full BSD subsystem.
Professor Plum run, we are now playing a game of 'Clueless'...
Yes, Apt does support authentication. It has an entire system set up for authentication and keys.
I've seen authentication of the downloaded packages against a public key. But when I looked through Software Sources on my Ubuntu laptop, I didn't see anything about authentication of the user to the server to allow only registered users the privilege to download from a repository. Google apt repository access control produced nothing relevant.
Cool down everybody. The Launchpad is just the OS X version of Launcher we had on Classic.
During the keynote nobody said Launchpad would be restricted to the App Store and frankly I don't see Apple forcing you to put your apps in two different places depending on whether you've bought it from them or not.
Apple also knows damn well Adobe, Microsoft and the other big software publishers will NEVER want to give Apple 30% of their revenue, they're not going to restrict non-App Store installs unless they want to kill the Mac platform altogether. Maybe in future releases of Mac OS X they'll embark on some dirty tactics to force publishers to be on the App Store exclusively, but it will be an uphill battle: unlike on the iPhone, other software distributions channels exist and are well-entrenched. Also, why would they have helped Valve port Steam on the Mac if they wanted 100% control of distribution?
Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
Everyone's worried about lock-in.. I'm thinking "Great. iAds in iTerm."
Three or four years ago, everything was moving to Web-based apps where no one cared about what OS you are running - they only cared about what browser/JavaScript/CSS/HTML/rendering software you were using. But then iPhone and iPad and iOS came out started taking marketshare,
and then developers weren't satisfied with Apple's initial "web apps only" stance on the iPhone and threw public tantrums until they got a native SDK, and Apple came up with the App Store since buying and installing mobile apps on other platforms had proved to be a complicated pain in the ass for non-technical people,
and now we're back to platform-specific apps, and this time they are ultimately controlled by one company with a maniacal CEO.
Everybody always seems to forget that middle part.
Only by submitting their apps to Apple's store and giving up 30% of their receipts will developers get to take advantage of two new OS features...
The comment about LaunchPad is totally wrong. Of course users will be able to add apps to it.
The comment about not being able to use the built-in OS single-click updating mechanism is pretty irrelevant, since there is (and has been for quite a while) an open-source, widely-known, widely-used 3rd-party framework that provides this to any developer who wants to use it.
I was going to buy my wife an upgraded powermac, and my kids an iMac for Christmas, but this kind of shit really rubs me raw. Two sales down the draino, Stevo. Stop being such an asshat, and I might come back.
it's ok for them to stick the knife in ya as long as they do it slowwwwwly. When Apple fully locks down the OS and the only avenue for applications is to get Apple blessed apps via the app store you'll keep begging for more and justify something you'd have denounced 5 years ago. Don't sit there and scream FUD at everyone when the last decade (at least) of Apple history shows that this move is inevitable. What is it that compels people to want a nanny no matter how much they claim otherwise? I will never understand why you guys buy into the "we know better than you" mentality of Apple. I reserve the right to screw up my user experience and suffer the consequences. Butt out please.
The irony of it all is that when any other company turns the screws and locks things down a little more each year, you same guys scream and whine. Mobile carriers spring to mind as getting lots of mileage and hate around here for closed platforms and stores. Yet when Apple learns the lesson well and gets into bed with AT/T, it's ok, since it's shiny and has a half eaten fruit logo.
You will play in Steve's playground, by his rules or he will take his ball and YOU'LL go home. Brilliant he might be, but a childish control freak as well. If it makes me shallow to not purchase Apple products because I just don't like the way Steve does business, oh well. But before you start pickin on me for that, remember that there are loads of Apple fanboys (plenty on this site) that don't use Wintel platforms because of a personal dislike of Gates and Ballmer.
Can we now finally change the apple icon on slashdot? A Borg icon like the one M$ has would do, or maybe a rotten apple. Or, perhaps an apple where a worm comes out with the face of Steve Jobs, and with an evil laugh.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
So... that's pretty much like the Games/Software for Windows market place?
How about making a GUI to Macports available in the Apple application store for free. =)
Or maybe Apple won't let you put free software and/or software that download other software on their application store... Haven't read up on the details surrounding it. =/
/.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
I agree that most Mac users aren't exactly the brightest computer users, but get real, most Windows users don't even know other OS's exist, let alone what an OS is. Mindless flock of sheep, really.
And there you have it.
The attitude that guarantees a declining 0.85% market share for Linux as a client OS. Top Operating System Share Trend, StatCounter Global Stats
The masses may not know Linux, but they have come to know the geek all to well - and they do not like what they see in him.
yeah, but I highly doubt that ever GNU/Linux user has some sort of malware from GCC. As for compiling, even without a personal code audit (thousands of eyes excuse), I trust it a hell of a lot more than I'd trust apple. They didn't realize that a 'flashlight app' was really just a tethering app. Do they even look at source code?
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
Prove me wrong.
Microsoft should start making "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" adds, and hire the same guys....
Yeah, as a developer myself, I won't touch any platform like the mac appears to be becoming. I would rather save my efforts for a platform where I don't have to sacrifice 30% of revenues for a few convenient features. In any case, I am moving to the web for development in the future, and Mac users can still use my web software! I wrote some of my thoughts down about it as well when I first heard the full extent of the news: http://www.bootstrappingindependence.com/technology/the-future-of-independent-software-development/
We use Flash on some of the sites I run, and we sniff for the plugin. If it's not present, or a version too old, we serve a link to the Flash player page on Adobe's site. Anyone who uses Flash and cares about UX is already doing this. Consumers can choose to download the plugin or not, but we make it easy to do so if they want.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Au contraire, Apple has over 20% of all PC sales now
Retail does not include most Business PC purchases... so I stand uncorrected.
Here is my keynote liveblog reference:
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
My friends and family who are unsure about what tech to buy, ask me. If I am confident in my knowledge of the product (ie, Cameras, Laptops, etc)... I issue clear recommendations. For the past 5-7 years I've been recommending Mac laptops. If Apple locks down OSX (I strongly doubt it), then I will stop recommending them. I know for a fact that folks I know factor my recommendations strongly.
I'm pretty sure there are a lot of "evangelists" like me out there, and if Apple shuns us, they will lose sales.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I've been using Macs for a long time- even through the "Apple is going to die any day now" 1990s- and, from that perspective, I believe if this is the approach Apple will be taking I don't see it as a good sign. 1. As far as the mobile market goes, Android has shot up that proverbial ladder because of their open license agreement ( as well as the fairly solid design out-the-gate), 2. To believe this will work, Jobs must be convinced that Apple will gain significant marketshare in hardware and software before Lion's introduction and at this stage in the game Jobs, I believe, must seriously consider 3. His lifespan. If he dies around that stage of the game he'd already better have left something up his sleeve for Apple to work with. No matter how much us fanboys love Apple, we all have to remember that its a publicly traded company...
MacPro 4,1 2.66GHz/Radeon HD 4870/Mac OS X 10.6.x