Slashdot Mirror


MplayerX Leaving Mac App Store

New submitter technonono writes "MplayerX, a popular and free video player app on Mac OSX, is now leaving Mac App Store 'after arguing with Apple for three months.' The developer claims that Apple's sandboxing policies would strip the app into 'another lame Quicktime X,' which is unacceptable. The app is releasing updates on its own site, where users who bought it from the App Store would most likely never notice them. The situation was 'foretold' by Marco Arment, at least for one app."

225 comments

  1. It's not actually popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and if they had an auto-update mechanism (like sparkle) people wouldn't need to check their website for app updates because (drumroll) in soviet russia, app checks website for updates!

    1. Re:It's not actually popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      and if they had an auto-update mechanism (like sparkle) people wouldn't need to check their website for app updates because (drumroll) in soviet russia, app checks website for updates!

      It's a media player. It renders .mpg and .flv and .mp4 and .avi and .ogg, well-documented containers/well-documented codecs. Barring the occasional security hole (which I can retrieve at my leisure), it doesn't need updates.

      The day my media player phones home to download new executable code for a previously-unrecognized video codec is the day I get a new media player, because in the presence of the aforementioned video containers/formats, any video content that purports to require a new one is almost certainly a malware vector.

    2. Re:It's not actually popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing you don't need to play anything in h.265 anytime soon.

  2. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I stopped at a local coffee shop the other day and noticed a bunch of hipsters with their macbook airs "writing a novel" or whatever the fuck they pretend to do. But when I passed by, I noticed a tux icon on the desktop. I looked again and noticed they weren't using OSuX, they were using OpenBSD with xfvm. In fact, a couple were even using emacs from the console. I started talking to them and they told me that Apple is too popular now (and mountain kitty dumbed everything down) so they need something less popular. And they can spend all their time finding on the perfect X window manager. Also, they like emacs on the console because it lets them focus on the words, not on the fonts. I invited them to the LUG meeting but I don't think they're into bears. But you never know.

  3. Is this a genuine case? by Quick+Reply · · Score: 1, Troll

    He claims that "MPlayerX will lose so many features if it adopted Sandboxing, it could not load the subtitle automatically, it could not play the next episode for you automatically, ". I dont see how a Sandbox would prevent these features from working, can anyone verify this to be true?

    1. Re:Is this a genuine case? by ModernGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

      I am assuming that the application cannot access the file system unless a file is within the applications sandbox, or opened through the operating systems open file API.

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    2. Re:Is this a genuine case? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      I suspect he's not talking about subtitle tracks - he's talking about standalone subtitle files. MplayerX wouldn't be allowed to open that second file, unasked by the user.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, features to support this were added in Mountain Lion.

    4. Re:Is this a genuine case? by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Informative

      From Apple's design guide:

      When a user of your app specifies they want to use a file or a folder, the system adds the associated path to your app’s sandbox. Say, for example, a user drags the ~/Documents folder onto your app’s Dock tile (or onto your app’s Finder icon, or into an open window of your app), thereby indicating they want to use that folder. In response, the system makes the ~/Documents folder, its contents, and its subfolders available to your app.

      Starting in OS X v10.7.3, you can retain access to file-system resources by employing a security mechanism, known as security-scoped bookmarks , that preserves user intent. Here are a few examples of app features that can benefit from this:

      • A user-selected download, processing, or output folder
      • An image browser library file, which points to user-specified images at arbitrary locations
      • A complex document format that supports embedded media stored in other locations

      It seems like the simplest solution is to have the user choose the folder the videos are in, not the video itself.

      You could just have the user pick the folder their video library is stored in, and the player can even create a 'bookmark' so the app can access that folder (and its contents) persistently across restarts.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    5. Re:Is this a genuine case? by daBass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The app can only open files in specifically defined (and Apple approved) locations. Outside these locations, you need express permission (via a file open dialog) to access files. So all would be OK for ~/Movies or ~/Downloads.

      But while you could open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.avi" via a file dialog to play it back, the software could not automatically also open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.srt" to show you subtitles.

      That's the problem.

    6. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Tough+Love · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't stand all these anti-sandboxing stories that make it sound like selling software over the Internet is so horrible.

      I would hazard a guess that the MplayerX folks have more of a clue about the situation than you.

      The subtext of this story is: it's walled garden time boys and girls, suck it down and like it.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    7. Re:Is this a genuine case? by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).

    8. Re:Is this a genuine case? by _KiTA_ · · Score: 2

      This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).

      Like, for example, the player that Apple makes, which presumably won't have this problem. A happy coincidence for Apple, for sure.

    9. Re:Is this a genuine case? by bussdriver · · Score: 1

      I thought you could create your own sandbox files and apple merely provides default ones. They bothered to make a whole file format and command line tools a little some documentation that got me started playing around with it at least a year ago. I'm running my firefox in a sandbox I built right now - I had to do a ton of tweaking as firefox ran into errors. I'm not upgraded the OS yet. I might never...

      I like the sandbox system its what OpenBSD needed many many years ago when they were the first ones to put in hooks to mess around with access to system calls. I didn't play around with theirs because it was too messy at the time. Somebody needs to push developers into the sandbox...

      Is Apple forcing a default sandbox onto everybody? that seems rather foolish if you can't use your own after all that work to make it configurable per app...

    10. Re:Is this a genuine case? by tadekd · · Score: 1

      yeah, i am agree with you.......

    11. Re:Is this a genuine case? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But seriously who DIDN'T know Apple is a bunch of control freaks? this is like having a dozen people walk up to you and say "See that guy selling fruit on the corner? Yeah don't do business with him, he'll punch you in the nuts" but you go 'Hey, that guy is making the monies! I'll do business with him!" and right after you do business with him he gives you a Falcon Punch from hell that cracks your walnuts. Now why the fuck should we feel sorry or care when you didn't listen?

      Apple is a bunch of control freaks, MSFT is run by dumbass PHBs, Google wants to know what you had for breakfast this morning...and now for the weather....water is wet Chuck, back to you!

      Seriously folks Apple has a history of fucking over the little guys, going apeshit on their control over them and/or ripping off their ideas for a new "Apple Feature" down the line....who doesn't know this? Its been SOP there forever, its not exactly news folks. The moral of the story, if you get in bed with a control freak don't bitch when you end up tied to the bedpost with a ballgag mmkay?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    12. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The app can only open files in specifically defined (and Apple approved) locations.

      Wrong. Apple approved, or USER approved. YMMV, but I rather like knowing what an app is reading or writing before it goes ahead and does so.

    13. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Otherwise, you doubleclicked season3ep5.avi. Why should the program even touch season3ep6.avi or seasone3ep5.sub?

      Because they're related to the clicked file in a manner I and the application know and expect?

    14. Re:Is this a genuine case? by gnasher719 · · Score: 0

      I am assuming that the application cannot access the file system unless a file is within the applications sandbox, or opened through the operating systems open file API.

      That includes dragging a file or a folder to the app, and keeping bookmarks of files that can be opened. What doesn't work is letting the user type in a path, which is not a good user interface anyway.

    15. Re:Is this a genuine case? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It also doesn't include double clicking on a movie file to open the player - it would get permission to the clicked file, but not to the associated subtitle file.

    16. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So finally people would be motivated to actually use a better video container holding both video audio and subtitles alternate streams?

      Count me in!

    17. Re:Is this a genuine case? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was wondering how long it'd take before we arrived at "you're holding it wrong".

    18. Re:Is this a genuine case? by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Nice attempt at a conspiracy theory, but not only does QuickTime Player not read external .srt files (never has, though embedded subs work fine), it too is sandboxed.

    19. Re:Is this a genuine case? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).

      Like, for example, the player that Apple makes, which presumably won't have this problem. A happy coincidence for Apple, for sure.

      Oh, you mean the FREE one?

    20. Re:Is this a genuine case? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      I am assuming that the application cannot access the file system unless a file is within the applications sandbox, or opened through the operating systems open file API.

      That includes dragging a file or a folder to the app, and keeping bookmarks of files that can be opened. What doesn't work is letting the user type in a path, which is not a good user interface anyway.

      Especially on a Mac.

      The only time I ever have to type in a path is in Terminal, for obvious reasons.

    21. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Its because like so many other "developers" they want to ignore their own failure to do it correctly in favor of doing it half-assed..

      "load subtitle automatically" in that app currently uses a website for pirated content to find it, then redirects and downloads it elsewhere, and ultimately loads it..
      "not playing the next episode automatically" works similarly in the current version..

      What he is wanting is essentially to turn off sandboxing entirely to be able to go to *any* random internet site and download whatever files with no user approval.. which is incompatible with sandboxing/gatekeeper at a fundamental level..

      Snapshot saving has to be within the apps clearly identified folder OR the file save api of install time customized folders.. but never a specific random folder at that time..

    22. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and right after you do business with him he gives you a Falcon Punch from hell that cracks your walnuts.

      Being a loud mouth is not a replacement for a (any) good argument.

    23. Re:Is this a genuine case? by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I know it sucks, but couldn't they just ask the user to select _all_ files related to the movie? And then figure out which one is the movie and which one is the subtitles?

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    24. Re:Is this a genuine case? by scarlac · · Score: 2

      QuickTime Player is sandboxed in 10.8 (and possibly earlier), so it should have the same issues as MPlayerX... And I havn't experienced any difficulties as a power user.

    25. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 0

      This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox).

      If the file opens in MplayerX, at some time the file type would have to be associated with it. Then all accompanying files should have also been associated with MplayerX. And that would probably have been something a simple Automator script from the developer could have done.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    26. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 0

      That's the problem.

      No the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files instead of having the movie in a container. And then doesn't want to give access to all those files by either clicking all those files or (heaven forbid) the containing directory in the Open file selector.

      Or that the developer is afraid to give a decent interface where the user can select which of the available files can be played apart from the Open file dialogue.

      IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    27. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And how many do you expect to do the same?

      And here the common complaint against Linux was all the tweaking people needed to do, while OSX "just works"...

    28. Re:Is this a genuine case? by sqldr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't stand all these anti-sandboxing stories that make it sound like selling software over the Internet is so horrible. The app store is not old enough for you to be bitching about not being in the app store. This isn't even selling, it's free software joining the ranks of all the other free software out there.

      It's Apple's 1984-esque bullshit like this which is the primary reason why I will never waste my money on an apple product until they change their ways. I don't want to buy a glorified media player, the difference between a computer and a set top box is that a computer has the ability to run any application, but apple are starting to blur this distinction by turning their systems into glorified set-top boxes. I don't care how easy it is to use. To be honest, the laptop we have to use when on-call is a macbook pro, and I'm not really overwhelmed by it - in fact, I don't like it. I want focus-follows-mouse.. oh, that would break the menu. Then again, I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes gnome 3 (yes, on a 1980x1080 screen).

      I would lose interest overnight if all I could run on my computer was angry birds and fart apps.

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    29. Re:Is this a genuine case? by sqldr · · Score: 1

      The subtext of this story is: it's walled garden time boys and girls, suck it down and like it.

      And the sub-sub-text is that the number of "how to hack" sites and people who are getting surprisingly good at reverse-engineering stuff seems to be increasing, while Apple products seem to be an ever-increasing target.

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    30. Re:Is this a genuine case? by sqldr · · Score: 4, Funny

      Being a loud mouth is not a replacement for a (any) good argument.

      Fortunately, he did throw in a good argument which you probably missed while you were masturbating over the latest fart app.

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    31. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the problem that with the iOS app store that developers have no choice but to use the app store? The developer doesn't want to or can't use the app store for his app so he is free to distribute it on his own site. Isn't this the way it is suppose to work?

    32. Re:Is this a genuine case? by zome · · Score: 1

      You don't want to embedded all possible sub-title languages into the a movie file and make it unnecessary big. Separate sub-title files make it easier to add new language.

      Also, as people are discussing above, the OS file dialog is basically asking user to give permission to access a file, so I don't think a custom UI for access files will work.

    33. Re:Is this a genuine case? by pete_p · · Score: 1

      You can drag and drop files into a Terminal window and it'll type the path for you. So you don't even have to type a path there (though honestly, if you're in terminal it's probably easier to type the path than to find the file and drag it)

      --
      Insert wit here.
    34. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      couldn't they just ask the user to select _all_ files related to the movie?

      They could but that would rely on the users:

      1. reading the request
      2. understanding the request
      3. correctly complying with the request

      How likely do you think the typical user is to do all of those things correctly?

    35. Re:Is this a genuine case? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files

      The user is likely downloading the movie which is split over several files, and doesn't know how to join them. You are blaming the victim.

      IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.

      Filesystems work. Otherwise we wouldn't have them. We'd just have object stores.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    36. Re:Is this a genuine case? by bsane · · Score: 1

      But while you could open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.avi" via a file dialog to play it back, the software could not automatically also open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.srt" to show you subtitles.

      So you have the user select the directory '/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies', as a movie repository. The app then has full access to everything underneath it.

      It is an extra step for the user- they have to choose all of their movie directories (top level only). Hell you may even get away with / (I haven't tried).

    37. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention, some subtitles files are just horrible, with spelling and grammar errors, timing problems and missed or wrong dialogue. Having the option of downloading a different set of subtitles (e.g., a completely different file) without having to download the entire video file is a very useful feature.

    38. Re:Is this a genuine case? by paulatz · · Score: 5, Funny

      QuickTime Player is sandboxed in 10.8 (and possibly earlier), so it should have the same issues as MPlayerX... And I havn't experienced any difficulties as a power user.

      What does it mean to be a power user of QuickTime Player? That you managed to find the full-screen button?

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
    39. Re:Is this a genuine case? by macshome · · Score: 1

      I also turn on the service that gives me a "New Terminal tab at folder" contextual menu in the Finder.

    40. Re:Is this a genuine case? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Sandboxing is only a requirement for applications sold through the app store.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    41. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 0

      the real problem is that the user feels the need to have a movie split over several files

      The user is likely downloading the movie which is split over several files, and doesn't know how to join them. You are blaming the victim.

      If anything, I'm blaming The Pirate (TM). But oddly enough, your little theory isn't mentioned by anyone but you.

      Not that it would matter because my solution would also solve your pirating problem.

      IOW, the problem are the File System Fetishists.

      Filesystems work. Otherwise we wouldn't have them. We'd just have object stores.

      So you are a pirate and a File System Fetishist. Listen: play with files all you want if it makes you happy, but don't complain when others make computers easier to use by treating movies as movies and not a bunch of files that should be kept segregated.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    42. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Apple's developer videos from the last WWDC, that use case is supported in OS X 10.8. (Apparently an application can define pattern matching rules that derive file names which will inherit the permissions of the initially selected file.)

    43. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 0

      You don't want to embedded all possible sub-title languages into the a movie file and make it unnecessary big. Separate sub-title files make it easier to add new language.

      Then only embed the ones you want. Problem solved. Better yet, don't embed any. Even better: don't pirate movies.

      Also, as people are discussing above, the OS file dialog is basically asking user to give permission to access a file, so I don't think a custom UI for access files will work.

      Wow, you FSFs really have a ghard time letting go of your fetish. I didn't say that movie players should let you select files to play, it should let you select movies to play. And it could do that if you as a user didn't gave it just access to single files, but to your bloody movie directory.

      That way Sandboxing works flawlessly for both the user and the programmer - if only they could let go of their File System Fetish.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    44. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 0
      Okay, it seems it's time for an analogy: see the problem cited with Sandboxing here as the equivalent of Read permissions for a file on Unix systems. You can give a program read-access to a file (via its dedicated User). If you don't give your movie player read access to all the files your movie consists of, it can't play it (or show its subtitles). If you give it full read access to the directory containing your movies, it can play them all. Get it now?

      All I'm asking is to let go of the notion that a movie is a file especially when you made it so that it isn't. The sad thing is that many geeks have completely lost their ability for such obvious abstraction.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    45. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the one controlled by the Mothership? You think big red needs money? No, they make tons of that off the hardware alone. This is, and always has been, about control over it's own ecosystem.

    46. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, just because you want to replace "/usb1" or "g:" with several clicks, that's your prerogative. I love my keyboard shortcuts -- they're infinitely faster than moving my hand to the mouse to position the cursor over some small line of text somewhere on my high resolution display.

    47. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But while you could open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.avi" via a file dialog to play it back, the software could not automatically also open "/Volumes/My Big External Disk/Movies/movie.srt" to show you subtitles.

      That's the problem.

      Actually, it could:

      Apple Developer Documentation

      Some apps require access to secondary files or directories with names that are related to the primary, user-selected file. For example, a subtitle file, by convention, has the same name as its corresponding movie file, but with a different filename extension. If a movie player is sandboxed, an NSOpenPanel object will grant access only to the user-selected movie file (the primary item) and not its associated subtitle file (the secondary item).

      To gain access to a secondary item, first register an NSFilePresenter object for it. At any point in its existence, a secondary item must be able to return an NSURL object to its primary item. This is done by using this property. When done accessing the secondary item, unregister the file presenter object.

    48. Re:Is this a genuine case? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Thanks but I just figured it was pretty damned obvious, after all it isn't like being control freaks is some new revelation when it comes to Apple. If more and more devs would just give them the finger and refuse to play ball then they'd have no choice but to change, especially when the latest hot app is available on Android but not iOS, but greedy devs dreaming of iMoney frankly ruin it for everyone.

      If you don't like jumping through their endless hoops then don't do business with Apple its as simple as that. Nobody puts a gun to their head and says "Go kiss the ring and try to make teh iMonies!" its a choice, you do it or you don't. If you don't want to be stuffed in a corner? Then have some fucking pride and tell them to fuck off. But in the end the reason Apple can get away with this shit is too many greedy devs think that THEY will be different, THEY won't be stuffed in the corner or have to jump through the hoops because THEY are just too damned good. Bullshit, its arrogance and the MPlayer guys got bitchslapped for it. Hopefully this will be a valuable lesson for others that there is NO negotiation with Apple, its their way or the highway.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    49. Re:Is this a genuine case? by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      No, he didn't. Apple being control freaks has noting to do with making apps in the app store make use of sandboxing.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    50. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Actually grouping those together in a container for viewing purposes is the right answer.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    51. Re:Is this a genuine case? by metrix007 · · Score: 2

      The app working correctly should not be dependent on where I keep my media.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    52. Re:Is this a genuine case? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The problem is that I as a user am dealing with the video files that are already there, in a popular and widespread format that splits them in two files. I don't care about what is the "right answer" from the technical perspective, I just want to watch the videos.

      And, by the way, no, it's not actually the right answer in all cases. For example, as a foreigner, back in the day when I didn't know English well, I had to watch foreign videos with translated subtitles. In many cases there were no such official subtitles, so you had to go and find some fan translation - which is pretty easy to do when it's a separate subtitle file that can then be paired with the video - it would be much less convenient if you had to embed it into the video every time. Better yet, when there is more than one translation, you can try a few and use the one that feels better.

    53. Re:Is this a genuine case? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 0

      well, looking at the latest mac ads, if you are able to do anything at all on your mac on your own, you are a power user.

    54. Re:Is this a genuine case? by macs4all · · Score: 0

      You can drag and drop files into a Terminal window and it'll type the path for you. So you don't even have to type a path there (though honestly, if you're in terminal it's probably easier to type the path than to find the file and drag it)

      Thanks. I always forget that.

      It's really amazing how much better "Terminal" is than, say "Command Prompt" in a Windows system. I mean REALLY!!! You can't even do a cut or paste to/from the "DOS Emulator"??? And don't get me started about the retarded need for "Quotation Marks" in pathnames (HOW long has Windows supported Joliet???), or in inability to use UNC Paths (that have existed for HOW long, now???)

    55. Re:Is this a genuine case? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Hey, just because you want to replace "/usb1" or "g:" with several clicks, that's your prerogative. I love my keyboard shortcuts -- they're infinitely faster than moving my hand to the mouse to position the cursor over some small line of text somewhere on my high resolution display.

      ...And, conversely, just because you want to feel superior every time you type in some 1,000 character CLI incantation, doesn't mean that 99.995% of the computer-using public agrees with you.

    56. Re:Is this a genuine case? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Yes. The real problem is that the user has figured out a way to use his computer in a way that YOU didn't expect. It's a general purpose device. THAT is kind of the point.

      THIS is precisely the lame brained Apple mentality that I like to complain about.

      "You're holding it wrong."

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    57. Re:Is this a genuine case? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised it took you iCultists so long to start slandering everyone who isn't a part of the iCult and can think outside the box.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    58. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can select more than one file in an "open" panel. And the app will get a list of both files. If you selected two files in the finder and sent them to the App it would also be able to open them both. Do these generated files have a common prefix in their name? (If so, then they will show up next to each other in a sorted list). The app can probably use the same matching heuristic it is using to troll around on the filesystem with the list of files it gets.

    59. Re:Is this a genuine case? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I normally open files by double clicking on them in the file manager of the OS in question, not by launching an app and then activating its file open dialog - the latter is too many extra steps, especially when I already have the directory in question open in the file manager.

      I'd wager that most users also do the same - i.e. that double clicking on a file is by far the most common way to launch an app associated with that file.

    60. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ohh, looks, its the dumbest of the File System Nazi Pirates.

    61. Re:Is this a genuine case? by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      Your response does not address my point in any way.

      How can he modify his code and have it work in the way it does currently? He can't. That's a problem with Apple's sandbox implementation, not him being lazy.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    62. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      This is correct. The only way to open a file is if the user selected said file in an open dialog. It's bollocks in the extreme.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    63. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      It doesn't work like that. You can only get an entitlement on the entire folder by having the user select the folder from an Open Folder dialog, and then you'd still have to tell them to find the video to play. In other words, GP has it right and you are very wrong.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    64. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You must be an idiot.

      You can drag and drop a file or directory onto a Command Prompt, and it will be inserted into the prompt, just like in Terminal. Command Prompt requires quotation marks to distinguish between a path with spaces and the parameter list to a command - just like Terminal requires you to prefix each space with a backslash to escape it. And you can either mount a UNC path to access it as a drive, or you can perform manipulation commands on it (such as dir, del, move, etc) without mapping it - you just can't change to it. Hell, Terminal doesn't ever support UNC paths. Not for changing to, listing, manipulating files.

      Actually, it's clear you're a troll.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    65. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a loud mouth is not a replacement for a (any) good argument.

      Fortunately, he did throw in a good argument which you probably missed while you were masturbating over the latest fart app.

      A collection of hokey colorful assertions that Apple is populated by NOTHING BUT CONTROL FREAKS OMG EVIL DRACONIAN!!!! do not amount to an argument. It's just hairyfeet vomiting his worthless opinions, the way he always does.

    66. Re:Is this a genuine case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Apple's 1984-esque bullshit like this which is the primary reason why I will never waste my money on an apple product until they change their ways.

      Please, don't lie. The reason you won't spend any money on Apple products -- ever -- is that you hate Apple for irrational reasons.

      I don't want to buy a glorified media player, the difference between a computer and a set top box is that a computer has the ability to run any application, but apple are starting to blur this distinction by turning their systems into glorified set-top boxes.

      No, they are not. If you actually had put even the tiniest bit of sincere effort into learning about the issues in play here, you couldn't possibly say this. Instead you just dragged out all the usual lazy slashtard memes.

      It's funny you mentioned 1984. There are parallels, just not the way you think. In 1984, the bullshit was that Big Brother watched you. You had no freedom, even of thought. In Apple's sandboxing, the operating system controls applications on your behalf. You are Big Brother, and they are only allowed to do what you want to allow them to do. That's a bad thing in real life, but a good thing in computing so long as you -- the end user -- are the one in control.

      And you really are. Ultimately, if you need software which doesn't fit neatly into Apple's current sandboxing design, such as MPlayerX, you are perfectly free to install non-sandboxed apps, same as you could before. No report will be made to Cupertino. Death squads will not come to your house.

      I don't care how easy it is to use. To be honest, the laptop we have to use when on-call is a macbook pro, and I'm not really overwhelmed by it - in fact, I don't like it. I want focus-follows-mouse.. oh, that would break the menu. Then again, I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes gnome 3 (yes, on a 1980x1080 screen).

      Oh good lord. The reason Apple doesn't offer global FFM is not that it would "break the menu". It's because FFM is a stupid idea which has only ever been a tradition on X Windows-based user interfaces. (OS X UI is not built on X Windows, in case you weren't aware.) Even lots of UNIX power users hate the idea of sending their typing to the wrong window just because they brushed their mouse.

      But wait, there's more. Apple actually does offer a limited non-global FFM mode. You can set a preference in Terminal.app to use FFM for terminal windows.

  4. Procrastination by Fls'Zen · · Score: 2, Informative

    They've had over a year to get this straightened out, not three months. If MplayerX won't sell in the app store, some other product will fill the void in that market. This is of course assuming people are going to the app store for such a media player.

    1. Re:Procrastination by stephanruby · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      If MplayerX won't sell in the app store, some other product will fill the void in that market.

      Yes, Android is filling that need as we speak.

    2. Re:Procrastination by Fls'Zen · · Score: 1

      Yes, Android is filling that need as we speak.

      This article of course has to do with the *Mac* App Store, with which Android does not compete.

    3. Re:Procrastination by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Android is a desktop OS? (We're talking about Mac OS and the Mac App Store, not iOS)

    4. Re:Procrastination by Tough+Love · · Score: 0

      Yes, Android is filling that need as we speak.

      This article of course has to do with the *Mac* App Store, with which Android does not compete.

      In which universe does Android not compete with Apple?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    5. Re:Procrastination by stephanruby · · Score: 2

      The Mac OS has an App Store? Do people actually use that? Forgive my ignorance, I do not actually have a Mac.

    6. Re:Procrastination by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      They said they were arguing back and forth for 3 months, not that they only had 3 months to attempt to implement changes.

    7. Re:Procrastination by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Yes, Apple has created a Mac App Store to sell apps, and showcase some "Best of" apps. It is not exclusive, and you can still download and install apps the normal way. Apple has gotten stricter, requiring anyone who wants their app listed in the store to use sandboxing to prevent security holes in the OS. That's what this story is about.

    8. Re:Procrastination by justin12345 · · Score: 2

      I don't think most Mac users are too aware of it either. I've used it twice, for the last two OSX upgrades, but that's it. I suppose it's fine for Apple software, but it wouldn't occur to me to go there instead of the internet for 3rd party software. The App store seems to me just a half-hearted attempt to try to recreate the formula that made them so much money with iTunes and iOS.

      The alarmist predictions that OSX will go the way of iOS are off base. iOS is consumption oriented, whereas OSX is production oriented. The bottom line is that they simply don't have the leverage to turn OSX into a walled garden. They tried that back in the 80s and nearly went out of business. If Apple loses sight of that the Mac will die, and Apple will effectively be withdrawing from the PC market. I wouldn't put it past them to one day kill the Mac, their consumer electronics division is way more profitable than their computer division, but I don't see that day coming soon. A powerful development platform is still a key to their brand.

      --
      Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
    9. Re:Procrastination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple has gotten stricter, requiring anyone who wants their app listed in the store to use sandboxing to prevent security holes in the OS.

      Not to put to fine a point on it -- this does not PREVENT security holes in the OS. Rather, the sandboxing is designed to mitigate the damage a malicious app can do WITHOUT resorting to security holes (permission elevation, etc.)
       
      There was a time when Apple tried to position app-store apps as being non-malware by definition -- only good apps would be approved. Now they're instructing the OS almost the opposite: App-store apps should not be trusted beyond somewhat-crippling security parameters, no matter what the machine user/administrator tells you. Apps specifically blessed by the user, on the other hand, should have full root access if needed
       
      In a way, it's a ray of common sense -- trust the user to know what's best, after adequate warnings have been given. The biggest suck here, though, is that indy developers who are hoping to get compensated through Apple app's store are at a severe disadvantage.

    10. Re:Procrastination by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      But what if they just stop making Pro units? After all it was Jobs that was big on "Apple is the machines the movies are made on" while Cook really doesn't seem to care about the pro market. After all he's drug ass on a new pro line, pissed a LOT of people off with FCP, and with pro users frankly he makes less money, how? Simple the home users frankly don't need refreshing hardly at all, those Macbooks and iMacs already have more power than the average home user is gonna use so they can just swap for better screen and tiny CPU boosts and still make crazy profits whereas pros need more expensive hardware and faster refreshes.

      If I was an Apple Pro user I'd be seriously looking into buying me some top o' the line Win 7 box, since Windows has as much pro software tools as Apple and with Win 7 supported until 2020 that'd give me a nice long support cycle and you can always add OSX in a dual boot Hackentosh. Because frankly after this next rev I really wouldn't be surprised if the next time refreshes roll around for Cook to declare "The iPad X is the new tool for pros!" and kill everything but one iMac and maybe 2 Macbooks, regular and Air. Makes sense, less refreshes, less expensive hardware, cheaper and easier upgrade path equals lots more profits.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    11. Re:Procrastination by macs4all · · Score: 1

      In a way, it's a ray of common sense -- trust the user to know what's best, after adequate warnings have been given. The biggest suck here, though, is that indy developers who are hoping to get compensated through Apple app's store are at a severe disadvantage.

      Why?

      They learn the APIs and they're good to go. How does sandboxing put them in any greater disadvantage?

      Oh, and the slang abbreviation for "independent" is "indie", not "indy", which is the slang abbreviation for the city of "Indianapolis".

    12. Re:Procrastination by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Your post highlights how little you understand Apple, their hardware and their userbase.

    13. Re:Procrastination by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      Typing this on a Mac right now, Macs aren't a professional machine, they're a vanity item. Windows software support has been better for maybe 15 years.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    14. Re:Procrastination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Fandroid that's a mentally slow, that's shocking.

    15. Re:Procrastination by narcc · · Score: 1

      Yup, the solution to every problem Apple developers face is, as always, bend over a little further.

    16. Re:Procrastination by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      Your post highlights how little you understand Apple, their hardware and their userbase.

      and I think your post highlights how your understanding of apple hw and userbase is a decade out of date.

      sure they know what pro's need. they just don't give a fuck since that's not where their money comes from.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    17. Re:Procrastination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Mac OS has an App Store?

      Yes

      Do people actually use that?

      Apparently so

      Forgive my ignorance,

      No

      I do not actually have a Mac.

      That's an unusual excuse for ignorance

    18. Re:Procrastination by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Exactly it all comes down to margins and profits. I bet if you were to get your hands on a spreadsheet showing the profits on the various divisions the pro line is probably the worst performer they have...why? Because it uses much more expensive hardware and it only appeals to a teeny tiny niche compared to the iMac and Macbooks. It was Steve Jobs that pushed the Apple for creators mantra and he's gone, Cook hasn't said anything that would indicate he's excited about the Pro line and who can blame him? Pros need faster refreshes than the consumers, better hardware that cuts into the margins, and the sales don't back up the extra expense.

      Finally lets not forget the control angle. Apple has always been about control and with Intel they have ZERO control of the chips and the roadmap whereas with ARM its their baby. This doesn't matter with the consumers because the hardware is frankly overpowered now so they can do smaller refreshes, just add a little faster CPU or better screen and keep the sales up, but the pros want the latest top end hardware which is the absolute most expensive parts that Intel makes. Apple simply isn't buying enough Xeons to get economies of scale like a Dell or HP and with no control of the roadmap or even what sockets Intel are gonna be using next year they can start to build a new unit now and have it out of date before they even reach the retail channel, I bet Cook doesn't like that one bit.

      So I really wouldn't be surprised if this next refresh is probably the last for the pro line, Apple doesn't really need them and they cost Apple more than any other division on hardware. Its just good business sense to bail out of a niche that doesn't bring in the sales and the Apple pros simply don't move like the Macbooks and iMacs.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    19. Re:Procrastination by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Yup, the solution to every problem Apple developers face is, as always, bend over a little further.

      So, of course you'd rather the Linuxtards have a field day about how "OS X doesn't even support sandboxing", right? Or, not put any incentive behind developers learning and using the sandboxing API?

      Apple has moved and moved and moved the "drop dead date" for enforcement of sandboxing. And they don't even make it mandatory unless you want to sell your warez in the Mac Apple Store.

      So now the devs that continually bitched about how restrictive Apple's "Walled Garden" is, are bitching that they are only able to sell their products the same way they have before?

    20. Re:Procrastination by macs4all · · Score: 1

      So I really wouldn't be surprised if this next refresh is probably the last for the pro line, Apple doesn't really need them and they cost Apple more than any other division on hardware. Its just good business sense to bail out of a niche that doesn't bring in the sales and the Apple pros simply don't move like the Macbooks and iMacs.

      First off, do you REALLY think the Pro line isn't profitable for Apple? Have you seen the list prices for Mac Pros? If you listen to the Linux fanbois, they could build TEN systems with TWICE THE SPECS for these prices (but I digress...) ;-)

      And then there's this little email from Tim Cook, that seems to affirmatively put to bed your meme...

    21. Re:Procrastination by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      BAD sandboxing is worse than none at all. It's better to have a dangerous powersaw than a useless door stop. There are plenty of doorstops available. You don't need to turn the Mac into that.

      This seems more like an attempt to control the user rather than to actually protect the user from themselves.

      Restricting read access to non-critical user data? Really? That's just retarded. It adds nothing to user security and just serves to encourage people to not bother at all.

      This is Apple's answer to Vista UAC.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    22. Re:Procrastination by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Yeah and if you sell 10 units for $10k VS 10,000 units for $1k you'd have the same money right? WRONG, because the parts that go into the $10k unit probably cost at least $7.5k and needs to be replaced with newer parts quicker than the $1k unit which thanks to economies of scale you aren't paying hardly squat for.

      Finally didn't I say you'd get one more refresh? I believe I did. I wouldn't be surprised if the contracts they have with Intel cover one more refresh of the pro line not to mention you can't stop a production line on a dime like that, not without incurring costs. mark my words this will be the last refresh, followed by Cook milking it for as long as possible for declaring that "With iCloud the Macbook Air and iPad X are the new tools for developers!" which will be met by cheering and guys like you agreeing with everything he says. meanwhile the actual devs will simply finish the move to Windows and call it a day.

      If you read the places devs like to hang out like OSNews you'd know that frankly a lot of them already began migrating when FCP came out with its lack of tape support, You had guys that had banks of Mac pros pulling them (complete with screenshots or links to the ebay sales so you know it wasn't idle talk) to replace them with new $7K+ Windows pro rigs simply because Cook has dicked them around too much and the roadmap doesn't give them any confidence.

      So what you are about to see is a classic self fulfilling prophecy, Cook burns the devs, devs go elsewhere, next rev has low sales, Cook cancels line. The simple fact is that line isn't nearly as profitable as you think, they simply don't move enough of them. The devs needing real power have already moved on, not because of price but because Apple simply doesn't offer anything close enough to the cutting edge for guys that make their living in HD film and TV. Hell one I was talking to provided links to the Hackentosh he was building to cover as he learned the Windows tools and that thing cost $14K+ easily. when you are talking about guys that have no problem sinking THAT much cash into a single machine offering yesterday's parts at high prices really ain't gonna cut it.

      Final verdict? pro line dead in 3, maybe 4 if Cook milks it. Hell after Intel fucked them out of the Nvidia chipsets they were using it really wouldn't surprise me if he has an exit strategy for X86 altogether, he's been making more and more powerful ARM chips and there he controls the entire cycle. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Apple ARM desktop in 2013 or 2014 with 6 or more ARM quads that scale with workload. I bet even with 6 quads they'd make more per unit than the midrange Macbooks while being able to offer all day battery life on the road, sounds like a winner to me.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    23. Re:Procrastination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think most Mac users are too aware of it either. I've used it twice, for the last two OSX upgrades, but that's it. I suppose it's fine for Apple software, but it wouldn't occur to me to go there instead of the internet for 3rd party software. The App store seems to me just a half-hearted attempt to try to recreate the formula that made them so much money with iTunes and iOS.

      iTunes and the iOS App Store do not make Apple a lot of money. It's in their SEC filings. Look them up if you don't believe me, they're not hard to find online.

      The alarmist predictions that OSX will go the way of iOS are off base.

      Agreed.

      The bottom line is that they simply don't have the leverage to turn OSX into a walled garden. They tried that back in the 80s and nearly went out of business.

      This is the WTF I had to respond to. I'm sure that sentence sounded nice in your head, but what in the world are you talking about? Apple never did any such thing.

      The Macintosh shipped in 1984. It had no barriers in place preventing installation of non-Apple-approved software.
      The Mac II shipped in 1987. It had no barriers yada yada yada.
      The Macintosh Quadra shipped sometime around 1991 or 1992 (I forget exactly). Guess what it didn't have?

      The reasons why Apple almost went out of business -- in the late 1990s, not the 80s, I might add -- were that they were making a huge number of crappy Mac models, lots of their computers were overpriced, they'd started a Macintosh clone program which permitted the cloners to target Apple's high margin Mac models (thereby sucking a lot of the profitability out of Apple itself), and MacOS was old and crusty and not competitive enough with Windows 95. But at no point did they ever try to turn "classic" MacOS into a walled garden. Not once. Not ever. It did not happen.

      The only conceivable time at which there was an inkling of truth to what you say was maybe the very very early days, back when the only available developer tools required buying a Lisa (a ~$10,000 computer) to run a cross compiler. But there was no gatekeeping. If you could pony up the cash for the necessary gear and developer tools, you could write programs for the Macintosh.

      If Apple loses sight of that the Mac will die, and Apple will effectively be withdrawing from the PC market. I wouldn't put it past them to one day kill the Mac, their consumer electronics division is way more profitable than their computer division, but I don't see that day coming soon. A powerful development platform is still a key to their brand.

      It's not merely a "key to their brand", it's the development platform they use to make iOS. If they wanted to give up on making personal computers, they'd have to port a huge quantity of software to other platforms, none of which are as well suited to running it as OS X.

  5. MplayerX was in the App Store? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3

    I have it installed, but never even thought to look for it there. Nothing to do with sandboxing requirements - I just would've figured their developers would object to the concept of the App Store on principle.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  6. I predict, for the moment, only.... by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From one of the links in the summary:

    Apple's stance seems to be pretty typical of them: comply with the new rules or leave. This usually works for them, but this time, theyâ(TM)ve made a critical strategic error: leaving is often a better option...

    I would put forward that this conclusion is actually only true right now, but I expect over the coming years that is liable to change.

    As an increasing number of applications *DO* become available on the app store, I would suggest that a growing number of people are going to increasingly rely upon it. Eventually, I expect that a critical mass will be reached (I predict about 2 years from now), and Apple will shut the door to external sales on the Mac outside of jailbroken devices forever.

    This will probably be cause for a lot of people to abandon the mac platform, but I expect that the remaining userbase will be sufficiently large by that point in time that other developers will eventually be drawn to writing for the platform, attracted by the promise of what will seem to them, initially at least, to be a largely untapped market.

    And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.

    1. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yawn. We heard the same thing with Lion, then with Mountain Lion.

      Give it up.

    2. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Give what up, exactly?

    3. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      <sarcasm>I'm going to go with "it."</sarcasm>

    4. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Macrat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.

      Continued increasing sales year after year?

    5. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give what up, exactly?

      You could give up your penis. Like that song Detachable Penis.

    6. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by javacowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would Apple alienate their professional customers, including developers? They're the ones who, along with graphic artists, movie editors, radiologists, etc, who pay top dollar for the most expensive Macs?

      If developers can't install Apps like Eclipse, Mac Ports, various command-line tools, etc, then they'll switch platforms. Apple can't afford to lose those sales.

      Besides, many game developers don't distribute on the Mac App Store, including EA and Blizzard (and Steam still runs separate from the App Store), not to mention Microsoft and Adobe. Just how can Apple afford to lose Office and Photoshop, among other high profile non-App Store apps?

      --
      This space left intentionally blank.
    7. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why don't you ask the professionals that use Final Cut Pro that question when Apple released Final Cut Pro X? It was a royal clusterfuck and goes to show that Apple does not care about its pro customers. Even its latest line of Mac Pro was criticized by people like Any Hertzfeld for being subpar. Apple only cares about making the latest toy not about professionals getting work done.

    8. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by subreality · · Score: 1

      And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.

      ... Apple will continue making loads of money selling other people's software, and developers will mostly stay on board because the App Store is a much bigger market than you usually get to tap as an indie?

      You say it like it's something that Apple somehow should regret. I don't like it, but it seems to be working out pretty well for them.

    9. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As an increasing number of applications *DO* become available on the app store, I would suggest that a growing number of people are going to increasingly rely upon it. Eventually, I expect that a critical mass will be reached (I predict about 2 years from now), and Apple will shut the door to external sales on the Mac outside of jailbroken devices forever.

      This will probably be cause for a lot of people to abandon the mac platform, but I expect that the remaining userbase will be sufficiently large by that point in time that other developers will eventually be drawn to writing for the platform, attracted by the promise of what will seem to them, initially at least, to be a largely untapped market.

      And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.

      This is a steaming pile of bullcrap hyperbole topped with +1 We Like It When Someone Says They Will Do Bad Things and +1 If We Wish Hard Enough It Will Come True

      It amounts to "I think Apple will sandbox their entire desktop OS because iOS"

    10. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This will probably be cause for a lot of people to abandon the mac platform,

      Totally... me and all my Mac user friends just tossed our MacBooks and MacBook Pros (some retina) and iMacs and mini's in the dumpster because we're so torn up over having to use google to find apps and having to manually update software... Apple is being completely unreasonable to expect developers to sandbox their apps and expect their user base to have to go back to the way it was before 10.6.5... I can hardly remember how to open a disk image and drag a file into the Applications folder. Just kidding. Goddamn I'm glad I'm not completely fucking retarded.

    11. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by aliquis · · Score: 0

      And what happened with iOS is going to happen again with MacOSX.

      Someone had quoted this and while reading the first part what came up in my mind was something like:

      What happens on macs stay on the computers of retarded^Wstupid people. Or something such.

      What about:
      What happen with iOS doesn't matter? =P

    12. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      I argue its already hit critical mass, and the masses are starting to wake up to the idea that one store does not have all that they may want

    13. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      As an increasing number of applications *DO* become available on the app store, I would suggest that a growing number of people are going to increasingly rely upon it. Eventually, I expect that a critical mass will be reached (I predict about 2 years from now), and Apple will shut the door to external sales on the Mac outside of jailbroken devices forever.

      And how do developers develop apps then?

      Right now, gatekeeper only applies to apps downloaded from the Internet. If you acquire the app some other way (compile from source, off other media) it doesn't get in the way. In fact, it relies on the "downloaded from internet" extended attribute which is bypassable by editing the attribute.

      And back to the original question - iOS can be locked down because people cannot develop apps on it - it provides no native toolchain to do so. You have to develop on a Mac in order to write an iOS app.

      If the only way to get apps on OS X is via the Mac App Store, where are those apps going to be built from? Windows?

      Take this to its logical extreme in that developers need to upload a binary, get it signed by Apple and then run it off the Mac App Store - well, what's to keep end users from doing the same and writing their own apps, or better yet - using open-source apps?

      Hell, if that's the case, the FSF would be super happy because the only ways to get software onto OS X would be the Mac App Store, or via the developer program in order to compile from source. Which means the only way to distribute apps outside of the Mac App Store is via source code, making OS X one of the most "open" platforms around because you cannot distribute a binary - but only as source.

      And for the time being, gatekeeper's verified developer ID thing allows non-Mac App Store apps - it's just developers have to prove their identity. Firefox has two such keys and are using them for all their builds (one is for daily builds, the other for formal releases).

      Finally - there are classes of software not allowed by the Mac App Store - ones that cannot be self-contained (e.g., drivers, utility programs), demos (Microsoft Office Trial, anyone?).

      Oh yeah - limiting Mac App Store apps to $1000 max price, too. AutoCAD LE can work under that, but AutoCAD can't. Multi-thousand dollar software packages exist.

      And how to jailbreak a Mac - I dunno, you could well, take out the hard drive or SSD, put it in an appropriate adapter via USB (you can mount every mac's Disk - PATA, SATA, mSATA, MacBook Air/Retina MacBook Pro wierd-SATA), and access files that way.

      The lockdown isn't happening because it's a computer and computers are doing certain things. Locked down tablets and phones are nice and popular though because people realize they don't need a computer to do most of the things they actually do, and want to avoid the pain and trouble of having to maintain a computer. (After all, would you really want your mechanic to have to bill you for time spent futzing with the diagnostic computer because they had to recompile the Linux kernel to fix some issue? No, most of them expect them to just work and please-don't-bother-me-with-useless-computer-techy-things-just-let-me-do-my-job)

    14. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by ToastedRhino · · Score: 1

      And there are some senators in Kentucky who would argue that evolution isn't real. Just because you can argue something doesn't make it true. Facts and evidence make something true. The facts clearly show at this time that the Mac App Store is a success.

      It may come as a surprise to you but developers like to make money. Apple's ecosystem (so far) allows for more developers to make more money than any other ecosystem out there. People (that is real, actual, normal people who do not spend their time reading and commenting on Slashdot) also seem to love it, and are happy to be able to find everything they want in one place.

      Perhaps a critical mass will come, but we're definitely not there yet. Argue all you want.

    15. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

      The Apple faithful said "Never going to Intel!" and it happened. So, hyperbole or not, Apple is closing off their once semi-open OS so they can maintain control over the "experience." If that's what people want when they buy a Mac or iPhone, that's fine. It's just not what some of the older converts (who started with 10.0 via a coupon in their Macs) want.

      It is what it is. Evil megacorp references aside... these things have been brewing in the applesphere for a while now. It's not a new plan. Apple's never been all that "open" with their Macintosh platform (a different track than the Apple 2 days, I suppose), and the fact that OS X started out with more freedom was just a transitional phase to the 'iOSification' of their entire product line.

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    16. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      If the only way to get apps on OS X is via the Mac App Store, where are those apps going to be built from? Windows?

      They will be built on Mac, of course. The limitation hasn't hurt iOS development any.

      Take this to its logical extreme in that developers need to upload a binary, get it signed by Apple and then run it off the Mac App Store - well, what's to keep end users from doing the same and writing their own apps, or better yet - using open-source apps?

      Absolutely nothing is stopping them from writing their own apps or taking source code and compiling it for themselves to run it on their own machine. You can already do that with iOS apps without any help or approval from Apple. It's not very practical for distributing applications, however... except during test cycles of a specific (and fairly short) duration.

      Hell, if that's the case, the FSF would be super happy because the only ways to get software onto OS X would be the Mac App Store, or via the developer program in order to compile from source. Which means the only way to distribute apps outside of the Mac App Store is via source code, making OS X one of the most "open" platforms around because you cannot distribute a binary - but only as source.

      I actually hadn't considered that possibility. I suppose that it might happen that way. But I don't think it's likely.

      Finally - there are classes of software not allowed by the Mac App Store - ones that cannot be self-contained (e.g., drivers, utility programs), demos (Microsoft Office Trial, anyone?)

      Apple will simply turn a blind eye to such software, as it won't be of any practical use on a closed system.

      The lockdown isn't happening because it's a computer...

      No... the lockdown isn't happening because widespread use of the MacOSX app store as an exclusive means of installing software hasn't reached a critical mass yet. Give it a couple of years. As you yourself said, most people don't need a real computer anyways, so this isn't likely to matter to most people. Only to power users, who make up such a tiny percentage of computer users, that it is unlikely to matter to Apple.

      What will keep some power users sticking with Apple (and probably draw new ones),.however, is the size of its user base, and the attractiveness of what will, for a short time, appear to be a vast and largely untapped market.

    17. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I say it like it's something *I* regret.

      It will be a boon for Apple... and will probably keep them relevant for at least another decade, if not two.

    18. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Why don't you ask the professionals that use Final Cut Pro that question when Apple released Final Cut Pro X? It was a royal clusterfuck and goes to show that Apple does not care about its pro customers. Even its latest line of Mac Pro was criticized by people like Any Hertzfeld for being subpar. Apple only cares about making the latest toy not about professionals getting work done.

      Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?

    19. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by narcc · · Score: 2

      Apparently they don't.

      A quick google search will turn up article after article about the "royal clusterfuck" that was the release of Final Cut Pro X. Hell, I have no interest in the app at all and even I'm familiar with that mess of a release.

      Anyhow, the biggest complaint seems to be that Apple removed a shit-ton of essential features from the program, turning a once professional tool in to a play-toy. See for yourself. Apple, once again, fails to understand working professionals and their needs.

    20. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by mikael_j · · Score: 0

      While I will agree that the initial FCPX release wasn't really good enough I think it should be kept in mind that a big part of the changes with FCPX was bringing the workflow into the 21st century, there were a lot of modernizations and with those Apple also threw out a whole bunch of legacy bits.

      And if you look at those who screamed the loudest about how horrible FCPX was they all tended to have some legacy bits in their workflow which they claimed "everyone" used. Yes, for those who are still doing their edits directly onto tape like it's 1992 it sucks if that feature is removed but honestly, it might be time to update your workflow...

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    21. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 2

      The Apple faithful said "Never going to Intel!" and it happened. So, hyperbole or not, Apple is closing off their once semi-open OS so they can maintain control over the "experience."

      Let me get this straight. By Apple faithful, I presume you're referring to users - not the company itself. If I'm wrong there, who was it who said this? With that presumption, I'd like to parse what you wrote.

      You claim that Apple is going to do x because their fans in the past said that Apple would not do y, yet Apple did do y. What?

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    22. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freedom...

    23. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by narcc · · Score: 1

      One of the biggest complaints was the lack of multi-camera editing. I'm not that familiar with video editing, but that doesn't sound like a workflow issue to me. The same goes for the lack of RED camera support, which is apparently quite popular with filmmakers.

      One particularly damning problem was the inability to import projects from the previous version of the software. Again, not really a workflow issue.

      The inability to assign audio tracks I suppose is a workflow issue, though it doesn't appear that any sensible alternative is provided by the software. Of course, "updating" your workflow isn't helpful if that workflow doesn't jive with your other applications. As I understand it, FCPX doesn't support OMF transfers which appears to be a common feature. Given that solutions to many of the missing features in FCPX include the use of third-party software, this kind of omission, well, makes the software somewhat less than professional.

      I don't know enough about video editing or the software to give a through critique -- all I can do is report on the problems. That FCPX was anything but a professional tool seems to be the consensus.

    24. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by paulatz · · Score: 1

      Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?

      The point is not that they do not know, but that they do not care.

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
    25. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      Ignoring your pointless attempt to hit Kentucky with a pussy swing...

      "It may come as a surprise to you but developers like to make money."

      And holy fuck, what better place to make money than on a store with the narrowest market possible with some dictator that removes your product from market at a whim without justification, were not talking IOS here, its Mac OS, ya know that computer thing apple does which is getting smaller every year?

    26. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by ClaraBow · · Score: 1

      You may need to join forces with John C. Dvorak, as he is brilliant at making predictions about all things Apple! He's yet to get one right, but hey, that's the nature of the game!

    27. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 I don't like facts

    28. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

      The apple users, lovers, people who owned Powermacs... said on forums, in editorial print magazines, and just about everywhere else "No, Apple's not going to Intel"... and gave a myriad of practical reasons (they thought) why it wouldn't occur. What that means in context is everyone who says "OS X is never going to be iOS" and "OS X will always be what it is today..." etc... are more than likely incorrect in their predictions.

      Given Apple's past performance is it not unreasonable to assume that Apple won't just continue to do what some people speculate and turn OS X into iOS, and by that same token turn a Mac into an iPhone with a detached display (or in the case of a laptop, built in keyboard.)

      You cannot replace your own batteries on your Mac notebooks anymore. You used to be able to. (I have a first gen Macbook Pro) That's just one example of how the entire Apple lineup is becoming more closed and less like a traditional computer. If one comes into the Apple ecosystem now, they are buying a more closed product than they have had in the past decade or so.

      What we're seeing is the return to the original Mac... closed and not open to experimentation. Whether that is a bad thing depends on your perspective.

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    29. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

      Oops.. I should've mentioned this in the previous post.. (sorry!) but you can see even in my posting history (I'll spare you the tedium) where I stated "if Apple goes Intel, I'll eat my hat." (I gave a bunch of now inconsequential reasons for the claim too... but at the time they seemed relevant)

      My hat tasted like shit. :)

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    30. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      One of the biggest complaints was the lack of multi-camera editing. I'm not that familiar with video editing, but that doesn't sound like a workflow issue to me. The same goes for the lack of RED camera support, which is apparently quite popular with filmmakers.

      One particularly damning problem was the inability to import projects from the previous version of the software. Again, not really a workflow issue.

      The inability to assign audio tracks I suppose is a workflow issue, though it doesn't appear that any sensible alternative is provided by the software. Of course, "updating" your workflow isn't helpful if that workflow doesn't jive with your other applications. As I understand it, FCPX doesn't support OMF transfers which appears to be a common feature. Given that solutions to many of the missing features in FCPX include the use of third-party software, this kind of omission, well, makes the software somewhat less than professional.

      I don't know enough about video editing or the software to give a through critique -- all I can do is report on the problems. That FCPX was anything but a professional tool seems to be the consensus.

      All of those were legitimate gripes. However I believe ALL of them have been, or are currently being, addressed, either by Apple, or by others. In one case (FCP 7 import), the 3rd party plugin/add-on is a whopping $10, and in the case of the other, more expensive one (AAF export), there is now a FREE solution.

    31. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?

      The point is not that they do not know, but that they do not care.

      Not according to Tim Cook.

    32. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by paulatz · · Score: 1

      Not according to Tim Cook.

      I seriously doubt that the anonymous you were answering too is Tim Cook.

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
    33. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      The apple users, lovers, people who owned Powermacs... said on forums, in editorial print magazines, and just about everywhere else "No, Apple's not going to Intel"... and gave a myriad of practical reasons (they thought) why it wouldn't occur. What that means in context is everyone who says "OS X is never going to be iOS" and "OS X will always be what it is today..." etc... are more than likely incorrect in their predictions.

      Heh, a possible tl;dr coming your way.

      Ah, I get you. Still, it doesn't follow that they're probably incorrect, and this whole lock-down thing is pretty subjective. I agree that the battery thing could be a pain, and 12 years ago I'd have thought it crazy if my PowerBook G3 came that way. No way I'd be getting much work done if I had to rely on a single battery, but these days battery life is way better. Still, when this thing gets old, I'm going to have to send the entire thing off. That part could be pain. So far the locking-down works for me. I don't mind my iPhone being the way it is. I'd be jumping to a different system though if all apps had to come via the app store (which I doubt will ever happen on Mac), or if they decided to ditch the Unix command line (which I'm honestly surprised is still there). Not being able to upgrade the RAM in the Retina machines doesn't bother me too much, as I'd tend to max out RAM, or get pretty close. Being unable to monkey around the drive is a pain, but the form factor kind of makes that tricky anyway. Trade-offs.

      The OS X in to iOS thing you mentioned is possible, but I wouldn't go so far as to assume it'll happen. In the end, we'll vote with our feet if they take away something too important. As an old time, you'll probably remember the earlier transitions, and the concerns. m68k to PowerPC, and then PowerPC to Intel. OS 9 to OS X - that was a big shift, albeit sweetened by having a Unix that didn't require farting around with pdisk and tweaking to enjoy luxuries like audio CD playback and functional power management on portables. Ditching ADB, SCSI and serial ports - that left me replacing a few peripherals. New machines lacking optical drives.

      I don't believe OS X will become iOS. I do see more iOS features coming to OS X, which has generally been good for me. Notification centre is great, and the trackpad gestures have done a lot to improve my productivity - even the reverse scrolling, after so many years of working the other way around, seems just so intuitive.

      The way I see it now is that I can experiment far more than ever before. I have a decent IDE freely available (MPW was good in its day, but all but discarded once I picked-up Code Warrior). Automator is a great tool, particularly when you get in to writing services. I have a proper suit of Unix commands available to me, and plenty more via MacPorts/Fink. I run PostgreSQL and PHP on here for development, which is something I doubt would ever have come to classic Mac OS. Now with the move to Intel I have far more options for natively booting other operating systems, or virtualised in Fusion, Parallels and the open source options.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    34. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by narcc · · Score: 1

      Doesn't that make the point though? If you need to rely extensively on third-party software to make up for features missing in the new release, which were present in the old release, it's not difficult to argue that the new software is no longer the professional tool it was in previous incarnations. That these features are in other professional tools from Avid and Adobe just kind of cements it, yeah?

      I'm sure you can think of other instances where Apple has misunderstood the professional market in some of their other products. I know I can think of few myself.

    35. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Doesn't that make the point though? If you need to rely extensively on third-party software to make up for features missing in the new release, which were present in the old release, it's not difficult to argue that the new software is no longer the professional tool it was in previous incarnations. That these features are in other professional tools from Avid and Adobe just kind of cements it, yeah?

      I'm sure you can think of other instances where Apple has misunderstood the professional market in some of their other products. I know I can think of few myself.

      Apple may have not perfectly analyzed the features that FCP 7 users were using the most; but I don't agree that it is the crime of the century, when those features are either promptly returned to the product, and/or readily and cost-effectively (and $10 total is pretty cost-effective) replaced by third-party tools.

      Few software products undergo such a massive paradigm and UI shift from one version to the next as the difference between FCP 7 and FCP X. They really aren't the same animal. But, not only has Apple taken care of most of the "missing features" already, I didn't hear you bitching about all the features that were ADDED or IMPROVED, e.g. "Audition", and SIXTY-FOUR-ANGLE multicam editing, and a spectacular built-in Keyer, and workflow IMPROVEMENTS that were made, like, oh, I dunno, TRACKLESS EDITING, BACKGROUND RENDERING, PROJECT BACKUPS, and the ability to EDIT WHILE IMPORTING. No, you want to bitch about 3 things that affected some greatly, and others not at all.

      But the proof is in the pudding, and it seems that FCP X is teaching some old (but big) dogs new tricks.

    36. Re:I predict, for the moment, only.... by narcc · · Score: 2

      You're being deliberately obtuse. The $10 addon is, as you know, a bit dishonest. Some of the more popular addons to restore lost functionality cost close to $500.

      Sure, it added some new features, but was, at release, quite obviously not a professional tool -- as professionals tell it. I don't get the bits in all caps -- Project Backups? Yeah ... if that was missing in the first few releases of FCPX, it was quite clearly not ready for prime-time.

      Still, if you want to list features, you'll need to compare the features list from other competing packages. I don't know enough about that market to comment, but I suspect things like project backups are standard features!

      Features like trackless editing seem to be a mix -- some people love it, other hate it -- and it doesn't jive with the processes the industry has developed over the past few decades. Really, it doesn't matter how great that feature is if adopting it locks you in to FCP. Not a great decision as Apple seems intent on alienating the professional market (see the recent MBP troubles) -- Competing options like Premier look a lot more attractive price-wise when you consider the difference in price between Adobe and Apple post addons, and it'll work with your old FCP7 projects. It was a bad move on Apple's part, if they wanted to retain the pro market, no matter which way you slice it.

      Still, there are rather important missing features more than a year after release. I don't know that I'd call that "timely".

      I know that you love Apple stuff, but you're being somewhat less than rational in your defense here. They clearly misread the professional market and botched FCPX. It's okay. You'll get over it.

  7. They lost me when Stanza stopped working by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For all their much vaunted backwards compatibility or large collection of apps the reality is that either the app developer keeps updating their app or it breaks. That was what happened with Stanza. It was probably a mere coincidence that it broke around the time iBooks was released.

    Or was it?

    1. Re:They lost me when Stanza stopped working by mccdyl001 · · Score: 2

      Nothing to do with Apple - Stanza was bought out by Amazon when the Kindle app came along - thats why development was stopped, they didn't want competition for their own app. It still beats other e-book readers in quite a lot of ways, I just wish they'd implemented syncing across multiple devices before development shut down.

    2. Re:They lost me when Stanza stopped working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It broke when Amazon bought the developer and crippled it to encourage development of the Kindle app

    3. Re:They lost me when Stanza stopped working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah Apple had a conspiracy to kill Stanza which they and nobody else ever heard of. Get a grip.

  8. still alailable just not in App Store by SchroedingersCat · · Score: 1

    MPlayerX will still be available just not in AppStore. I would assume existing users will still get updates through internal update service.

  9. why is this still an issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's been clear for a long time that Apple intends to exercise authoritarian-type control over your machine. Everyone who objects to this has left the platform, and everyone who doesn't object has stayed. It's clear what the situation is, and everyone gets to make their own choice about whether it is acceptable for there to be a central authority who controls your computing experience.

    So why is this being considered an issue any more?

    1. Re:why is this still an issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's been clear for a long time that Apple intends to exercise authoritarian-type control over your machine. Everyone who objects to this has left the platform, and everyone who doesn't object has stayed. It's clear what the situation is, and everyone gets to make their own choice about whether it is acceptable for there to be a central authority who controls your computing experience.

      So why is this being considered an issue any more?

      Because Apple customers are mostly clueless and too technically inept to readily switch to any other platform. So they really feel stuck.

      Windows sucks in its own ways - malware being a big one. And Linux might mean *gasp* learning something new. If these people liked doing that then they would be past a newbie-level of understanding by now. And lots of them were warned early on about Apple's fascination with control and about walled gardens etc but didn't want to listen. They fell for the hype and the fashionability of Apple products and the marketing and the frequent mentions in all sorts of media like this site for example. Now they feel stupid because they don't want to lose what little control they have over their own devices.

      And because whining about a relative non-issue that you should have anticipated long ago is the only way a lot of people can get attention. So they do that instead of making a point and reasoning it out.

    2. Re:why is this still an issue? by LihTox · · Score: 1

      When Apple closes the gate on the walled garden, we'll all skip that OS update, or leave for another OS. Until then, Macs remain nicely useable even for people who write their own programs and generally don't want to play inside the garden.

    3. Re:why is this still an issue? by StripedCow · · Score: 2

      And Linux might mean *gasp* learning something new.

      The only way out is to make Linux better than OSX. So, start coding...

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    4. Re:why is this still an issue? by nstlgc · · Score: 1

      we'll all skip that OS update
      You know you won't.

      --
      I'm Rocco. I'm the +5 Funny man.
  10. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Mac App Store is a piece of crap anyway. I doubt anyone would even notice.

  11. Legacy update method works fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's wrong with the way apps have always worked? I like VLC, I go download it, it checks for updates when I use it. I push the update button when there's an update.

    I have a few app store apps, but it's in addition to what I've always used. App store encourages devs to write apps for mac. I like more options, good system.

  12. Apple absolutely hates its customers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I got off of the Apple bandwagon a long time ago after I realised how much Apple's ecosystem is like a prison. I'd rather have my freedom. Microsoft and other companies are moving more and more in the direction of Apple (and Apple just keeps moving in the wrong directions). Even Canonical, Red Hat, System76, ZaReason, and quite a few others have really annoyed me in recent years. Not so much because they have taken drastic steps towards imprisoning you although more for their ignorance and complacency. Canonical and others are giving in to Microsoft's secure boot crap and moving away from GRUB. GRUB isn't the problem. Microsoft is. STOP GIVING IN.

    There is enough crap I have to go through to get from point A to point B when I travel because of societal complacency in the criminal (I'm using that word loosely) actions of our world's leaders and the systems they've implemented (authoritarians who love censorship and promote thuggish behaviour). I don't want that experience when I go online.

    The only company I've even got any respect for any more is ThinkPenguin. For those who don't know this company sells computers and accessories for GNU/Linux and they actually have a respectable set of values. The company doesn't sell hardware dependent on non-free software (drivers or firmware) and supports freedom like nobody else. They contribute a significant percentage of their profits to the Free Software Foundation and Trisquel project (one of the few strictly free distributions) amongst others. I believe 10% of certain distribution channels go to the Free Software Foundation and 25% of sales from libre.thinkpenguin.com (a version of the site tailored to free software users) go to the Trisquel project. And they are supporting a lot of other projects as well.

  13. I always got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from the website, before they started pointing to the app store instead.

  14. MPlayer? by bhcompy · · Score: 1

    MPlayer leaving the app store? Guess I'll use TEN and Kali instead

  15. Why not just use VLC ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe there is something I don't know, but why do these other apps exist when
    VLC is such a useful app for playing all kinds of file types and pretty much
    can deal with anything you throw at it ?

    If I missed something please explain.

    1. Re:Why not just use VLC ? by cbreak · · Score: 1

      You missed the fact that there IS NO VLC in the app store. And if you are happy with downloading programs from the internet, then you can stick with mplayer in the first place, which plays pretty much anything you can throw at it.

    2. Re:Why not just use VLC ? by someones · · Score: 1

      I use both, mplayer and vlc, as neither can play really ALL the files. VLC has less decoding capabilities, but needs less ressources. mplayer on the other hand can play nearly anything, but at 50% more resource usage.

      Therefore i have both and if one player wont do, the other will.
      The mplayer + vlc combo never faild me for like 5 years now.

    3. Re:Why not just use VLC ? by TyFoN · · Score: 1

      It is funny that the system that claims to be "where movies are made", even if the movies are made on linux, is the system with the worst media support.

  16. Re:Thank God by reasterling · · Score: 1

    I do not know who modded this as interesting, but it is funny. Buy the way no self respecting bsd user would have tux on their desktop. I believe they prefer demons.

    --
    "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice" -- God
  17. The Real Deal by rabtech · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Some of this is just a learning curve on the part of developers. As has been pointed out, a lot of the issues surround access to the file system but as long as the user selects a folder (via the OS' built-in privileged process proxy that presents the selection UI for your app) or drags it to your app, you can store a link to it that is part of your sandbox, including across reboots.

    In this App's case, it would mean reworking his UI slightly to have users select folders with content in them, not individual movies. Then he can show a list of movies in that folder and let the user pick, all the while reading separate subtitle files or moving to the next movie with no issues.

    There does need to be a category of Developer Utilities / System Utilities that allow things like asking for Admin rights. This is one place Apple is totally wrong. Sure, make the review process extra detailed and don't allow apps to go into that category unless they are truly utilities, but it is definitely needed.

    The days of [app permissions] == [user permissions] are long over... We're just stuck with a broken security model that never anticipated people would be running so much code from so many sources, code that can't necessarily be trusted (or that itself loads data/code from untrusted sources). It's like the difference between traditional Unix permission bits and ACLs: once you use ACLs you realize how primitive user/group/owner is. Sandboxing is an attempt at limiting the permission of apps but it remains to be seen if that's the best way.

    --
    Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
    1. Re:The Real Deal by EricJ2190 · · Score: 1

      Sandboxing is great, but the real problem with Apple's sandboxing is that it gives no say to the user. Apple and the app developer get to decide what an app can or can't do, while the owner of the computer is stuck with the choice of accepting those permissions or not installing the app.

    2. Re:The Real Deal by vux984 · · Score: 2

      In this App's case, it would mean reworking his UI slightly to have users select folders with content in them, not individual movies.

      Except that I play movies by finding them in finder, and double clicking them. I can't remember the last time I opened a movie from -within- an application's user interface.

      So, no, reworking he UI would be pretty irrelevant.

  18. Re:Please consider Mitt Romney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I am an American. And this is what we get. Pick my candidate or we will all die. The Other party is planning the destruction of the country if not the world.

    Or..

    Pick MY candidate and we all will die!!!

    That's right, I'm supporting Cthullu/Dagon this election. Why settle for a lesser evil?

  19. Re:Sounds like a GPL violation. by MassacrE · · Score: 1

    How is this any more a flagrant act of GPL violation than a linux install CD (which does not ship source due to space)? The help menu takes you to the project's github repo.

  20. Professionals Don't Matter by CritterNYC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple is making record profits ($35 billion last quarter) and only 14.2% of those profits ($1.287 billion) came from sales of Mac hardware last quarter (all desktops and laptops). (source) The percentage of money Apple makes from desktops and laptops is getting progressively smaller each quarter. And the number of 'professionals' in those numbers is smaller still. The bottom line is that there is FAR more money to be made from consumers. To the point that professionals really don't matter to Apple's bottom line at all. Consumers, consumers, consumers. Consumers consuming music/video ($1.571 billion, up 29 percent from $1.571 billion a year earlier.) and apps ($891 million, up 28 percent from $696 million a year earlier.) on their iPads ($9.17 billion, up 52 percent from $6.046 billion a year earlier.), iPod Touches ($1.06 billion, down 20 percent from $1.325 billion a year earlier.) and iPhones ($16.425 billion, up 22 percent from $13.31 billion a year earlier.). That's where the money is. That's where nearly ALL the money is. Microsoft is seeing the same light. That's why Windows 8 is what it is. It is a 100% consumer operating system, corporations be damned. It's about setting up an ecosystem of apps, music and video across your desktop, laptop, tablet and phone. So, no, it doesn't matter if you can't install Eclipse, Mac Ports or various command-line tools on your Mac. The Mac App Store is about consumers, just like the iOS App Store. Not creators or 'professionals'. Even if you estimate that 10% of Mac's desktop/laptop hardware sales were 'professionals' (an extremely high estimate) and every single one of them abandoned Mac as a result of these changes (unlikely), that's still only $493 million. 1.4% of Apple's revenue. And that will be more than offset by another platform where Apple for all intents and purposes controls the keys to the kingdom (Mac App Store will be 95%+ of all Mac software sales in the next couple years) and makes a 30% cut of all software sales. They can ditch professionals and make a killing on consumers.

    1. Re:Professionals Don't Matter by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      he Mac App Store is about consumers, just like the iOS App Store. Not creators or 'professionals'. Even if you estimate that 10% of Mac's desktop/laptop hardware sales were 'professionals' (an extremely high estimate) and every single one of them abandoned Mac as a result of these changes (unlikely), that's still only $493 million. 1.4% of Apple's revenue

      There is one group of professionals they can't drive off though; the people that write those lovely profitable apps that go in the app stores.

      If people can't get their dev environment running, they won't dev apps, and without new and updated apps (to support the new versions of the OS), the platform would be in deep trouble. So I fully expect Gatekeeper to become mandatory at some point; you won't be able to turn it off. You'll still be able to install apps on OSX from outside the app store, but only if they're signed with a dev certificate.
      Which you need to be an apple dev, i.e. pay the annual $99, to get. And you'll still be able to run apps you compile yourself without a cert. But if you're paying for a dev cert, you might as well distribute though the app store, as you're paying to do so anyway...

      For commercial devs, not a major issue as they're already paying for it, and they'll be able to run test builds without signing each one. Open source or non-profit coders though? Crap out of luck. But then they don't make money for apple, so who cares about them? it's not like they write anything useful*... [/sarcasm]

      * apart from BSD. And KHTML.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    2. Re:Professionals Don't Matter by organgtool · · Score: 1

      And this is a particularly risky move for Apple. While shifting from a mix of professionals and consumers to just consumers is paying off very well right now, it could prove to be a horrible long-term decision. Consumers are much more fickle than professionals. Professionals need to have domain knowledge of their hardware and software which makes switching platforms for them much more difficult. However, with two years of no updates for the Mac Pro, the huge debacle over Final Cut Pro X, and the removal of pro features of the Macbook Pro (no 17" screen, no Firewire or DVD drive on the Retina model), Apple has given professionals plenty of reasons to make that switch. The professionals kept Apple alive when it was crumbling apart, but they might not be around the next time that it's no longer fashionable to be carrying an Apple product and then Apple could be in serious trouble. I wouldn't expect this to happen for quite some time, so there's still a good chance for Apple to turn this around, but all current indications point to continued abandonment of their most loyal customers.

    3. Re:Professionals Don't Matter by CritterNYC · · Score: 1

      Most open source devs are already out of luck as GPLed code (the most popular open source license used in over 50% of open source apps) is incompatible with the iOS and Mac App Stores. Most consumers don't care as long as they get to play angry birds.

  21. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And they can spend all their time finding on the perfect X window manager.

    As opposed to doing any actual work, which is what they might be doing if they stopped fiddling around with their OS and actually, I don't know, used their computer.

  22. MPlayerX .... not a that good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have it installed ... rarely use it ... because it sucks at playing almost every format I have tried.

    On the other hand, VLC has never failed to play what ever I have thrown at it.

    So yes ... use VLC and skip the drama. MPlayerX is not ready for primetime.

  23. Audio sync bug by debilo · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, MplayerX is unusable at its current state for a significant number of users because of this issue that has been open and unaddressed for months. The lag is unbearable and keeps me from switching from VLC. I would like to do so because MplayerX' killer feature, remembering the play position, is missing from VLC even though it has been requested by its userbase for years.

    1. Re:Audio sync bug by someones · · Score: 1

      i guess the desync time is constant.
      So why not manually offset the desync and sync manually?

    2. Re:Audio sync bug by debilo · · Score: 1

      It actually increases. There is no lag at the beginning but it becomes noticeable after awhile, particularly after seek events.It gradually gets worse.

  24. Unimportant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These devices are only bought by iDiots, who are too stupid to know they don't actually own that they paid for, and that they are being totally ripped off.

  25. Re:In the real universe ... not your limited brain by Tough+Love · · Score: 0

    Eh, of course it does. Android is Linux and Mac OS is FreeBSD. And as everybody knows, Linux is superior to FreeBSD.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  26. Alternative App Store by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    Maybe there is à market for a non-Apple app store? If someone gets in the act now, and Apple pulls the rug, then it would be possible to apply anti-trust laws.

    With regards to sandboxing, I can understand why Apple is doing this, but have they gone too far with their sand boxing model? What needs to be improved and does a better model exist elsewhere?

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:Alternative App Store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've gotten away with keeping all other browsers off their i store for years now. What makes you think that any anti-trust laws will be brought up against this corporate darling?

  27. You're on to something there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmmm...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dErAZL1Hr8

    +

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zIEZDt188I

    I think you're on to something.

  28. Mplay-what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been using Macs for nearly ten years and this is the first time I've even heard of MPlayerX, so I guess I'm not missing out on much.

  29. it doesn't need updates. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps not, but it never hurts to plan ahead.

    Or does apple forbid something like that, pointing you away from the store ?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re: it doesn't need updates. by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Yes, they forbid that.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  30. Re:I second that by rickb928 · · Score: 0

    "because when you're that rich you can't imagine a better life"

    So why is Mitt running for President? Oh, I can answer that.

    Your statement I quoted above is naive and illogical. Mitt is runing for President for several reasons, but one would be, I presume, to preserve the United States that he got rich in. To go just a tiny step further, this would be to improve the chances that he STAYS rich.

    For the rich, it's not just about imagining a 'better life'. Sometimes it's about imagining a worse life, like not being rich any more.

    The comment that started me off imagined that we should take in taxes what the rich 'don't need'. I think that meant making them not rich any more. When you know that number, please let me know.

    And it is not $70,000/yr. My household income is a bit more than that, and I can use more. I can barely afford a week's vacation to my hometown.

    Your ideas are not well thought out. Keep trying.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  31. More apps should leave app store by serialband · · Score: 0

    I know I'm a very minor voice in this, but I find it annoying to sign in to Apple's tracking just to download a free app. I will still install MPlayerX on all the Macs that I have control over.

    Too many people are willing to give up their privacy to apple to get software that was once just freely available. This goes for the android app stores too. I really don't like signing on to web pages that require javascript from a multitude of sites before I am able to download.

  32. Re:I second that by errandum · · Score: 0

    I read that number in a book. I might be wrong since it was a long time ago. Still, the priciple applies.

  33. Re:I second that by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    The priciple (sic) being what? That we should decide how much is enough, and take the rest for the common good ?

    Wrong country. Unless you're trying to make America into something else. You will understand if I don't agree.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  34. Why would that be? by bogie · · Score: 1

    "If people can't get their dev environment running, they won't dev apps"

    Why wouldn't they be able to get their dev environment running? I understand what you are trying to say but realistically Apple does supply Xcode and any other tools needed to make apps on it's platform. If you don't like it Apple will just tell you to piss off like they do on everything else. It's not fair but then again Apple has never been about fair.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  35. Re:In the real universe ... not your limited brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSD is dying.

  36. Fuck it. by slashfoxi · · Score: 2

    I'm going back to Linux.

  37. Re:I second that by errandum · · Score: 2

    I obviously am. I'm trying to make America a more equal place. The reason why the higher income people should pay more taxes is exactly that reason, a way to level the field. The thing is, they are very good at dodging taxes. And say they pay 13% and feel proud about it...

  38. Re:I second that by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    America is not and never has been the land of equal results. It is the land of opportunity. You write that you want to make American a more equal place. Levelling the field. Personally, I am not nearly so interested in levelling the field as I am in having an opportunity, and those two things are not the same.

    But more to the point, I think, I don't believe the government should take a dollar more in taxes than it needs to do what needs to be done.

    Any more than that is taking from me without giving me even value. Taxes are not the government's money, they are mine. I want to get good value for my taxes. Am I now?

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  39. Re:Thank God by gagol · · Score: 0

    deamons are not demons. If you are to be pedantic about something, try to be right or it loses all of its value.

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
  40. Re:Thank God by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2

    You mean daemons?

    --
    Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  41. Re:I second that by errandum · · Score: 1

    If you only want to pay taxes for things that you will benefit from, then there is nothing more to talk about. It's selfishness at it's prime.

    Now you have a stable job and a home. If your life ever took a turn for the worst, I bet you would feel differently.

  42. So having a free OS at home means anti-consumerism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I never thought of that. This means also that having a free OS is the total refusal of just "consuming" anything in the digital world, but enjoying certain works and stuff that works.

  43. Off-topic. But it only takes one comment... by meowris · · Score: 1

    ... To destroy the entire comment section.

  44. Re:I second that by One-Note+Pony · · Score: 1
    Your question sounds rhetorical, so I imagine you do not believe that you are getting good value for your taxes (something you rather hilariously express on the Internet...). I for one feel I get plenty of value. I am not a person living alone on an island in international waters, with no contact with the outside world.

    My home, by which I mean both the nation of which I am a citizen and the actual house that I live in, is under precisely zero threat of invasion and occupation by foreign armies. I pay people to ensure this, though I’ve never written a check directly. When those people retire, or are hurt in the line of duty, or are killed and leave families behind, I continue to pay them and I’m happy to do so. It seems like the right thing to do, since they do so much for me.

    Every day I travel to a workplace that pays me reasonably well, and I do so either by train or on well-maintained and fairly safe roads. My money goes pretty far because goods are cheap, in large part because they can be made or grown wherever it is most efficient to produce them, then driven in big trucks on different but similar roads to a place where it’s convenient for me to purchase them. They don’t grow oranges in my state, but I get them fresh all the same.

    More of my money goes to the purchase and maintenance of my home. My home’s value (both in intangibles and in the monetary possibility of resale) is increased by the proximity of a public park, good nearby elementary schools, a low crime rate, and the fact that my trash, yard waste, and recycling magically disappear once a week as long as I set them out by the curb. The same is true for the rest of my household waste, if you get my meaning. Most of all, though, the value is increased by the security of knowing that somebody can’t just enter my home when I’m there, board up the entrances, and refuse to leave. Somebody *could*, I suppose, but there’d be hell to pay, and I wouldn’t have to risk my own life to make them pay it.

    There are schools operating in my neighborhood. At the very least they keep children from running amok during the day, when I’m at work and can’t stop them from climbing my tree. Hopefully they’re actually educating and preparing the children for useful lives as citizens. Some will move away as adults but many won’t, and I will benefit from a new generation of shopkeepers, firefighters, artists, chefs, dentists, mechanics, and the like.

    I of course have neighbors. Some are better off than I am, but most are not. I like most of them. I like how their kids get an education even if the parents can’t afford private-school tuition. I like knowing that if one of those kids got hurt playing, they could go to the hospital and get treatment. Nobody would refuse it because their parent is poor, and nobody will knock on my door asking me to contribute. It’s just taken care of, as if by magic.

    Some years ago I lost my job. For several months I got a check from the state for half of what my salary had been, until I found a new job. It wasn’t much to live on, but it let me keep my house and food on the table. I didn’t feel too bad taking it, either, because I’d spent a decade before (and I’ve spent a decade since) paying into the fund from which I briefly drew.

    There are woods near my house. Somebody might have bought them and turned them into parking lots, except that they’re not for sale. Instead they’re kept available for me to walk my dog, or ride my bike. Some people ride horses or ATVs around in them, and that looks like fun too. I don’t pay for a ticket to go in, nor does anybody else.

    These are the benefits of civilization. They cost money. My taxes are that money. Quit whining.

  45. Re:I second that by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    I'm genuinely happy that you're happy with the situation. And I'm mindful that I have clean water and shelter, which is more than most people on earth have.

    My complaint is not going to resonate with you, and that is testament to your contentment, which I choose to not find fault with.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  46. Re:Thank God by gagol · · Score: 1

    Superb link, post of the month!

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
  47. Re:Sounds like a GPL violation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The difference is under the GPL you can write to the person who gave you the binaries, and in the case of a Linux distributor they can actually give the source to you.

    Oh, you don't know what's actually in the GPL? My mistake.

    Link to github. Does that help Apple's right to distribute it? Didn't think so.