The Subtle Developer Exodus From the Mac App Store

An anonymous reader writes: Milen Dzhumerov, a software developer for OS X and iOS, has posted a concise breakdown of the problems with the Mac App Store. He says the lack of support for trial software and upgrades drives developers away by preventing them from making a living. Forced sandboxing kills many applications before they get started, and the review system isn't helpful to anyone. Dzhumerov says all of these factors, and Apple's unwillingness to address them, are leading to the slow but steady erosion of quality software in the Mac App Store.

"The relationship between consumers and developers is symbiotic, one cannot exist without the other. If the Mac App Store is a hostile environment for developers, we are going to end up in a situation where, either software will not be supported anymore or even worse, won't be made at all. And the result is the same the other way around – if there are no consumers, businesses would go bankrupt and no software will be made. The Mac App Store can be work in ways that's beneficial to both developers and consumers alike, it doesn't have to be one or the other. If the MAS is harmful to either developers or consumers, in the long term, it will be inevitably harmful to both."

Comments

Ob

[Hognoxious]

You're coding it wrong.

Re:Ob

[ShanghaiBill]

You're coding it wrong.

But there are no clear guidelines for coding it "right". Apps are often rejected for unclear reasons, with just a vague and terse comment from the rejecter. I have had apps rejected, then resubmitted them a few days later, with no changes, and had them accepted.

The Apple app store is flooded with lots of similar apps, and they no longer highlight new apps. So it is very hard for a new developer to get started. I know a team of developers that worked for nearly a year to create their app. They put it on the app store for a price point of $4.99. A week later they had sold five copies. The following week, three more. After a month, they had less than $100 in revenue for a year of work. Back in 2010 and 2011, it was easy to make money selling apps. Unless you already have a customer base, those days are gone.

Re:Ob

[Anonymous Coward]

you're whooshing it wrong.

though, now that I understand the guidelines, it appears you are whooshing it just right.

Re:Ob

[NotDrWho]

Apple behaves in mysterious ways. Perhaps you need to look into your heart and ask yourself if you have truly invited Steve into your heart and are truly following his teachings in your software development. If you do this, and then come back and make true penitence to Apple for this blasphemous post, then Steve will welcome you back into the Kingdom.

Re:Ob

[93 Escort Wagon]

You're coding it wrong.

I know you're making a joke (which worked pretty well) - but if he's complaining about forced sandboxing, I think Apple is (sorta) in the right. I can see the argument for allowing some kinds of apps to escape the sandbox, but it should require some hoops be jumped through and it should require specific notification to the user.

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

I know a team of developers that worked for nearly a year to create their app. They put it on the app store for a price point of $4.99. A week later they had sold five copies. The following week, three more. After a month, they had less than $100 in revenue for a year of work.

Where was their market research? Where was their marketing? Any traditional non-technology startup that forgets do do these things will fail. If you build it they won't necessarily come. One has to sell the right thing, execute well, price it right, and let people know about it. Why expect to be able to not do these things just because one is on the internet? If they didn't already know of 8 people that would buy it, why did they create that software?

We could watch Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares and come to the conclusion that it's impossible to make money running restaurants. And indeed it's not easy. Yet there are many successful restaurants as well as many failures. The failure is always in the specifics of a particular restaurant, not the concept of restaurants.

Re:Ob

[Charliemopps]

Most... and I mean 99.99% of apps in both the Apple and Android stores are utter crap. Completely worthless. Surprise surprise, after a few years your customer base has become jaded. I never pay for anything through any app store anymore. It's almost guaranteed to be garbage. Even the Free games are nothing more than gambling scams anymore. You want my money? I need to read about your app in forums, from real people.

Developers burned themselves.

Re:Ob

[Anonymous Coward]

Apps that can't be sandboxed shouldn't be allowed in the store: installation from software not signed and not from the Mac app store triggers a bunch of security hoops, which is exactly what the user should have to see to install software that doesn't exist in a sandbox. Apple's doing the right thing.

There was development before the App Store. People still sell software outside it, and in fact most of my useful software is not in the app store; I only buy little productivity utilities from the store. Office and Photoshop are killer apps that will probably never be in the store, and you don't see them suffering much.

Re:Ob

[Anonymous Coward]

I submitted an app to Apple for approval, which normally took 2 weeks at the time. After 2 weeks the app still was not approved. I reached out to Apple for the reason of the delay, and they wouldn't give any feed back besides the application is in review. After 3 or 4 months they came back and said the application was denied because they did not like one of the sentences in the description of the application. Re-submitted without that sentence then was approved a week or two later.

In the meantime a competitor beat me to the store with an app that was quite similar, but only because of the delay! Fuck Apple!

Re:Ob

[Anonymous Coward]

Yip, I even sandboxed my non appstore version of my audio recording application.
It is not easy though, getting access for writing in directories that the user chooses across a restart of an application. Requiring you to read through ,assive ammount of documentation. There are some cool technologies though, the bookmark system that you have to use actually keeps track of files/directories even when they are moved by the user, even if your application is closed.

Re:Ob

[Splab]

1. Just because you work on something for a year, doesn't mean it's good (in fact, most successful startups will tell you to ship early and see if you are on the right track).
2. 4.99 is a lot of money for an app, it might be the second coming of Jesus - but most people will look for a 99 cent alternative.

Re:Ob

[kick6]

We could watch Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares and come to the conclusion that it's impossible to make money running restaurants. And indeed it's not easy. Yet there are many successful restaurants as well as many failures. The failure is always in the specifics of a particular restaurant, not the concept of restaurants.

This analogy would ALMOST work except for there aren't 42 italian restaurants lined up, side by side, doing the same thing, all for $.99 with the only visible difference being olive garden vs olive g4rden. There is so much garbage in the app store, the market research is almost impossible...and if you even DO the research, someone is going to essentially cold-spike your app, and charge less for it 10 seconds after it's released. Try that with a burger king...

Re:Ob

[mlts]

One issue I recall was around 2011, when IAP came along, the fundamental change of apps. Before that, one would buy an app for 99 cents, and it would be playable, people would tell their friends, friends would buy it, and so on.

IAP came along and fundamentally changed the landscape from having a good game that was well engineered from start to finish to games whose sole goal is to get the player stuck so they would throw money at IAP in order to buy extra currency/lives/etc. so they could move on. Games also put deliberate bottlenecks in place where it might take 2-3 weeks to earn enough currency to get some levels, or one could pay $20 and skip that. The fact that the most popular (as in app clones) games changed from tower defense to casino slots also echos this.

People are tired of games that are "free"... but in reality may take $30 to complete. So, user apathy is causing sales to sag in app stores. Candy Crush was the first big game along these lines, but consumers are bored with stuff like that and there won't be another game in that genre which will gross even near that.

Maybe it is time for developers to actually not go for the low and easy road with IAP, but go for something playable that can get a lot of people buying it.

Same problem in the console industry and the PC game industry. DLC used to be for expansions and added levels, not must have content to play the game, or items which make the game not a grueling grind. It is no wonder why game sales are sagging across the board, regardless of platform.

Re:Ob

[jedidiah]

I've had an iPhone and I will happily choose not to swim in the Kool-Aid.

The Apple store has the same problems as the Android store. Apple has no real advantage in this regard. People that think they do are just stupid fanboys kidding themselves.

Your chosen consumer brand fixation is not a special unique snowflake.

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

This analogy would ALMOST work except for there aren't 42 italian restaurants lined up, side by side, doing the same thing, all for $.99 with the only visible difference being olive garden vs olive g4rden.

In London and various other cities there is "China Town" with Many Chinese restaurants. Amongst them is Mr Wu's which is an all you can eat buffet for 5UKP (about US$8).

In Manchester there is curry mile with many Indian restaurants. Again many are very cheap.

It is a completely valid analogy.

Try that with a burger king...

They opened a Burger King near me, behind a petrol (gas) station, where it was't easily seen from the nearby busy road. It was a bad location, so it got virtually no customers. It was open a couple of years then closed - presumably the minimum time before they could get out of the franchise agreement and/or property let. ALL businesses suffer if the owners don't do the market research.

Re:Ob

[tibit]

Lolwut? Most "apps" I use daily at work start at tens of dollars and go up to $50k or so per seat. Some of the lower prices ones are actually quite popular - for example SmartGit/Hg and CadSoft Eagle. A $4.99 application can't be very good unless it's hugely popular, otherwise it won't support the development work needed to make it good. I'd argue that the cheap apps should be in fact in a separate "slum" section of the store where you have to explicitly navigate. It's rather sad, actually, that the Mac App Store doesn't have anything serious in the $50-$500 range. Never mind that the search is so broken that unless I knew the name of the app I looked for, I wouldn't find it anyway.

Re:Ob

[tibit]

I think that mobile app stores got it half right: the store simply asks for requisite permissions when installing an app. I've declined to try numerous "free" apps that apparently needed access to all of my private data for no good reason at all. It shouldn't be any different when installing Mac App Store apps. The only additional feature that I'd like to see is for the apps to define what subset(s) of permissions they can live with, so that the users would have an option of running apps with less permissions, with some loss in functionality.

Re:Ob

[slashdice]

Expecting your app to rake in millions just because it's on the app store is like expecting a car load of bomb-ass pussy to show up on your doorstep just because you've watched some porn. There's a reason some people are getting some and you're not.

Re:Ob

[serviscope_minor]

It is a completely valid analogy.

It is, if you can instantly teleport to any restaurant in the world and additionally, each restaurant can host infinite customers at once.

OK, laying it on a bit thick there, but restaurants are very finite in size, so come Friday evening, the street lined with curry restaurants fills up almost all restaurants, despite the quantity of more or less identical places.

There's no natural pressure with apps like that so it turns into winner takes all.

But yes, on the other hand no marketing will sink more or less anything.

Re:Ob

[UnderCoverPenguin]

I think that mobile app stores got it half right: the store simply asks for requisite permissions when installing an app. I've declined to try numerous "free" apps that apparently needed access to all of my private data for no good reason at all. It shouldn't be any different when installing Mac App Store apps. The only additional feature that I'd like to see is for the apps to define what subset(s) of permissions they can live with, so that the users would have an option of running apps with less permissions, with some loss in functionality.

For devices like smartphones and tablets that can't be administered in the way a full PC can be, I want *all* apps sandboxed - especially the vendor's apps.

As for minimum "subset(s) of permissions they can live with", why ask? If the app is asking for access to sensitive data without a compelling reason, why it would it also admit it doesn't need that access. If the app says "If you let me access X, then I can do Y for you", then I can consider. But even then, why bother?

The access permissions can be part of the sandbox mechanism. If I allow app W to access X, then the sandbox can allow that. Otherwise, it can just provide "Harmless X" for the app to play with.

I suppose apps could detect "Harmless X" and refuse to work. But, for example, suppose X is my Contacts List. If I never add any contacts nor delete any of the sample contacts, then my real Contacts is indistinguishable from "Harmless Contacts". Would be very rude for the app to refuse to work in that case, so any app that would refuse is probably some kind of malware.

Yes, I know that would mean no apps like TextExpander.

On my PC, I run Debian with SELinux and virtual screens, each with its own Xserver. Yes that means I can't copy/paste between applications on different virtual screens. It also means I had to create a lot of "Harmless X" resources that certain applications want to access.

Far from perfect. And a a major pain. and I know separate PCs would be a lot safer. I already have a separate PC for audio recording and editing. That PC doesn't have any network access.

So, as far as I am concerned, neither Apple nor Google have gone far enough.

Re:Ob

[Charliemopps]

My wife does... amazing how I can interact with other human beings and gain knowledge about objects I don't physically own ain't it?

There is very little difference between the 2 stores. There are few apps that don't appear in both stores. I find something, I tell my wife to get it, there it is and vice verse. It's like the difference between The dollar store and the dollar general. Same plastic crap.

Re:Ob

[Charliemopps]

lol... you're not drinking the coolaid at all... no sir.

Re:Ob

[Hussman32]

Man, I hear you, but if they will pay to play, developers will continue to put their crack on the store with IAP. I hate them. Utterly hate them, but that's where the market is right now.

Re:Ob

[jbolden]

Total sales are way up. In 2011 there was a lack of good quality general purpose applications. Today those exist. So unless you can do something really spectacular your app doesn't serve the common interest and shouldn't be funded. However in 2014 there is still a huge lack of applications targeting verticals. That's what developers should be focusing on.

Re:Ob

[jbolden]

It's rather sad, actually, that the Mac App Store doesn't have anything serious in the $50-$500 range.

They do have applications in those ranges but they sell on the commercial applications stores. Microstrategy (http://www.microstrategy.com) is probably the biggest mobile applications development house in the world and they sell many of their applications for more than $500 / user.

Re:Ob

[jbolden]

I can see the argument for allowing some kinds of apps to escape the sandbox, but it should require some hoops be jumped through and it should require specific notification to the user.

That is precisely what they do. You can get applications through that break Apple's rules on the consumer store but they require much more serious auditing and evaluation.

Re:Ob

[mjwx]

This analogy would ALMOST work except for there aren't 42 italian restaurants lined up, side by side, doing the same thing, all for $.99 with the only visible difference being olive garden vs olive g4rden.

In London and various other cities there is "China Town" with Many Chinese restaurants. Amongst them is Mr Wu's which is an all you can eat buffet for 5UKP (about US$8).

In Manchester there is curry mile with many Indian restaurants. Again many are very cheap.

It is a completely valid analogy.

Not really, I've been to many places like this "Curry mile" you speak of. There's a crap-load of them in Asia and I love them (in fact this Curry Mile sounds like a wonderful place). The thing is, they're all selling something different. You dont have 32 stalls selling the same variety of noodles, there's a lot of variety even to someone who has no idea about the culture they're eating in. Everything is cheap and you end up getting 4 or 5 different things but still comes down to less than you'd spend at Burger King.

A better analogy is 32 McDonalds all in a row. All doing the same thing but having slightly different names. Very few app stores dont suffer from this (Steam would be the only one I can think of off the top of my head) the difference is in how they manage it.

Re:Ob

[mjwx]

The Apple store has the same problems as the Android store. Apple has no real advantage in this regard. People that think they do are just stupid fanboys kidding themselves.

This x 1000.

The only app store I have seen that doesn't suffer from a large volume of similar crap applications is Steam... but Steam is a special case as video games take a lot of resources to develop so making crap clone games is too expensive to be viable.

It's hard to find a good application on Android or Iphone and trial and error sucks, both figuratively and literally (my battery life).

Re:Ob

[davester666]

or rather, they were whooshed.

Re:Ob

[putaro]

The sandbox is a stupid idea.

The reason given for it is to prevent exploitable code. This makes sense on a system that is running in multi-user mode where a non-admin user is trying to escalate to admin and will try any exploits available to do so. This doesn't make sense on a single-user system where the user is running the apps and any exploit that is being targeted would be automated. It doesn't make sense to automate exploits for apps that have a small user base so sandboxing is silly for the majority of App Store apps. It tries to close a door that no one would exploit. It makes sense to sandbox apps like Safari (the web browser) or iTunes or TextEdit or any of the other apps that are installed on every system.

What sandboxing is really for is to allow Apple to sell software and vouch for it without doing any work in terms of vetting either the vendors or the code. To date this has been successful because no one has really tried to break out of the sandbox. However, given the number of exploits that tend to exist in any code base, the odds that there is an exploit somewhere in the sandbox system is pretty high. Sooner or later someone will distribute malware via the App Store and the sandbox is going to be shown to simply be crap.

Re:Ob

[Splab]

Love the way you laugh at the 4.99 statement, and then proceed to claim that software priced at 4.99 can't be good.

You are like the wine connoisseurs, if the price tag isn't above $100, it can't be good. Silly person.

Re:Ob

[N1AK]

Where was their market research? Where was their marketing? Any traditional non-technology startup that forgets do do these things will fail.

Bullshit. You think Facebook did market research before starting up? It's ludicrous to think that most companies do extensive market research and marketing at launch. It's also equally naive to think that doing market research and marketing automatically means you'll be a success.

But then this is the internet where you can respond to a post that in no way mentions market research, let alone says they didn't do any, by suggesting that's where they went wrong so obviously it's a +5 insightful post.

Re:Ob

[Bitmanhome]

You think Facebook did market research before starting up?

Yes, basically. According to the movie, Zuckerburg copied another in-development app, one that was likely to be successful. And being at the school he saw a need that he carefully wrote his app to fill.

"Market research" doesn't need to be charts and surveys; if you know your field well enough you can generate good ideas.

Re:Ob

[bytestorm]

It can't unless it is sold in volume. Quality software takes time (read: money) to write, support, and bugfix. If you want anything with a limited market segment, by its very nature it has to be expensive to be of reasonable (and useful) quality or you are relying on the generosity of a not-for-profit software development organization.

Re:Ob

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

"sub optional location" In Houston, out in the middle of a bunch of refineries and not even near a parking lot would qualify.

Re:Ob

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

They do quite a bit of marketing. It's just not "traditional", remember their "scandal" in showing different "mood" posts? That's marketing. Zuckerburg snagged someone else's app and he DID market it, just via "word of mouth" instead of normal media.

Re:Ob

[Alumoi]

Moral of your story: don't spend a whole year developing some useless app.

Re:Ob

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

I don't know how often Apple lets you change your price, but price-point is also an important part of marketing. If it's not selling, change the price. With Apple, even raising the price might have led to more sales from people's ideas of more-expensive=better supported. In the non-digital world, price-points are often found via coupons and such, so a company can put out a bunch of coupons in different areas to see what price gets the best sales then settle on that as it's "normal price". With apps though, I'm not sure how this would be implemented.

Re:Ob

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

erll...you still might strike it rich on an app; however the chances of porn calling out to a bunch of hot chicks like a siren's call is probably impossible lol. Unless you've already made millions off your app of course!

Re:Ob

[Dutch Gun]

Gold rushes / landgrabs are, by definition, unsustainable. Those coming late to the party (which is most) get very little. This is reality. In the early days of phone app development, a bunch of people made a very early killing with very modest products. Those salad days are at an end. The novelty has worn off for the public, and a large percentage of people have smartphones now, with all the apps they need already purchased or acquired for free.

If the market is flooded with similar apps, then developers simply can't develop an app that does the same thing as twenty other apps and expect it to make a pile of money. It's just not realistic. It doesn't work that way in any other market. Why should app stores be magically immune to market forces?

Moreover, you can't rely on an app store to do your own marketing for you. When there are a dozen new apps hitting the store every day, exactly how much promotion do you think the store can realistically do for you for free? This really only worked near the beginning of the rush, when there weren't so many apps as today.

It sucks for those developers. Hell, I may be in the same boat in about half a year. I'm releasing my product that I've invested both years and a significant amount of my savings in, and I have no idea if I'll see any return on my investment at all. When it comes down to it, you need to create a product that the market isn't already saturated with, or else you need to build a product so much better that people beat a path to your door for it. Or you need a unique spin that draws people to your product.

In the long-term, there really are no shortcuts for most of us. Counting on "lottery" type success is for suckers.

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

Bullshit. You think Facebook did market research before starting up?

Not only do I think Mark Zuckerberg did, I know. Thanks to the court case and the movie, it's well documented. Before creating FB, as a student, Zuckerberg spent a night as a student putting together FaceMash. Although this was just a student prank with no intention of being market research, it was the viral success of that which was one reason to move forward to Facebook.

The other was the input of the Winklevoss twins who were popular kids at Harvard. Exactly the types that knew the market FB was initially aimed at.

Thus Zuckerberg had information on how likely the market was to be interested in FB, before he wrote a single line of it's code. This *IS* market research.

A company that only sell 8 copies of a cheap app clearly didn't have any worthwhile market research.

It's also equally naive to think that doing market research and marketing automatically means you'll be a success.

Strawman. No one claimed it did. It's the other way around, and not an absolute. Don't do market research and you'll probably fail.

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

It is, if you can instantly teleport to any restaurant in the world and additionally, each restaurant can host infinite customers at once.

Analogies are not identical in every way. If they were they'd be descriptions, not analogies. They only need the attributes necessary to illustrate the point. And the point is that it's as ridiculous to expect every business in a given industry to be equally as successful or equally a failure as every other one. An example of a failure does not say that and entire industry or business model is doomed.

There's no natural pressure with apps like that so it turns into winner takes all.

Only if you are producing an app identical to many others. Takes games for example. There are many games, and most of them don't sell because they are derivative and low quality. Quality original games sell. And no, they don't necessarily need huge teams to make. Take Threes for example, or Minecraft. Both simple but well executed and original, and produced as indie titles by single programmers.

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

Actually in the case of curry mile and other such places, they all use the same set of names for menu items, but they vary a bit in what's actually delivered. But there's more similarity than difference. The variety on The App Store is huge compared with what Indian restaurants offer.

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

You're saying jeddidiah isn't a Linux zealot? Hmm?

Re:Ob

[BasilBrush]

There are few apps that don't appear in both stores.

This is the evidence that you don't know what you are talking about. Most apps on the iOS store are not available for Android.

Re:Ob

[tibit]

I don't believe in fairies and pixie dust. Someone still has to get paid for the development. If it's a serious app, it needs serious man-hours to be developed, and you can't fund that if you have $4.99 price tag and merely thousands of users. Minecraft sells for ~$20 and they sold tens of millions of copies. They wouldn't make it if they sold for $5, and that's a hugely popular and successful project.

Wine takes about the same amount of effort per bottle to produce no matter what kind of a wine it is. Comparing it to software is silly.

Re:Ob

[Gr8Apes]

CPU - probably the best out there. GPU - ditto. drive space? The entire cloud is your drive oh, you meant SD card interface? Ok, you win. Customizability - I'll give you that one as Android can basically be anything you want it to be, except iOS. :). What really matters to me is that the phone does what I need it to, and works the way I want it to. For me, my choice works and has given me no trouble in anything I wish to do. I have also used the competing product, and find it confusing, disorganized, and generally too many steps to do anything I want to do. Others state that this is "my problem". They are wrong, it's my preference. That's one of the reasons I also no longer use any MS products. They kept getting harder and harder to use for my use cases. Gentoo is easier. So was switching to Open Office or pretty much any other office suite.

Re:Ob

[david_thornley]

Except that, as far as I've seen, none of them either bother to explain why they need a certain permission, or offer a legally or technically binding assurance that they won't do something else with the permission. Asking a non-techie to approve various permissions is essentially useless, because they won't understand how the permissions can be abused.

Under iOS, permissions are asked for when the app wants them, which typically makes it a lot more clear what the app is using it for, and allows more informed decisions.

Ok..

[Anonymous Coward]

Boo Frikity Hoo Mr. Powers

Forgot the biggest one: Money

[Anonymous Coward]

The author forgot the biggest one: money. I did a lot of iOS development in the early days and earned enough to buy a nice car (not super nice, just a mere mortal nice car). I'm now experiencing the long tail of the cycle. I get about $200-300 a month of sales. I wrote straight sale apps, not in app purchase type apps.

The biggest reason I don't do iOS development anymore (other than here and there) is because it's too damn crowded. I now have to invest in marketing and advertisement. I'd spend 3 months developing a really nice piece of solid software just to get a few downloads. It's not worth it for me. I've moved on.

The author has some gripes, and I have some more, but they are just gripes.When people were making good money on it, those gripes were farts in the wind. Now that most people are making no money, those gripes are still farts in the wind.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[BarbaraHudson]

This is the same thing that happens at the end of any "Gold Rush" cycle.

Remember the days when you had tons of stores from which you could purchase a computer, almost all owned by mom-and-pop operators? Each sold a few boxes and made a living. Standardization and hugely lower margins killed them. Same thing with the App Store. Everyone cashed in at first since there wasn't much competition. Now? Not just competition from other iThingee devs, but also from Android. Both the App Store and the Android ecosystem are experiencing the bust that follows the boom.

Heck, you know App development is in trouble when Florian Mueller says he's switching from paid shill to developing "an Android and iPhone" project. The bottom feeders have arrived. Or as at the end of Spaceballs, "Oh sh*t, there goes the neighborhood."

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[irrational_design]

You do realize that iOS app store and the Mac app store are two different things, right? This article is about the latter.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[CastrTroy]

Money is part of it, but it's important to look at it from the other side too. Just getting started in iOS development costs quite a bit of money. The minimum you must spend is $600 on a Mac Mini. You could spend a little less and get a used Mac Mini, but you'd still be out close to $400. That let's you write code and run it on the simulator. The simulator is good, but doesn't really give you the experience of what it's like to run on an actual iOS device you hold in your hand. For that, the minimum you could buy is an iPod Touch, for $200. So, you've spent $800 just to start developing the app. Compare that with Android development where all you need is a $100 tablet and a Windows/Linux computer you probably already own. Maybe it's not fair for me to count the price of buying the initial computer for Mac and not count it for Android. But then maybe Apple shouldn't be dictating which hardware and OS I have to use to develop software for iOS.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[__aaclcg7560]

Or as at the end of Spaceballs, "Oh sh*t, there goes the neighborhood."

Actually, it's "Oh sh*t, there goes the planet."

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[nine-times]

The biggest reason I don't do iOS development anymore (other than here and there) is because it's too damn crowded.

This brings up an issue that I have with the App Store from a customer/user perspective: it's not easy to find quality apps. Unless your application hits the front page by being on charted as one of their top apps, or by hitting one of their "editor's choice" lists, I'm probably not going to see it. Every once in a while, I actually go browsing through the different categories to see if there are any other nice apps out there, and even then I feel like there must be some hidden gems out there that I'm just not seeing.

I don't know how to fix that, but I think it is a problem. It's hard to browse/discover apps unless you already know which app you're looking for, or if it's one of the small number that Apple chooses to highlight.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[NotDrWho]

Hey, $200-$300 a month is damned good money if you're some developer in India throwing out dozens of cheap knockoffs a month, like "Upset Birds" and "Planks vs. Zombies."

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[BasilBrush]

So, you've spent $800 just to start developing the app.

Which is an extraordinarily low investment in a new business. If you think this is a significant sum, then you don't have a business idea, you have a hobby.

If it's a hobby it doesn't matter whether you make money. And come to that, $800 is fairly modest for a hobby.

Maybe it's not fair for me to count the price of buying the initial computer for Mac and not count it for Android.

The difference is obviously significant to you. But then you aren't seriously considering it anyway. It's irrelevant to people that would actually be considering writing Mac software because they are already Mac users. And even for iOS they are probably already Mac users.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[rjstanford]

You don't have to. Build a website. Do marketing. Sell your product however you want to, and when someone's ready to buy you can provide them with a link that opens the App Store and gives them a "Purchase" button - no need for you to mess with handling payments or fulfillment.

The App Store replaces your shopping cart and shipping desk, not your sales and marketing department.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[gnasher719]

The minimum you must spend is $600 on a Mac Mini.

What sales goals do you have if you are worried about a $600 instment? Your goal cannot be to write software and use the money to feed a family. For that goal, $50,000 profit a year is low (it won't make your family happy). If you worry about $600, then you are trying to make some beer money at best.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[jedidiah]

> and a Windows Server license and a Windows SQL Server license ($2000)

Hey. I'm a Linux Zealot and even I am not going to let bullshit like that pass by. You are trying to sell a total fiction there. Even Oracle doesn't rape you for a full server license if you are just a developer.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[tibit]

You can do pretty good Windows development with VS Express and nothing else. Windows SQL Server whaaat? Besides, VS Express comes with full, unencumbered compilers these days. You can use Eclipse if you wish a free, expandable IDE. Or Qt Creator.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[__aaclcg7560]

I feel like there must be some hidden gems out there that I'm just not seeing.

I have that same feeling with Amazon. After buying 800+ books, DVDs and media for 15+ years, Amazon recommendations should show me something new under the sun. It doesn't. I'll have better luck browsing for something new at a brick-and-mortar store.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[sribe]

Which is an extraordinarily low investment in a new business. If you think this is a significant sum, then you don't have a business idea, you have a hobby.

Nope. Anyone who won't spend $800 does not even have a hobby...

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[nine-times]

I was talking as a customer, and not as a developer. And keep in mind, I'm not saying, "The app store sucks!" I'm just pointing out that there is room for improvement in app discovery and app browsing.

They've already improved it a lot by providing a large selection of editor recommendations. They'll have different promotional groups for apps (right now, I'm seeing one for "Get Stuff Done" and "Quick-Fix Games" for example). Not too long ago, they made it so you get recommendations and charts for each category, which they didn't used to do. These are all good choices, but I think they could do more. I'm just not entirely sure the best way to improve things.

But to give an example, it would be nice if, when you're looking at an application, there was a list of "the competition", i.e. similar apps on the App Store. If I'm looking for a todo list manager, let me easily see a list of some of my different options. It'd be even better if they could provide a method of comparison, such as "editor notes" describing the strengths/weaknesses of each, or a feature comparison matrix. I think this is a pretty good idea, but an idea with obvious problems. Most obviously, it sets Apple up to pick favorites (which they already do, to some extent), and pointing out problems with applications, which runs the risk of alienating developers.

Some other ideas: Allow developers to provide movies/tutorials rather than just screenshots. Improve searching to allow provide more control than just a keyword search. Put a button on each app's page for "more like this", showing a list of applications that have similar designs, are made by the same developer, or can be used for accomplishing certain goals. Refine the categorization of apps, so that I don't have games in the same category as media players, and I don't have business-targeted CRMs in the same category as Quicken and Mint.

Now you might not like my ideas. That's fine, they're just off the top of my head. Still, I think I'm right in that the store could be improved.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[serviscope_minor]

What sales goals do you have if you are worried about a $600 instment?

Well, if you're just "looking into" app development, then that's a barrier. With android, you can "look into" it more or less for free. Then maybe get interested, then hey presto you have an app.

sure if you already have a business plan and money, the nputting $800 of that into kit is a drop in the ocean.

As for me, I'm never even going to bother looking at iOS app development because I don't want to burn $800 on a computer I won't enjoy using much and then have to use the wretched thing.

It doesn't stop business plans, but it does stop the causal developer. Casual developers are what serious deelopers come from.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[sribe]

Just wait till you read on to paragraph 2...

I did read it, and disagreed with it. $800 is not a "fairly modest" hobby. It's not a hobby at all ;-)

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[vlad30]

Money is part of it, but it's important to look at it from the other side too. Just getting started in iOS development costs quite a bit of money. The minimum you must spend is $600 on a Mac Mini. You could spend a little less and get a used Mac Mini, but you'd still be out close to $400.

Find another business where startup capital is less than $1000 and running costs near zero this is not the problem your paper route or burger flipping job could have got you the startup money

The problem is as others have said its crowded with crap competitors who spoiled the neighbourhood and it doesn't suit in particular, high end software that costs $1000's requires support agreements and has only a small number of potential clients . in essence the app stores have become a race to the bottom where angry birds will rule because the person looking at the app store is now one of the masses not the person who spent $20k on a computing system for there business and then budget $10,000 for software they need

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[Sebby]

The App Store replaces your shopping cart and shipping desk, not your sales and marketing department.

It also replaces 30% with nothingness, since, as you said, you still need your sales and marketing departments.

I've yet to read any developers say that the MAS replaced their departments, thereby making the "Apple MAS Tax" of any real value.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[jbolden]

Casual developers are what serious deelopers come from.

That's never been Apple's belief. They have always wanted a professional development community. Moreover I'm not sure that's true. Obviously in school people do casual development but then most people join companies and learn to code professionally.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[Hognoxious]

It's irrelevant to people that would actually be considering writing Mac software because they are already Mac users.

Unless they already have an app developed for some other platform and they're considering porting it.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[BasilBrush]

Which is either done by a Mac enthusiast or a company that has had commercial success on that other platform. Either way, not a problem.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[DavidCBillen]

Just get Qt for whatever computer you have and target Windows and Mac and Linux...

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[Ronin Developer]

You still need to shell out $100 month for either an iOS or OSX developer's membership if you actually plan to deploy your developed software in either the App Store or the Mac App Store.. Still, that's a pretty small price to pay to have your app certified and made readily available to potential consumers of your app.

Where the difficulty comes from and costs go up is in figuring out how to differentiate your app from all the others (or, just to get noticed). And, you have to worry about knock-offs deciding to charge $0.99 against your $4.99 or even $49.99 product.

You actually have to have real business, marketing and sales plans - which implies knowing to run a small business - to survive after the initial app store "gold rushes". This demands a level of commitment above and beyond what most "coders" have in order to actually eek out a living or more - it's why they are called entrepreneurs or business owners.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[Hognoxious]

This is the same thing that happens at the end of any "Gold Rush" cycle.

I'm wondering who's the equivalent of the shovel sellers & saloon keepers.

It's bloody Apple, isn't it? The bastards!

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[david_thornley]

Last I heard, Apple shipped a full development suite, free, with every Mac. It wasn't installed, but it was included in the supplied media. (Since they seem to have stopped providing the media, this may no longer apply.) Alternately, you can download that suite, free. If you want to sell on an App Store, you need to spend some money, but that's mostly a commercial proposition anyway, and you have to spend money to make money.

They may have initially wanted only a professional development community (back when the Macintosh Programmers' Workshop cost several hundred dollars, and Metrowerks wasn't selling good C IDEs), but those days are long gone.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[david_thornley]

If you're going into the software business, you are going to want to spend a lot of money on good development tools (like Visual Assist X or Resharper). If you're going to noodle around (and I'm saying that noodling around is a Good Thing), you can do nicely with the Express version.

For commercial development, I'd suggest going high-end on the development box ($2K will get you a very nice one), getting a MSDN subscription, and buying a few good tools. We're talking about maybe $2K/year here, but you'll have everything you need and you'll be in great shape. If you're making any significant amount of money, the investment will be worth it.

For hobby development, installing VS Express on the Windows box you already have to play games on should do nicely.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[tepples]

The biggest reason I don't do iOS development anymore

This brings up an issue that I have with the App Store from a customer/user perspective

How did you find them before the Mac App Store?

Anonymous Coward was referring to iOS, not Mac. Before the App Store was added to iPhone OS 2, there were only web applications.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[jbolden]

Last I heard, Apple shipped a full development suite, free, with every Mac. It wasn't installed, but it was included in the supplied media. (Since they seem to have stopped providing the media, this may no longer apply.)

It still applies it is a free download. That doesn't change anything regarding the culture and who they want developing apps for the app store.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[tibit]

MSDN's value proposition is a bit murky. If all the value you get out of it is to have OSes to test on, and you target consumer systems, then it's much cheaper to buy said OSes individually on eBay/Amazon. Quite a few things from Visual Assist exist in Creator, I'm told, with more on the way :) Anyway, you only need VS Professional to use extensions. That doesn't cost $2k.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[david_thornley]

MSDN has the advantage of getting most of what you'll need all in one place, so you're not reliant on buying things piece-by-piece as available. As to whether it's worth the cost, well, I get my subscription as a job perk paid by the company, so I can't answer that. The cost is perfectly reasonable for a professional.

Re:Forgot the biggest one: Money

[david_thornley]

Apple lets just anybody develop iOS apps. If they wanted to restrict it to professionals, they could. When Barnes & Noble started advertising for app developers, they required significant previous app development experience. Apple couldn't actually do that, but they could have raised the cost of putting apps in the App Store much higher than $100/year, with much the same effect.

Oxymoronic

[exploder]

Subtle...exodus?

Re:Oxymoronic

[__aaclcg7560]

Would the Pharaoh have noticed that the Hebrews were leaving Egypt without the Biblical plagues on his people? Anyway, those pyramids built themselves.

Good riddance

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't need any products that are not from Apple anyway.

Sincerely,

Apple Fanboi

As long as it's optional...

[plazman30]

As long as it stays optional, I'm fine with it. I still love MacOS and have a Mac in my house, but 90% of what I do, I do on my Arch laptop. If Acrobat Pro, or something just as good was available for Windows, I'd leave the Mac for the kids to play with.

Other app store

[CauseBy]

So why not use a different app store then?

Re:Other app store

[tlhIngan]

So why not use a different app store then?

Exactly, there are plenty of ways to get software on a Mac.

Mac App Store is one, and it's required if you want to use iCloud (for security reasons - detailed below).

But there's also Valve's Steam (a good way for games), and you can always roll your own web store - it doesn't take much to accept Paypal or if you are a business, to get Amazon Payments or Google Wallet.

A lot of developers that started with iOS migrated to the MAS when they port their IOS apps to OS X - you find a lot iOS games "enhanced" for the Mac. Cross-platform games usually are on Steam, and there are few on both. Steam is nice, though it limits you to one user at a time, while MAS lets you have 5 copies on 5 different PCs at once. Useful if you want a quick multiplayer without having to have 5 copies (especially in a family setting).

Regarding MAS and iCloud, well, you have to hark back to the bad old days of Microsoft office viruses - they'd infect Microsoft office's default template files and then subsequently infect every document since then. Well, you can imagine one using a variety of exploits that infect an entire computer. Use something like iCloud and now the attack's persistent - you reformat the computer, reinstall the app, and boom, you're infected again (thanks cloud!). So Apple made sandboxing a requirement for the MAS, and use that with iCloud mean well, if that happens, damage is limited to within the sandbox. So you're isolating the rest of the computer from the infection target (since the sandbox keeps the infection to a small area) in case a persistent piece of malware tries to remain in that way.

Without sandboxing, a cloud storage account could prove very interesting. I'm actually surprised we're not seeing viruses try to persist using Windows Explorer vulnerabilities and say, DropBox. (Remember the ones involving specially constructed image files? Imaging putting one of those in DropBox, and now when you browse to it, your PC gets infected. And the virus makes sure to keep a compromised image there so even if you wipe and reinstall, you install dropbox and boom, infected again.)

Trial vs in-app

[WolfgangPG]

Having a trial is nice. WP supports this. However the key with most apps now is to make them free and then add in-app purchases as "Free" gets more downloads than the "trial".

Re:Trial vs in-app

[CastrTroy]

I have a Surface 2, and I really like the trial option that MS worked into their store. Apps can be time limited, feature limited, or have many other limitations. With Android apps, it's usually possible to trick the trial version of the app into giving you a longer trial by uninstalling and then reinstalling the trial app. The way MS has designed it, once you've tried an app, you're no longer eligible for the trial. You can either purchase it or uninstall it, but there's no way to revert the trial back and get the functionality back. It allows apps to give you a full trial with all functionality, without having to worry about people cheating the system and getting the entire app for free.

Re:Developer unhappiness or Marketshare loss?

[leonbev]

This story isn't about the iOS version of the App Store, it's about the Mac OS X version.

Either way, it doesn't surprise me much. When I want a Mac version of an App, I just Google the product name and download the .dmg file from the vendor's download site.

The developers probably like it better that way anyway, since they don't have to wait for Apple to review product updates before they are posted AND they aren't giving Apple a 30% cut of any sales if I decide to buy it after the trial is up.

Enough already

[It doesn't come easy]

How many apps are in the Mac app store? Over a million? Who needs a million apps? They can't all be doing something different.

And who needs yet another free app to mine your personal data and sell it to someone? We already have Google for that.

Seems to me that the market is a bit saturated...

Re:Enough already

[crmarvin42]

I suspect the saturation with low value apps and the restrictions are not unrelated. It sounds like the store is structured in such a way as to limit the number of possible business models that can be pursued profitably. Low value apps are easier to develop so there is less inherent risk with putting them into the Mac App Store than more complex apps that may run up against things like the sandboxing requirement. Success comes not from creating a single, polished and powerful application, but from developing a lot of small throw-away apps that make little money individually, but are profitable (more or less) in aggregate.

I think one shortcoming of the Mac App Store from the software buyer perspective that most people miss is the effect it has had on OTHER application sites. I used to know of several different sites I could go to and search for applications from various developers, but they all died off. Now it's the Mac App Store or Google, but Google turns up lots of PC apps, FOSS apps of questionable quality, or apps listed on aggregators that make their money off of pretty horrendous amount of adds/page and frequently link to apps that no longer exist.

I prefer to buy directly from the developer when possible, but I need to FIND the developers app first and the Mac App Store is making that more difficult.

Desktop/Laptop NOT Mobile

[irrational_design]

I'm seeing a lot of comments about iOS, smartphones, Android, etc. This article is about the Mac app store (for OSX, NOT iOS).

Re:Desktop/Laptop NOT Mobile

[Clent]

Actually it applies to both.

No it doesn't.

iOS apps have always been under the restrictions laid out by the App Store. Apps that cannot be written within those restrictions do not exist in the App Store eco-system and are of the type that require jail-broken devices.

OS X apps, however, have existed long before the App Store and were not written with any restrictions in mind. OS X apps could be written to do anything to the OS X operating system, including virus infections.

Before the App Store, many OS X apps were 'installed' by dragging the application's bundle to the Applications folder. This variety of apps are often easy to migrate to the app store. There is another class of applications that require an installer, often requiring administrator rights to install or update files in restricted locations.

The App Store does not allow this for any reason. That restriction alone creates an entire class of applications that will never be found in the app store.

In between these two varieties there are applications that may or may not have used installers and did not require access to restricted system locations. But, for other reasons cannot operate within the restrictions introduced by sandboxing. This article is about those types of apps. Since OS X applications can be installed without the App Store and without jailbreaking the desktop machine, it's really Apple's loss as they are not getting their 30% cut.

Since all applications are under the same restrictions, these application's competitors cannot be found in the App Store either. Anyone that manages to get around these restrictions without losing functionality will have an advantage. But any competitor that does find a way, by the nature of economics deserves to win as it means the other applications aren't being developed cleverly enough.

Apps with a following don't need the App Store

[justcauseisjustthat]

But for small developers it can be a huge blessing (or just buried in the pile) :-)

Re:Developer unhappiness or Marketshare loss?

[skribble]

I'd assume this is about Mac OS X, not iOS. Mac OS X market share is actually growing (though not even close to iOS in market share, or especially sheer numbers). The truth is it's very easy to leave the MAS, many key software products never went there to begin with for whatever reason.

There is evidence that *some* developers who tested the waters of the MAS are turning away from it. Rich Siegel (of BBEdit fame) has recently said BareBones may pull some/all apps from the app store (at least BBEdit, which makes since, nobody wants a sandboxed professional text editor).

Other problems from another perspective

[nine-times]

I think he has some good points here, but as an IT (support) guy, I see other problems with the App Store that are completely unrelated. One of the biggest is the issue of "volume licensing". I don't know if Apple has sorted it all out recently, but last I looked into it, it was a confusing mess of a program with little administrative control. IIRC, at one point Apple was advising businesses to gift employees with applications that would then be bound to the employee AppleID, which is completely stupid, without the ability to withdraw the license and reuse it.

It's also pretty frustrating that you need to put in an Apple ID to install or update any application, even if it's free. For example, if the iWork/iLife apps are pre-installed on the system and there's a new update available, even though Apple detects that the apps are already installed, and Apple knows that the upgrades are free, it still won't install the updates until you sign in with an Apple ID. That might not seem like such a big deal, but when you're administering a few hundred Macs, it means that you either need to make every user create their own AppleID, or you need to provide them access to a company Apple ID which you then lose control over. Failing to come up with a solution means that your users are going to be bugged to update applications that they can't update.

And speaking of updates, AFAIK there's no command-line utility for the App Store application. This means that I can't control the thing with a script at all. Making it more confusing, there *is* a command-line utility to download and install system updates, which are normally installed through the App Store GUI. This means that if you look at a list of updates available for your system presented in the App Store application, you can write a script to install some of them automatically, but other updates need to be updated through the GUI. What I wouldn't give to be able to update everything with apt-get.

Getting back to the article, I'm not sure I completely agree with him. I understand his frustration with sandboxing, but on the other hand, left to their own devices, developers seem to do some really dumb and annoying things. For example, instead of using an installer or developing their app to be drag-and-drop, they develop a custom application that installs their software, making it difficult and frustrating to push out in an automated fashion. Or they code their application to require an installer, dumping their files all over the system, when it really shouldn't be necessary. I wouldn't be opposed to Apple supporting applications that require installers, so long as they (a) allowed customers to get access to the unaltered installer; and (b) kept tabs on what the installer did and rejected developers who used them unnecessarily. Otherwise, I think you'd see too much dumb crap on the App Store.

Re:Other problems from another perspective

[jbolden]

Apple has two models:

Consumer owns the device, the account, the software
Company owns the device, the account, the software

To some extent they allow you to mix on mobile. You are trying to have a BYOD situation without business licensing. If you want business licensing then you build your own app store and distribute from there signing licenses with the software companies directly. Apple doesn't get involved at all.

Is there an exodus?

[phantomfive]

In none of the articles could I find evidence of the 'exodus from the app store.'

Maybe the title would be better, "Things that Could Be Improved in the App Store"

Re:Is there an exodus?

[rgbscan]

Agreed, of the linked articles... one is a blog entry from 2012 predicting the end of the app store without really anything concrete to say - just opinions, and one is from a developer who acknowledges that Apple gave them personalized help above and beyond the call of duty, and admitted that their app was a "worst case scenario" for sandboxing, and they are shipping outside of the MAS due to time constraints rather than solve the remaining sandboxing issues. Both are hardly damning of the app store.

Re:Is there an exodus?

[phantomfive]

Yes. This. Plus, what the hell is a "subtle" exodus? Exoduses are not subtle.

There is a joke in here somewhere but I am too ham-fisted to find it.

Re:Is there an exodus?

[swillden]

In none of the articles could I find evidence of the 'exodus from the app store.'

Or, for that matter, significant entry into the app store. I haven't actually gone looking by my impression from looking at Mac software I was thinking about acquiring is that most developers still just download a .dmg to you from their own site.

Re:Not driving away quality software

[Anonymous Coward]

the app would have to have extremely high value for users to be willing to wander out of the app store and take that risk

No, it would not. The easy counter to your argument is Bonzi Buddy, proving that people are dumb.

Also, I have literally (yes, literally) several dozen CD's of old Mac shareware of varying quality. They used to sell them in multi-disk sets called "MacCubed". You could pick up a crap-ton of marginally useful software and a lot of good old games in those packs for a few bucks back when CompUSSR had a Mac section. I also had a MacAddict subscription for many years, and I still have every bundled disc that came with those. So that's just about all of the Mac freeware, shareware, nagware, and demos from about 1997 until 2003 or so.

And none of it was so exotic that an internet connection couldn't replace those disks. So either Mac users have "pussed up" even more than they already were, or the Mac App Store is a pathetic waste of time. The App Store does one thing, and it does it so poorly that it's basically not worth the time or effort to most users or developers. It's Windows Live trying to be Steam all over again, but this time with more already-been-chewed fruit logos.

Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

Apple behaves in [the mistaken view that it needs to by your mother].

FTFY.

In my view, the Apple store was so hostile that I never even bothered.

In addition to all the issues pointed out in TFS, there's:

o The rejection of adult content;
o The constant breaking of both OSX and IoS WRT earlier (but very recent) hardware
o The failure to bugfix both OSX and IoS except for a few bugs in the first few years
o The arbitrary dropping of useful capabilities (PPC emulation is the poster child for this)

Plus, they seem to be able to pick the perfect path to annoy the shite out of me:

o My macbook pro... suffering from serious bugs at its current OS... can't be upgraded to the next (not even latest) because they stopped supporting the CPU *and* the OS version
o The new Mac Pro is exactly what I would *not* buy. Can't be expanded without desk warts, and so hugely vulnerable to physical mishap
o Never released a mid-tower, which is really what I need (but nothing below (or above) an older Mac Pro is properly expandable)

Best I can do is keep buying used earlier Mac Pros and then installing Mavericks on them, while completely ignoring the existence of the app store otherwise.

The sad thing is I really like the OS, and I'd be happy to develop for it if they made development accessible and quit leaving trails of unfixed bugs behind them.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[Anonymous Coward]

The sad thing is I really like the OS, and I'd be happy to develop for it if they made development accessible and quit leaving trails of unfixed bugs behind them.

Not Trolling, and not defending OS X on this point; but please name an OS Platform that DOESN'T have a long, long trail of unfixed bugs.

Windows? Surely you jest!

Linux? They too have plenty of bugs that just seem to live on and on...

I can't speak to the other OSes; but that covers about 99.5% of desktop computing, at least.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[tibit]

To address some of your concerns:

You really need to get a hackintosh. Go to tonymacx86 and read up the most recent recommended hardware. When installing, make sure you start with the latest Mavericks, and the early versions required bootloader trickery with integrated Intel graphics. The most recent release doesn't need anything special besides the usual multibeast treatment. I have one and I'm not looking back.

There's simply no hardware I could buy from Apple to give me the same functionality at any realistic price point - especially that I really like to reap benefits of all-in-one testing done during hardware and software development at Apple. The new Mac Pro is fine and dandy if you have all of your storage and PCIe cards in a single external enclosure, but that makes it just too expensive, and you're shelling lots of money to someone else but Apple, the warranty doesn't cover the enclosure, it's not tested and validated during the OS X development, etc. Even then, if you bump the tiny thunderbolt cable, you crash. It's not that hard to put it all in one case, as the "old" Mac Pro demonstrates. They could have slimmed it down and modernized it. With some clever engineering, a modern Mac Pro with drive caddies and card slots could have still been very, very compact.

You probably have a Lion-compatible MBP, with something like AMD X1xxx graphics, right? If there's a 64 bit graphics driver kext for it in Lion, then you can run Mountain Lion via tiamo's boot.efi - simply copy the driver over from Lion. It'll work fine (BTDT). For original Mac Pro, it's even easier, all you need is the new boot.efi, a compatible graphics card, and you can boot Mavericks. Read here for details. In all cases, though, don't use Mavericks or Yosemite without an SSD for the OS itself. Even a 100GB SSD will be sufficient. I have nothing but stellar performance on "old" machines that were the first ones that still support Mavericks, but without an SSD it's essentially unusable.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Best I can do is keep buying used earlier Mac Pros and then installing Mavericks on them, while completely ignoring the existence of the app store otherwise."

So... you support a company that you don't agree with.... Why?

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[Anonymous Coward]

To address some of your concerns:

You really need to get a hackintosh. Go to tonymacx86 and read up the most recent recommended hardware. When installing, make sure you start with the latest Mavericks, and the early versions required bootloader trickery with integrated Intel graphics. The most recent release doesn't need anything special besides the usual multibeast treatment. I have one and I'm not looking back.

You probably have a Lion-compatible MBP, with something like AMD X1xxx graphics, right? If there's a 64 bit graphics driver kext for it in Lion, then you can run Mountain Lion via tiamo's boot.efi - simply copy the driver over from Lion. It'll work fine (BTDT). For original Mac Pro, it's even easier, all you need is the new boot.efi, a compatible graphics card, and you can boot Mavericks. Read here for details. In all cases, though, don't use Mavericks or Yosemite without an SSD for the OS itself. Even a 100GB SSD will be sufficient. I have nothing but stellar performance on "old" machines that were the first ones that still support Mavericks, but without an SSD it's essentially unusable.

Now THAT'S what Just Works(tm) means!

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[maccodemonkey]

The sad thing is I really like the OS, and I'd be happy to develop for it if they made development accessible and quit leaving trails of unfixed bugs behind them.

How exactly is developed not accessible?

- Apps do not have to be distributed through the Mac App Store.
- Xcode is provided for free along with all documentation. There are tons of other IDEs and languages as well.
- Yes, there are bugs, but all platforms have bugs. Surely as an OS X user you can see bugs as well.

I'm not sure what you're looking for to make development more accessible.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[jbolden]

The failure to bugfix both OSX and IoS except for a few bugs in the first few years

Come on. There have been bugfix for both regularly.

The arbitrary dropping of useful capabilities (PPC emulation is the poster child for this)

There is nothing arbitrary about it. IBM acquired Transitive in 2009 and wanted them focused on software. Transitive stopped making the Rosetta application.

My macbook pro... suffering from serious bugs at its current OS... can't be upgraded to the next (not even latest) because they stopped supporting the CPU *and* the OS version

That's kinda odd. How old is your pro and which bugfix did you desperate need?

The sad thing is I really like the OS, and I'd be happy to develop for it if they made development accessible and quit leaving trails of unfixed bugs behind them.

Your points about have little to do with development.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

Not sure how you interpret buying stuff they already sold to someone else as "supporting them", frankly. Mavericks is free. They get zero additional income from me.

That's support? Save me from such support, please. :)

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

How exactly is developed[sic] not accessible?

I was referring to the IoS app store when I was talking about roadblocks to development. They also make it too difficult to sideload; so I can't make an app for me and others without things expiring and limited distribution and etc. Sorry I was unclear. Both OSX and IoS have some similar problems, but the IoS app store is far worse than the OSX appstore (not that I think very highly of the OSX appstore... I sure wouldn't use it unless forced [as in, Mavericks upgrade, because they stopped using real media.])

I'm not sure what you're looking for to make development more accessible.

This is what I expect WRT IoS: I want to be able to write an app. I want it to be about anything that I want to write, that someone else might want to use.

Including, if I so choose, the raunchiest adult porn you can imagine. I don't need another mother. I already had a mother, she approved of my sexual inclinations when it was relevant, but at this point I'm 58 and no longer require maternal input. Apple's not in the running for the role in any case; that would require that I respect their opinions on the matter, and that isn't happening.

Then I want to be able to put whatever app(s) I write on my website, whatever they might be. I want you to be able to download an app from my site, install it as easily as humanly possible (drag, drop... download and run... etc.) Then, barring bugs, updates, feedback, or friendly chatter, I don't want you to have to ever come back. And likewise, I want similar access to apps others write.

I can do this with OSX. Easily, even trivially. I can even use QT to cross-platform fairly well (as long as I'm willing to write the cross-platform system aspects QT fails to address, like USB, Midi, etc. Which I am.) I can't do it with IoS unless I hack the device, and that means you have to hack yours as well. Not interested. This limits the audience (and me) to intentionally crippled and incompatible devices. So I decline.

Clearer?

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

Come on. There have been bugfix for both regularly.

Many non-trivial things have been left unfixed. UDP doesn't work right in 10.5 and and 10.6, you can only open one listener to a UDP stream (a pretty grievous error for a BROADCAST network protocol!) 10.5 constantly spews invalid error messages to the console when cron is used (although you can visit my website for a hack-fix... I got *really* tired of that one and patched the OS for those lazy Apple bastards.) The color graphics pipeline in 10.6 leaks memory like a sieve when heavily used (I write realtime stuff that has live spectrum, waterfalls, vector displays, etc.) OSX 10.6 can chew up a gigabyte of memory deep in the pipeline in just a few hours losing track of its own mach message trap activity, and worse, it begins to chew its own (performance) leg off in the process. Mavericks still has the bug, but the memory management is better and it all gets thrown into swap so it's not an immediate problem, as long as you restart the apps once a day or so. Safari is an *awful* memory leaker under 10.6, and yes, I consider it part of the OS. In 10.6 for single core CPUs, the printing system fails to handle the most basic UTF-8 character printing at the console / scripting level. The bug is in the compiled version for that CPU; Apple knows about it (I spoke directly to the fellow who writes the CUPS software) and they won't be fixing it. So, upgrade, right? Wrong. Single core CPUs are not supported by OS upgrades past 10.6. So fuck me, I get to throw away a fairly recent machine because of this bug -- I had to buy a brand new mini to make the software work for the customer for that *single* reason. Low level window messaging gets all screwed up if you try to create widgets outside of Apple's simplistic ones and the entire window messaging system slows to a crawl. The c library's user-home-directory is not properly set in 10.6, and even trying to get it can crash your app.

And yes, I'd be fucking HAPPY to upgrade to Mavericks if I could to fix any/all of these, but (a) I can't just toss my PPC software out the window, and (b) I can't upgrade these machines.

You want me to go on, or are you getting the picture yet?

There is nothing arbitrary about it. IBM acquired Transitive in 2009 and wanted them focused on software. Transitive stopped making the Rosetta application.

Many of Apple's users depended upon that software. Me in particular. I have thousands of dollars invested in PPC software. I can't use it past 10.6. Apple is rich as Croesus. When they decided it was ok to abandon the PPC hardware because they had a path for PPC software, they should have made sure they had what they needed into the future. At this point, they should probably just buy IBM to get it back. But, no, it's "fuck you, users." Assholes.

That's kinda odd. How old is your pro and which bugfix did you desperate need?

My macbook pro is a 17", core-duo. Wherever that puts it. I need the semi-fix that stops the clog of the graphics color correction pipeline that debuted in Mavericks. Without it, I can't use the machine for its intended purpose, which is in-the-field monitoring of RF and RFI issues using SDR hardware. But it can't be upgraded to Mavericks. Which makes it a brick.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

You probably have a Lion-compatible MBP

No. Lion refuses to install, says the hardware is unsupported.

In all cases, though, don't use Mavericks or Yosemite without an SSD for the OS itself.

This is terrible advice. Mavericks works fine from a traditional hard drive on all the machines I have that Mavericks will actually install on.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

Funny. :)

Thumbs up.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[NoMaster]

That's kinda odd. How old is your pro and which bugfix did you desperate need?

My macbook pro is a 17", core-duo. Wherever that puts it.

That model was discontinued in Oct 2006. Congratulations, your 8-year-old laptop is out of date. If it was a dog it'd be middle-aged; if it was a hamster its replacement's replacement would be probably be dead.

And not to put too fine a point on it, the Core Duo Macbook Pros were known from the start to be a dead-end - everyone was waiting for the Core 2 Duo models (that replaced them 6 months after launch), which would at least get you up to OSX 10.7.x.

Good luck with finding a non-Apple replacement that lasts as long...

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

That model was discontinued in Oct 2006. Congratulations, your 8-year-old laptop is out of date. If it was a dog it'd be middle-aged; if it was a hamster its replacement's replacement would be probably be dead.

10.6 came out in the summer of 2009. About two and half years after my brand-new and bloody expensive laptop purchase. 10.6 was busted. It's not been fixed. It's still busted. That's not an "8 year" problem, that's a 3 year problem, at best. So let's not get too carried away with your math. The only thing 8 years has to do with this is the length of time they left broken crap behind them.

Next: You see, that laptop is neither a hamster or a dog. It's an expensive, high-end bit of computing equipment, quite fast, fully capable of running some very advanced, real-time software. The thing is, it's been abandoned by its maker before they ever even made their OS work the way they claimed it did. I am not impressed with the "it's old hardware" line. That's not the problem. The problem is shitty, unsupported OS software.

I know Apple's got some of you convinced that your multi-thousand dollar purchases only have the natural lifespan of a gnat, but that's only because they're inflicting it on you. It's neither a natural or reasonable thing. It's a matter of choice: Apple chooses to abandon your stuff. Yes. They decided you and your undertakings weren't worth it. Always something to remain aware of.

I'll probably end up debugging and hack-fixing the major OS bugs myself, like I did the console message flooding if I can find the time. I don't look forward to it. But I'm also not particularly ready to throw tens of thousands of dollars worth of hardware in a dumpster because Apple's too stinking free of a reasonable set of ethics to do the right thing. Which is, make the advertised functionality of 10.6 actually work properly. And 10.7, and 10.8 and so on. Instead of flying ahead, yelling NEW and SHINY all the way, busted software strewn everywhere behind them.

everyone was waiting for the Core 2 Duo models

No, everyone wasn't. Obviously. Some of us have work to do, you know. We don't sit around waiting. We just expect manufacturers to do the right thing (now, THAT you can take me to task for... in retrospect, particularly in Apple's case, that was waaaay optimistic.)

Hey, but now I know better, and they don't get to sell me any new hardware. At all. That's what happens when you seriously screw your customers. In their own tiny way, the customer will screw you right back. No new spending, bad press, recommendations to not buy Apple.

Good luck with finding a non-Apple replacement that lasts as long...

As long? Bloody thing's been unusable since busted-ass 10.6 came out. That was years ago. In any case, I just buy $500-$600 used Mac Pros off EBay. Apple gets nothing, squat, zip, and I get machines that work with Mavericks, which shows every sign of being the first reasonably high quality OS Apple's ever shipped, or at least, it is once you turn off that app-nap idiocy. No need to go with non-Apple. I just stopped giving them money. Because, fuck them and their happy little trail of busted shit.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[tibit]

Given how relatively easy it is to get OS X to work well on what amounts to unsupported hardware, I'd say you need to rethink that line of thought. Apple has to drop support for hardware eventually, and the first-gen Intel machines with non-replaceable graphics are essentially impossible to support in any reasonable fashion. Note that Apple's notion of support means that you have a supported hardware accelerated composited desktop and 3D. So it's not merely sufficient to get the thing to boot up and show you a desktop - it's no problem getting Mavericks to do that on almost any oddball piece of Core II hardware. It's no different with modern Windows - if there are no drivers available for legacy hardware, you're stuck.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[tibit]

Lion refuses to install, says the hardware is unsupported.

Then you have a Core I CPU, and you're out of luck. I don't really blame Apple for not supporting those early CPUs.

This is terrible advice.

Why? It demonstrably increases performance. I've found it to be great advice.

Mavericks works fine from a traditional hard drive

Your expectation with regards to "working fine" will dramatically change once you give an SSD a try. People complaining about Mavericks being "slow" are completely right, but that slowness is simply due to the hard drive access patterns. Probably the paging policies have changed significantly between Mountain Lion and Mavericks. With an SSD, Mavericks works amazingly well even with 2GB of RAM. Sure, if you've got 8GB of RAM so that everything needed eventually gets cached, you'll have usable Mavericks even with a piss-poor mechanical hard drive.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[Gr8Apes]

iOS is a walled garden. It's the nature of the beast, albeit a very large beast these days. The plus side of the iOS appstore, because of its nature, it's highly unlikely that you'll get malware from it. That's not true in the Android world where you can download from anywhere. That's the trade-off Apple decided upon at the start, whether you like it or not, you have to admit it was their choice. Users can jailbreak their devices, but a large number choose not to, and remain in the Apple iOS walled garden. Apparently it's not so terrible. Compared to earlier phones, Apple's walled garden was a huge improvement and pushed the walls so far away they are virtually out of sight for almost all of its customers. Compared to Android, it's very controlled and may seem small. I guess it depends upon what you want to do with your phone.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[fyngyrz]

Agreed on all points. From my perspective as a developer, however, the walled garden is a serious problem; and the hipster moralizing is as well. So, for me, and I *only* speak for myself, I'm not going to be making any iOS apps under anything even remotely resembling the current circumstances.

And I have to say that my Android phone (Samsung Galaxy Note 3) suits me better. Along with most of the rest of the world, apparently (current market shares are about 84.7% Android, 12.8% iOS, and 2.5% Windows [as of Aug 2014].) And I have certainly taken advantage of the ability to sideload my Android phone many times, something I would not give up to go to iOS.

Apple absolutely has the right to proceed as they see fit. I would never say otherwise. I simply observe it when they proceed poorly, discuss it when I feel it is germane, and act accordingly in my business and personal life to avoid further damage from such actions.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[jbolden]

Many of Apple's users depended upon that software. Me in particular. I have thousands of dollars invested in PPC software. I can't use it past 10.6. Apple is rich as Croesus. When they decided it was ok to abandon the PPC hardware because they had a path for PPC software, they should have made sure they had what they needed into the future. At this point, they should probably just buy IBM to get it back. But, no, it's "fuck you, users." Assholes.

Your claim was arbitrary. This wasn't arbitrary. Faced with a high cost of supporting PPC indefinitely they said no. The guy below commented on your laptop. Apple expects regular upgrades. They patch OS bugs often through OS replacement, they aren't failing to bugfix you are failing to upgrade.

Now I get you have reasons. But you should accurately characterize Apple's actions. Your reasons for not wanting to do what they want doesn't mean they aren't doing things. Frankly it doesn't sound like you should be on Apple at all. Linux still exists for PPC and IBM Power systems are pretty nice boxes if you want to stay with PPC.

Re:Not mysterious. Just lousy.

[Gr8Apes]

Interesting on the breakdown of phones. Apparently both Apple and Android increased sales, but Android, thanks in large part to Xiaomi, jumped significantly. and Samsung was number 1 with double the phones that Apple, #2, shipped. Then there's a few smaller Android makers at less than half of Apple, and then the rest. to make up the numbers. In terms of "smart" phones, I wonder what they are, they're certainly not all Samsung Galaxy equivalents.

As for loading your own apps on your phone, you can still do that via their developer program. I have several currently. It is a bit of an admitted pain.

itunesconnect sales reporting sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

My biggest issue is with the sales reporting.

Every 3 months I have file taxes, so I need to know exactly how much was payed to me each month.
However you can't print this information because the website is not print friendly; it is not business friendly at all.

Share-it! another reseller of my application, sends me every month a nicely printable .pdf file of their self-reporting-invoice.

Apple's sale website is a joke.

"Back in 2011"

[garote]

... like that was the "good old days" of software development?

The exclusivity of the walled garden, the novelty of the device and platform, the deep pockets and enthusiasm of the userbase, this all created a gold rush environment for a number of years. (Remember that "I am rich" app that sold for $1000 a pop and did nothing but display a picture?)

Back In My Day, you only joined a small studio or became an independent developer if you had a REALLY INSANELY GOOD idea, were willing to work like hell for it (perhaps because you were tired of working for The Man), and were willing to evangelize it like hell, and even then, you were not guaranteed success, you were almost guaranteed to fail, but you did it anyway because you were deeply compelled. If you had to go slouching back to The Man in a few years, so be it.

The gold rush is over - and it's not a tragedy.

Programmers are as in-demand as they've ever been, and are paid fantastic money for labor that doesn't even involve, say, standing around in the hot sun, carrying a firearm, or constant exposure to hazardous waste. (Unless you count the exhaust from all those commute buses.)

I quit a long time ago

[cornicefire]

After a few attempts that made it through the gauntlet, it quickly became a fool's errand. Why should anyone risk months of work only to watch some nameless, faceless drone at Apple issue a thumbs down rejection? At least in Roman times, the Emperor was brave enough to show his face when issuing the thumbsdown. What a wretched market. It's impossible to do anything except sell stupid games. (And I say that as someone who likes stupid games.) Then they have the gall to take 30% for doing next to nothing. Seriously. It's just a db insert and some FTP.

Apple has zero understanding or care of enterprise

[Sycraft-fu]

It is amazing, given they are a big enterprise, but they really don't get what enterprises need, and just don't care. They want enterprises to use their iToys but don't want to spend any time on it. They just want to treat them like consumer devices and what you to spend your money and fuck off. It is really annoying.

They aren't much better to their people internally, either. Last time the campus Apple engineer came by, several years ago (our college doesn't use many Macs) it was shortly after Apple had suddenly discontinued their Xserve like. I asked him what they were going to do for their own web hosting, since they'd been using those. He said "I don't know, they didn't warn us about this or give us any guidance. We'll probably go back to using IBM systems like before."

The sad thing is Mac fanboys decide they want to use them for enterprise work, even though they are manifestly unsuited to it.

Re:Developer unhappiness or Marketshare loss?

[tibit]

It seems that you use your fingers and toes to count the $100+ software titles on Mac App Store. I tried finding some, and all I could come up with were Apple prosumer creative things, a non-Apple website editor, and another development tool or two. Heck, it's not even possible to sort by price in the damn store - that really pisses me off.

Just how Apple wants it...

[ndykman]

What's the incentive for Apple not to control every aspect of their user's experience, including the software they install?

They have a captive user base that insist that Apple can do no wrong, so why not get a cut for every paid piece of software installed on OS X? It works for iOS. I half expect to see a developer unlock for OS X, so that by default, you can't install anything on OSX that isn't from the App Store.

Adobe, Microsoft and the other big players will get on board. Because, being able to install your own software on your own machine is a security risk, and we can't have that. Instead, trust Apple to verify everything for you. That's the world we live in.

Re:Just how Apple wants it...

[danomatika]

I half expect to see a developer unlock for OS X, so that by default, you can't install anything on OSX that isn't from the App Store.

They already have this, it's called Gatekeeper. You can simply turn it off in the Security settings. The moment you can't I won't be using OSX ...

Re:Just how Apple wants it...

[david_thornley]

Said captive user base is small. Most Apple customers have iPhones and iPads, not Macs, and those could fairly easily move to Androids or even MS Windows phones and tablets. Lots of people switch over, both ways.

Apple got its fans by doing certain things very well. You may not care about those things, but pretending that Apple's success is due to some unexplained fanaticism among the public is stupid.

The Mac App Store is a failure for me

[Guspaz]

I've got a MacBook Air. It serves as my secondary PC (as a Windows user on the desktop and a Linux user on the server). Of all the apps that are installed on my Mac that aren't from Apple, I think only a single one of them (MPlayerX) is from the app store. From Dropbox to VLC to Chrome to Creative Suite to DiskInventoryX to SmoothMouse to Steam, almost nothing is available in the app store.

In fact, some things that I run on my mac (like Civ 5) through other "app stores" (like Steam) are available in the Mac app store... but are essentially crippled because they don't support multiplayer with the regular version of the game. And even though I bought the game, I would have to pay for it again to get the App Store version. Which, I wouldn't do, because I like actually being able to play multiplayer games with my friends who bought it like everybody else (through Steam).

There will soon be a day

[Fly Ricky - The Wine]

When you cannot run anything on anything unless it's been vetted by a corporation first. That's the real issue here. There will not be a market of alternate devices that are able to run unvetted applications. Whether Apple is particularly dickish in their take on this inevitable future, is a minor point.

Arbitrary?

[glennrrr]

I'd hardly call the dropping of PPC emulation arbitrary. It took up a large amount of engineering resources, presumably, and encouraged developers to procrastinate before dusting off the source code and releasing a new Intel binary.

Re: Arbitrary?

[mod50ack]

The company that provided Rosetta was sold to IBM. They stopped licensing Rosetta. Look up QuickTransit.

Re:Arbitrary?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Dropping PPC on OS X meant when I installed snow leopard I gained like a gig of disk back.

I'm sad I can't Starcraft 1 anymore but whatever

Re:Arbitrary?

[fyngyrz]

I'm not talking about games, though even then, any money you invest in the system that the company decides to throw in the trash is something I'm sensitive to.

And as for that GIG... you *are* aware there are multi-terabyte drives now, right? Right?

Re:Arbitrary?

[Gr8Apes]

What? You can get a 8 or 12 TB setup for less than $1200, all packaged up for you IIRC.

Re:Arbitrary?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

if it was anything i needed for work, I wouldn't have upgraded it. Or I'd run it in a VM.

You do realize A) this was *5* years ago(and I was on an 80 gig disk because fuck it didn't want to upgrade at the time). B) It was a joke of installing an OS and it taking up negative megabytes? I mean it actually happened, but the OS took up negative 1 gig. Actually might be 3 or 4 now that I think about it. But still. When was the last time you installed anything and got disk back?

Re:Arbitrary?

[fyngyrz]

I guess I just don't see disk space as something to care about WRT scarcity at all. That could definitely be just me - I'm not at all fond of video, although I am of audio recordings and still photos - the amount of available disk space rendered my actual concerns completely irrelevant when drives shot past 20 gigabytes or so. I just don't own that much music, a few hundred CDs at most, and even taking 20 MP DSLR images and editing them losslessly hasn't made much of a dent in my current 1 TB drive. And should it... 1 TB isn't anything these days.

Heck, my silly little Raspberry pi has 32 GB of storage, lol. A $39 linux machine with 32 GB, GPU, 512MB, HDMI, 4 USB, Ethernet... [shakes head] ...I paid crazy money for my first 4k RAM board... and hundreds more for the "privilege" of semi-reliably storing my work on cassette tape (SWTPC AC-30 ftw. Still have that thing. Also the 4K RAM board, and the machine it went in, lol -- and it still works!)

So I apologize for missing your joke. I thought you were presenting it as a legitimate reason to drop PPC support, which of course it is not. So mea culpa. :)

Re:Arbitrary?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

The real legitimate reason to drop PPC support is if the supporting software sucks. There might be more to the Rosetta story than we know.

Re:Apple has zero understanding or care of enterpr

[nine-times]

they are manifestly unsuited to it.

I wouldn't necessarily go that far. I support both professionally, and there are certainly things about Windows that are easier. For example, Windows domains provide a lot of great tools. Microsoft Office is much better on Windows than on Macs.

But then there are some ways in which I've generally found easier on Macs than on PCs. They're all unixy, really. They come from the factory supporting php, perl, ruby, and bash. Imaging Macs isn't much harder than copying the contents of a bootable disk, and then running a command to make the disk bootable. There's no activation to for Apple's OS or apps. Many of the application install/uninstall consists of drag-and-drop (or just using a script to copy a directory in place). A lot of the configuration is stored in text files. The support is generally pretty damned good. And there *are* actually administrative tools that work pretty well, once you dig into it.

It is NOT hard to find quality apps.

[Petersko]

You just need to start with a need and a purpose, rather than blindly scanning the horizon for some reason to justify the cost of your phone.

I need an for X reason... I google "best app for X of 2014", pick a reasonable site, and usually I do just fine.

Seriously? You just browse categories at random?

What the App Store needs

[GrahamCox]

I sell an app through the Mac app store. It's been fairly successful - certainly in terms of volume we would have struggled to match it if we'd only stuck with our own website as the sole means for a new customer to acquire the app. When Apple have helped us with promotion, we've seen sales skyrocket, at least for as long as they deign to put us on the front page or whatever.

But now we have an almost completely new version 2.0 ready to go, and the App Store has no provision for paid-for updates (all of our version 1 updates were free). Therefore we have to submit it as a brand-new product, which is really dumb, because it means all of our installed base of 1.0 users won't automatically get a notification that there is an update, and we can't build on any of our existing materials in the app store other than adding text to say "there's a new version over there". We have to start over from scratch, and it's a real cause for concern.

We can't offer quantity or educational discounts through the App Store either, which we've been frequently asked about.

I've also been on the receiving end of the sorts of developer-hostile treatment others have reported here, though on the whole it has been a mostly positive experience. The enforced sandboxing was exceedingly painful, and I definitely wouldn't want to go through that again, but having done it, it's an issue easily forgotten about. Apple eventually (in 10.9) included frameworks for getting media from other (i)apps which was the main thing we lost in the sandboxing, needing a hideous workaround.

What's annoying is that many of the issues pointed out in TFA are real, and have been a problem for a long time. Apple appear to have no interest in improving the store or canvassing developers about how it should evolve. The store staff appear to be a lawless disconnected bunch that don't seem to talk to other parts of the company, and seem arrogant and capricious. That may not be the case, but that's how it appears and so it's a problem they ought to be addressing.

Re:Apple has zero understanding or care of enterpr

[jbolden]

That's why Apple has brought in IBM. IBM is supporting Apple in the enterprise.

Re:Developer unhappiness or Marketshare loss?

[whereiswaldo]

In addition, I've wasted too much time on crippled versions of apps, like graphics editing programs that don't let you save to disk in the "lite" version. Should be called the "does nothing useful" version.

Re:Developer unhappiness or Marketshare loss?

[aaarrrgggh]

AutoCAD LT is $800.
I think Omni Group had something on there for $140 a while back.
Generally speaking I don't have a need for many $5 apps on my Mac; if that is all it is worth I can use a spreadsheet or something for the functionality. The impulse buys just aren't there.

It's improved.

[jpellino]

Managed distribution has made this much better than the original VPP model. Yes, it was initially a mess. Second iteration was a little better. Things work well now but there is dome deep diving to be done. You'll likely want a 3rd party for MDM (Casper, etc.)

Save your ire for iOS

[iamacat]

On Mac, Apple's Mac Store is just one of the choices. As such, requiring sandboxing is a defensible position. They are basically saying that they guarantee maximum amount of damage that can be done by certain category of apps. If yours requires full root access and installs device drivers, this doesn't make it a bad app. It just can not be effectively reviewed and determined safe in a realistic amount of time.

What most developers are missing is general shift to mobile, freemium model and need for creative advertising to stand out. In most cases, it makes sense to have an iOS/Android/Web app before a Mac app (and I trust you know Windows still has a higher market share). Users should also be able to find your app useful at free level before being expected to spend money.

Then, if you can explain to users why extra functionality can not be achieved on mobile or web, you will have no problem having them find you on Mac App Store or any alternative store like Amazon. Microsoft Office, Adobe products and many other big names are not on Mac App Store. They do fine.

Re:Developer unhappiness or Marketshare loss?

[iamacat]

Four smart guys who are not $450 short each?

No, I really don't need to get a hackintosh.

[ciroknight]

> You really need to get a hackintosh

No I don't. I either need Apple to get its head out of its ass, or to vote with my dollars and buy something I'd actually use. Going out of my way to support Apple's OS, which they barely support on their own hardware, and to circumvent their random SMC half-assed secure boot nonsense is doing extra work that I don't need to be doing.

But even still, Apple's never going to learn that lesson because Apple doesn't sell PCs anymore. They sell shitty appliances that break and go out of date every year, because they know you'll just keep coming back to them for more.

Re:No, I really don't need to get a hackintosh.

[tibit]

circumvent their random SMC half-assed secure boot nonsense

I have no clue what you're talking about. Seriously.

Your ramblings can be rephrased as: I've got an Intel Core I machine and I bitch that they don't support it anymore. Sell it. Get a Core II macbook or imac, anything from 2008 will give you wonderful performance. If you give yourself a month or two to look around, you'll find a good one for around $200. Stop bitching. Seriously. You expect them to bend over backwards to support hardware that was essentially transitional, that was made back in 2006. Geez. I'm a cheapskate when it comes to Apple hardware, I get most of their Macs used, and even I don't complain that much. A $200 used Mac with about $100-$150 in upgrades will perform quite admirably.

Security vs. free market

[Rick in China]

This is a common discussion when using other tangents - like government control vs. individual freedoms...and this is the crux of the discussion at hand.

On one hand, we have claims of "Forced sandboxing kills many applications" -- to which the comparison of the Android market vs. the App Store has metrics which show the benefits vs. risks (how many app store apps have propagated major malware?), on the other we have claims of preferring security and legitimacy over copies and extremely poorly written malware ridden apps? Personally, from a customer perspective, I'd like to think what I download onto my PC (or phone) has been vetted and behaves in a relatively secure way over simply rolling the dice, and I think the complaint in the topic above has a lot to do with being unable to write a program with true consumer value that meets coding standards. To that, I say, OP, cry more, cupcake..or come up with something original and learn to code.

Apprenticeships

[tepples]

Casual developers are what serious deelopers come from.

In that respect, you appear to disagree with certain fanboys on Slashdot who tell me that serious developers come from apprenticeships with established development companies.

To which channel are more apps exclusive?

[tepples]

You say 49 percent or fewer of apps are available through both channels. Of the remaining 51 percent or more, are more exclusive to the Mac App Store or to direct download?