Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mac App Store: Open for Business

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 286 posts

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#81

Post by jonprins »

rlmw wrote: post #76
kleiba wrote: post #18

Is this like synaptic et al.? I mean, do you get updates automatically? That would be great! Also, a central packaging tool helps avoiding multiple installations of the same software, when dependencies can be tracked and resolved. If that is what this is: cool.

They don't do dependency tracking, but will notify you of updates. I don't think Mac developers believe in packaging libraries, since it requires the same version of the library for all programs. The preferred way to do things is statically compile all of your dependencies into your binary. This has the advantage that you can just drag your .app bundle around.

Which, considering disk space is cheap, is a better way to do it than getting stuck in apt dependency hell.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#82

Post by J3L2404 »

fwdbureau wrote: post #78

Call me old fashioned, but I fail to see how implementing a corporate middleman between developers and users can be a progress... OK, from a developer's stand point, this could be really beneficial (distribution, centralization etc), but as a user, it feels like seeing independent record stores about to be crushed by a shiny new Virgin Megastore. I can't help to hope this will be an immense failure

Absolute nonsense.

Users don't want to search through multiple websites, use paypal and drag icons into the application folder.

You will be disappointed - users will love this.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#83

Post by jncraton »

stcredzero wrote: post #74
Tichy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't close apps on the Mac either (you can, but it is only for experts). I guess no uninstalling is just the logical extension of that concept.

Actually, that's a pretty clever optimization for caching, IMO. The user tends to leave apps in memory, leading to much snappier performance on machines with sufficient RAM. EDIT: And if you're savvy, you can always manage memory manually and quit from the top menu or from the Dock.

If the OS is intelligent, the memory doesn't get overwritten until it is needed. Even if an app is completely closed and its process is killed, doesn't it's image still hang around in memory for the next time it is run?

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#84

Post by JBiserkov »

ceejayoz wrote: post #62
vokoda wrote: post #38

Anyone else feel like https://chrome.google.com/webstore makes this seem old-fashioned? Seriously who's going to be running software on their local machine a year from now (apart from hackers obviously).

Apple Remote Desktop, Aperture, etc. aren't going to run in the browser anytime soon.

There have been browser based remote desktop solutions for years now.

Microsoft Live Mesh and LogMeIn come to mind, but I'm sure there are others as well. They require some sort of plugin/Java/ActiveX/whatever, but hey so does video.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#85

Post by etherealG »

fwdbureau wrote: post #78

Call me old fashioned, but I fail to see how implementing a corporate middleman between developers and users can be a progress... OK, from a developer's stand point, this could be really beneficial (distribution, centralization etc), but as a user, it feels like seeing independent record stores about to be crushed by a shiny new Virgin Megastore. I can't help to hope this will be an immense failure

distribution already exists! it's called the internet. fire up a website, have a downloadable app, and you're done. I don't understand why people keep saying the same for "app stores" like iphone and android, and now osx too. why can't I just search for an app on a search engine, goto that apps website, download it and run/install it? how does this system benefit me as a user at all?

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#86

Post by ben1040 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #31

If you get an error 100 ( http://yfrog.com/h4b9kkp ) attempting to download any apps, clear /Library/Caches and ~/Library/Caches. Something to do with the Terms and Conditions acceptance not firing.

Clearing the cache directories was also not sufficient for me -- I had to clear the cache directories, then sign out from my Apple ID (within the app store) and back in.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#87

Post by baddox »

rimantas wrote: post #14
pclark wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iTunes is by far the worst Apple product in terms of software engineering

Maybe. Never had any problems with it, be it Windows (long time ago) or Mac (since 2004).

That has to be rare. For the brief period when I had an iPhone and was using it as my primary mp3 player, I had to use iTunes on Windows. This was from August to November of this year, and iTunes was almost completely unusable to play, manage, sync, or even view my music collection.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#89

Post by tvon »

ugh wrote: post #50

Arrrg! No way of uninstalling apps in one central location. Why, Apple, why? There is this nice list of installed apps, why doesn’t it have an uninstall button? It doesn’t make any sense. I guess you are expected to drag apps to the trash like before? That sucks.

I often wish Apple employed a few longtime linux users to point out certain glaring deficiencies (primarily in app/library management, and in how Spaces works).

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#90

Post by tftfmacedo »

jonprins wrote: post #81
rlmw wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't do dependency tracking, but will notify you of updates. I don't think Mac developers believe in packaging libraries, since it requires the same version of the library for all programs. The preferred way to do things is statically compile all of your dependencies into your binary. This has the advantage that you can just drag your .app bundle around.

Which, considering disk space is cheap, is a better way to do it than getting stuck in apt dependency hell.

It's also a security nightmare.
Post reply on HN