Mac App Store: Open for Business • Hacker News Board

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#191

Post by peregrine » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:18 PM UTC

anto1ne wrote: post #160

pstinnett wrote: post #37

There are a lot of apps that I'm surprised to not see in the store on launch day. Versions, Kaleidoscope, Skitch. I'd like to see a way for open source apps to show up here too, because I think managing my applications from the Mac App store will be nice.

Most of the apps I use are not there too, we'll have to wait a bit I guess. What about Chrome and Firefox. are they forbidden and they didn't bother submitting ?

Google is probably working on integrating its auto update to the new app store, similar to how they did it with Debian.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#192

Post by count » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:18 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #152

generalk wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow. Command+Q and AppNameMenu->Quit both disagree with you.

Have you tried to explain that to your mum?

Does it make a difference?

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#193

Post by retroafroman » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:18 PM UTC

rmc wrote: post #143

jonprins wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That never happens. Unless you start mucking around yourself.

I don't know why someone downmodded you, but this is almost entirely correct in my Linux experience. Most of the major distros (Debian and Fedora is where most of my experience is) get so many things right it's amazing that it's all volunteers. Only when you start compiling random things from source, adding in non standard software, closed source binaries, etc, is when dependency hell can really start.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#194

Post by philwelch » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:20 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #152

generalk wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow. Command+Q and AppNameMenu->Quit both disagree with you.

Have you tried to explain that to your mum?

My mother grasped the idea pretty easily, actually, but then again she always used Macs.

If it wasn't for Windows confusing people by conflating windows with applications, I suspect most people's mothers wouldn't have a problem with it.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#195

Post by J3L2404 » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:20 PM UTC

elvirs wrote: post #188

J3L2404 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that your point is factually wrong, which is why you tried to backtrack. You should have deleted your post while you had the chance.

how is it wrong? apple advertises the fact that they will let buyers 'even redownload' for free the app a customers bought earlier. what is so great about it to advertise? is not that normal? I dont like the fact that apple makes a normal thing sound like a favor it is doing to its customers. which part is wrong in it?

This part:

>its amazing how apple expected customers to pay for the same digital product over and over.

Or are you trying to pretend you didn't say that?

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#196

Post by Xuzz » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:21 PM UTC

achompas wrote: post #123

sfphotoarts wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to back thar up with some explanation. Having switched to iTunes long ago and use it daily without ever having problem I fail to see your point.

iDevice backups take forever and the iTunes Store is frustratingly slow to browse.

More to the point: neither of those belong as part of iTunes.

(Well, maybe the music store. But device management and syncing makes no sense.)

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#197

Post by philwelch » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:23 PM UTC

tommi wrote: post #144

powrtoch wrote: post #139

Disappointed to see Twitter among the most popular apps. For mobile devices the native-app-front-end-for-existing-websites was arguably necessary and beneficial, but for desktop clients it really feels like a big step back to start moving back out of the browser.

I highly disagree. Native apps can provide way more better integration to your desktop and therefore improve the user experience. E.g. showing a consistent (growl) popup for tweets is not possible as far as i know from the web version. And that's just a very simplified example.

(Off-topic rant)

Yes, because it's vitally fucking important to interrupt my workflow everytime there's a new "Shit My Dad Says". God, I hate Growl sometimes.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#198

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:24 PM UTC

elvirs wrote: post #188

J3L2404 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that your point is factually wrong, which is why you tried to backtrack. You should have deleted your post while you had the chance.

how is it wrong? apple advertises the fact that they will let buyers 'even redownload' for free the app a customers bought earlier. what is so great about it to advertise? is not that normal? I dont like the fact that apple makes a normal thing sound like a favor it is doing to its customers. which part is wrong in it?

[deleted]

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#199

Post by lawfulfalafel » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:25 PM UTC

sfphotoarts wrote: post #107

pclark wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Care to back thar up with some explanation. Having switched to iTunes long ago and use it daily without ever having problem I fail to see your point.

I like how you can't tell it to monitor other folders for new music.

Re: Mac App Store: Open for Business

#200

Post by elvirs » Thu, Jan 06, 2011, 6:29 PM UTC

J3L2404 wrote: post #195

elvirs wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is it wrong? apple advertises the fact that they will let buyers 'even redownload' for free the app a customers bought earlier. what is so great about it to advertise? is not that normal? I dont like the fact that apple makes a normal thing sound like a favor it is doing to its customers. which part is wrong in it?

This part: >its amazing how apple expected customers to pay for the same digital product over and over. Or are you trying to pretend you didn't say that?

I did say that, Pay attention to 'expectED', it is in past tense, what it means is apple used to expect people to pay for redownloads or not allow redownloads at all but now with introduction of this great new feature they are going to let you redownload or 'even redownload'. pay attention to how they said 'EVEN redownload', they are making an accent on the importance of this redownload thingy. i hope you got it now.