111–120 of 454 posts
You still need to pay the $99 a year though, since you need an Apple Developer account to submit binaries to Apple for notarization (which is required to run them on Catalina.)
A paid Apple Developer account is not required to have binaries notarized.
Have you considered Setapp? They offer an App-store equivalent but all apps are included for a monthly fee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Apple taking 30% of that... for what? Payment processing is a 4% thing. It’s in the app developers interest to make it not have errors. It’s just for access to the market. That is the only value Apple truly brings, outside of the brand and a privacy commitment
Considering Microsoft cut their percentage take to 5% on the Microsoft Store [1], it shows that Apple is really charging 30% just because developers keep letting them get away with it. [1] https://download.cnet.com/news/microsoft-store-slashes-reven...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the past when I looked for a new app I went to the app store. But now since I'm on an older version of MacOS and very few app store apps run on any but the latest release of MacOS, I don't bother. I find the apps I need by googling. Edit: This implies there are a lot of great apps that don't get my money because they only sell on the app store. Looking at you Pixelmator.
This is very hard. Supporting API + UI changes is not easy. Microsoft is not doing it (Skype etc) so why should small teams do it. We don't just program we run BUSINESS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linux gaming? Seriously? Apple created THE smartphone. Every phone is an iPhone - Apple proved it and everyone else copied it. And Apple springboarded off their first-mover advantage into a platform that users really like, and keep coming back to.
Nah, maybe for US citzens. We were already using Symbian, Psion and PocketPC based phones. The first phone with hardware support for OpenGL ES was the Nokia N95 released in September 2006, one year before iPhone, with Asphalt as their show game.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The changes with the Save as dialog, how are they protecting the customer? It almost seems like they want to have creative control of the application, dictating how it should work. > often review rejected for text, images, random issues > random censorship of whatever Apple does not like
That’s a pretty disingenuous way to put it. Another phrasing could be “Apple enforcing their human interface guidelines”. To borrow a phrase: haters gonna hate.
Yes, I don't like closed platforms, I think the mac should be a platform for general computing and not turn into iOS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Painting this as "greed" is really quite ridiculous. Apple's 30% cut is completely orthogonal to their human review. The human review is to try and protect users and keep the app store a safe and trustworthy place to buy software. As with all human curation, there are problems, but on the whole it does keep the app store a remarkably safe place to acquire software. > I had high hopes for the future as a teen growing…
I remember when the App Stores first came online and everyone was fine to pay the 30% cut because before that, other retail channels were charging way more. Now the 30% is too much.
They kind of bury the lead here. They can't have their app on the appstore because: " While we still updated our applications in time, Apple did not review them for the AppStore, and instead rejected them first for a crash (sigh!), and later for requiring UI changes, including showing a Save As panel for each generated file. Now this may not sound like much, this is a serious issue for a document scan application whi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember when the App Stores first came online and everyone was fine to pay the 30% cut because before that, other retail channels were charging way more. Now the 30% is too much.
What? where? no one was charging fees for using channels because there were no channels other than direct marketing. (Unless you talking about actually selling a physical box in retail, which is completely different)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering Microsoft cut their percentage take to 5% on the Microsoft Store [1], it shows that Apple is really charging 30% just because developers keep letting them get away with it. [1] https://download.cnet.com/news/microsoft-store-slashes-reven...
That's because nobody uses the Microsoft Store.