Seriously? Do you remember what company this is? Apple does this every time and then corrects it down the road. Why? Because they receive more press that way. Come on guys, they are not stupid.
The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
91–100 of 249 posts
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#92The neckbeards will buy from the developer. The ordinary customers Apple has been relentlessly targeting for a decade will buy from the Mac App Store. Which group is bigger?
It's not about where we buy our apps, it's about where we sell them.
If the App Store doesn't work for developers, it won't work for users. The users can't buy stuff that isn't there just because they outnumber the developers.
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#93I have an incorrect understanding of the word sandbox in this context. So to clarify, what does the author of this blog mean by "the sandbox is restricted"?
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you tried purchasing the "latest" version of World of Warcraft? You can't. There is no standalone "latest version". You have to purchase the original, and each version since, and finally the current version. Correlate those game content / game mechanics updates with In-App Purchases, and it's clear how someone could offer "major upgrades" if they stop thinking in terms of version numbers and start thinking in te…
The problem is getting customers of version 1 onto version 2. There is no way to do this with MAS. I have a mechanism built into Shave so I can push "news", but it's annoying and bad user experience.
Why not a "fat" app? Always include two major versions in one binary, instead of putting the new features behind a paywall. Have an IAP purchase that just configures the app to run "Side B" from then on.
edit: no, I guess that does not work per below.
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shave actually looks pretty appealing to me on OS X. Does it support 60fps (unlike iMovie), and will it accept input formats other than the iPhone's? (Sorry if I missed the answers on your website: I browsed through and didn't find them, but that might be my fault.)
It supports anything that QuickTime can play, some formats better than others. But I use it to edit DiVX. Note, that it will always save a quicktime movie, even if you are editing an AVI or MPEG, but it won't re-encode, it just changes containers. Email me jon@interfacelab.com and I'll hook you up with the latest version that supports AVCHD. Edit: Does not support WMV, even with Flip4Mac.
I use Shave.. and thanks.
What are you gonna do about Perian shutting down?
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#96I'm pulling my video editor Shave ( http://shavevideo.com ) out of the Mac App Store for these reasons, though most specifically the lack of paid upgrades. For a $10 video editor that, quite frankly, beats the pants off a lot of crap out there for day to day editing tasks, I can't afford to devote the time and resources it requires to maintain it without it having a baseline level of income. Not having an upgrade pat…
The App Store sells millions of cookies. You eat the cookie. You don't upgrade the cookie.
You're absolutely right about the lack of upgrade path. Wonder how Apple will deal with this when their Keynote/Pages/Numbers sales taper off? At some point they'll want to refresh those designs and finance a fresh major version, and they'll want to charge for it.
I bet you'll see the paid upgrade features (or maintenance features) then.
One thing to realize is that the entitlement system is critically necessary and inevitable. It's really a case of taking the pain now, or taking it later. Might as well rip off that particular band-aid now. It won't get easier.
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#97Again, Apple doesn't really care what developers feel. What matters are the masses. Which don't care about these issues. The App Store is easy to use, accessible and allows them to download their apps on multiple Macs. It's a win win from their point of view.
Apple's thinking is simple: You (us developer) don't like it, PayPal is that way". Just that simple. And since The App Store is where most non-developer mac users get their apps from.. we have a simple choice.
Do I like it, hell no. Will I play by Apple's rules, yes.
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#98I'm going to put this comment here even though it doesn't belong because I wanted to make people aware and there's nowhere else to put it. Some HN moderator is censoring stories about Twitter being down, probably the biggest tech story of the morning.
First, this story was on the front page and it got killed https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4296416
Then this other story, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4296811, appeared briefly on the front page. But interestingly it wasn't killed it just doesn't show up on the front page.
If you scroll through the new story submissions you'll find a bunch of dead Twitter stories.
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#99The iOS App Store does the same thing with changing the rules in the middle of the game, but it is not subject to potential irrelevance because it is the only place to get software for iOS devices. So the obvious solution for Apple is to make the Mac App Store the only place to get software for MacOS. I'm actually a little surprised this didn't happen in 10.8.
That will be the day I go back to Linux.
I thought the same thing as I was reading John Siracusa's review of Mountain Lion. My stomach sunk when I saw the default 'gatekeeper' options.
[ ] Mac App Store
[x] Mac App store and identified developers
[ ] Anywhere
Re: The Mac App Store’s future of irrelevance
#100The iOS App Store does the same thing with changing the rules in the middle of the game, but it is not subject to potential irrelevance because it is the only place to get software for iOS devices. So the obvious solution for Apple is to make the Mac App Store the only place to get software for MacOS. I'm actually a little surprised this didn't happen in 10.8.
A few reasons why I think this will never happen: * Taking something away from someone that they've always had (as would be the case with OS X) is very different to never giving them it (as has been the case with iOS). * People are used to doing stuff that isn't possible with the current restrictions - with iOS they've only ever had those restrictions so they're not aware of what they might be missing out on. * Devel…
They'd need to make a "developer version" of OS X, which would just be OS X with this hypothetical super-Gatekeeper shut off. Then the whole thing just gets silly.
I believe the PC will remain a PC. Take away its nature and you might as well just hand everyone an iPad.