Reasons not to like the Mac App Store
 

I'll come back to submit my full list when I've got more time. Until then, you guys (and gals?) are encouraged to post your own thoughts here.

Mostly that it is country specific. It is just plain stupid especially because it's due to copyright issues. Entertainment industry is like a cancer that needs cure still.
I never buy music or video from Apple Store, but need some apps here and there. I can not legally use even free apps because of that. There are workarounds that go against EULA, but so what - I have paid for these!

Okay, here are the first four:

1) If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

There is currently a really interesting ecosystem of developer websites which were set up to sell apps, and to disseminate information about those apps. They are all unique and have their own personality. This will go away once the Mac App Store gains momentum. Who is going to spend the time and money to maintain and update something like that when they can just hop on the Apple's bandwagon?

2) Apple will choose which payment methods customers will be allowed to use.

Used to sending cash payments to the developer in an envelope? Want to use your less popular online bank? Sure, you can still pay that way… as long as Apple says you can. Don't have a U.S. credit card? Tough luck. Don't want to open an account with Apple's banking partners? Tough luck. You won't be getting access to Mac apps that were available just days or weeks before.

3) Content will be censored.

This probably needs no explanation. Many people have been following Apple's censorship of the iOS App Store. I think it's natural that Apple will continue the same behavior with the Mac App Store. Not a good thing in my opinion, and it hasn't been necessary up to now with Mac OS apps, so why start?

4) Apple will pressure developers.

Devs seeking entry into the almighty Mac App Store will be pressured by Apple to sign more restrictive contractual agreements which put Apple at an advantage, and devs at a disadvantage. For example, there are many Mac developers, even today, who keep their apps compatible with older operating systems such as Tiger, or even Panther.

I foresee Apple forcing all devs to drop support for older operating systems and only allow their apps to run on newer operating systems. Why? This forces folks running older hardware, with older operating systems, to upgrade by giving Apple more money for new hardware.

More to come… later.

I'm not sure I follow a lot of these arguments.

You pay cash for software by post? Really?

Apple will only allow payment from "its banking partners"?? What, you can only have buy apps if you have a bank account with a particular bank? Is that true?
Apple wants your money. Surely they don't care where you hold it.

The one difference between this and the iPhone/iPad store is that it is ONE of a number of methods to distribute software. If a developer doesn't like Apple's terms, they can sell from their own website.

I've not followed it closely. Does anyone know if the terms mean that developers can't also sell the app outside the store?

Trying to do direct payments from your bank online is pretty much impossible because banks are never all in the same network. I cannot even direct pay my bills to all my utility companies because my bank is not on their network.

However, I can use my bank issues visa card to pay for my bills and the payment goes through the Visa network.

Is that really the state of banking in the US...? I'm shocked.

Yeah because in the US everyone charges for everything. If your bank wants to get hooked up with the utility companies they gotta pay for that service, it is not free. Then each utility company is a local company but owned by a parent company. For example, I live in Kansas City, MO. We are a bi-state city. Missouri Gas Energy is our local gas company, however they are actually owned by some parent company and their head quarters resides in Texas or Arkansas or something. So their main bank is not in my state. The Kansas side as their own energy company which is also owned by another parent company and their HQ resides somewhere else as well.

If your company wants to use credit cards, those credit card companies get a piece on every transaction. Just remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

To bypass all of this banks who offer online bill pay, usually just mail a check for you on the desired date.

In the UK, I can make an payment to any other UK bank with no charge.
Cash machines used to be in networks years ago, but now they are all free (except for "third-party" ones in shops which charge you). So I can use any bank's card in any bank's machine.

Normally, you don't get charged for general usage unless you are overdrawn.

Most ATM machines are privately owned here in the USA and that ATM fee a lot of times goes into the pocket of an individual and not a bank. Though banks have definitely deployed their own as well.

My main reason…

Some apps just can't get installed, and there is no good reason provided - and no suggestions on how to resolve the problem. Alfred and Whiteboard just wouldn't install themselves.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5245/...6b39617023.jpg

(Running an i686 Intel iMac from 2006)

Oh cool... a new version of TextWrangler (3.5) released for the App Store launch(?), and still free. What a great app!

Sorry, you were saying "oh woe is us" or something?
Pray continue.

--

EDIT: Hmm, interesting. It auto-installed right in place (over my existing TextWrangler 3.1 app). I prefer having the dmg to open/install on my other Macs and/or partitions. But i can certainly see where non-power users will be attracted to the simplicity of this approach.

Finding new apps is hard for the average user. Upgrades are hard all around. There's plenty about the current system that is broken. The Mac App Store (MAS) might not be perfect, but it solves several problems for many users.
I also don't see this as killing 3rd party sites. There are plenty of developers who don't care to use the store, aren't accepted, or aren't in the scope of the store.

Just like the iOS Store you'll be able to use gift cards, which can be bought with cash.
If a developer actually accepted cash through the mail, they probably still will.

Content in the MAS will be "censored". Some apps simply don't fit the target of the MAS (system modifications, etc.) and others will be rejected for Apple's moral compass. Apps that aren't accepted will be sold elsewhere. Some will take the existing models, others will go with 3rd party systems like Bodega.

I seriously doubt Apple will pressure developers to abandon support for older systems. More likely is that developers will drop support for older systems that aren't worth their time to support. I will note that Apple doesn't accept bundles which include PPC binaries, but the MAS is only supported on 10.6 which doesn't run on PPC anyway. And this existing restriction doesn't hamper developers from offering PPC apps through their own channels.


My criticisms of the store:

1) Migration to the MAS
It sure would be nice if Apple offered an upgrade path for users who already own apps. A user could submit a receipt or serial number, and optional upgrade fee, to the app developer, who could then issue a promotion code with which to purchase the program from the MAS.
I have a feeling though, that Apple's plan is for developers to lower their prices and charge the full price for each major upgrade. In the end, I think I'm fine with this.

2) Needs Auto-updates
The killer feature for me would be if there was a setting to automatically upgrade apps when they aren't being used. And prompt to upgrade if the app has been out of date for some period of time. I can understand not wanting to do this with iOS devices where the bandwidth and CPU activity may be unexpected, but on desktops and laptops it's a no brainer.


The real complaints will come, I think, from conflicts with the App Store terms and submission guidelines.

Who needs the DMG when you can install and update right from the App Store? Fire up the "Purchases" section of the store and install your purchased apps on other machines at no charge.

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this post!

My list, continued:

5) This is the true Apple tax.

If it wasn't broken, then why has Apple gone out of their way to fix it? They want to create a giant venue for the sale of Mac apps. Venue is contained within the word revenue, and the word revenue is contained within IRS. Apple sees a revenue stream in the sale of Mac apps, just like with music and movies, and they are going to tax these sales no matter the cost to the existing Mac community. (I don't mind them taking a cut, but I do mind them shaking up something that is already working to get it.)

6) Organization and search problems will follow.

Remember how bad the iOS App Store was when it first opened? It was really difficult to find what I was looking for, and browsing was like wading through a flooded supermarket. It was poorly executed at the UI level, and the few times I've checked back since it opened, I haven't seen much improvement.

The Mac downloads page on Apple's website was nearly perfect two or three years ago, then Apple decided to "fix" it, and it's never been the same since. I sometimes can't even find apps which I know are there. The search function has been decimated, and recently, many downloads have been moved to the support section. Search and IU are supposed to be among Apple's strong suits, but for some reason, they just can't seem to get application search and organization right… recently.

You need to add another .6 to that.

Did you note that, just a few weeks ago, Apple was able to pressure the major record labels into agreeing to 90 second song previews on the iTMS? This is the trend with Apple nowadays. If you want to be in our store, you must agree to our terms. If your contract is coming up for renewal, and you don't want to be kicked out of our store, you must agree to our new terms!

Apple's contractual terms tend to change from contract expiration to contract renewal. While your scenario may not be happening now, you might see it happening a year from now. When the Mac App Store has gained more popularity, and most users go there first to find apps, you'll likely see Apple's terms becoming bolder and more restrictive.

Glad you brought this up! This is almost off topic, but I foresee that Apple's long-term plan with Mac OS will be to merge it with iOS. The most important facet of that being that all users will be denied access to the file system, and have only the most basic of admin privileges. The obfuscation of the installation process by the Mac App Store is a good indicator of things to come.

Yes, I think that's mostly accurate. iOS apps have always been sold on the App Store since day one, with the possible exception of those that were made to run on hacked iOS devices. I think those were being sold even before the iOS App Store opened.

By contrast, there was already a vibrant, healthy, distribution system for Mac apps which Apple has seen fit to shatter.

I have, in the past, paid for things by mailing cash, or a bank draft, cashier's checks, etc. directly to the vendor. Developers who sell their own software have been far more flexible with accepted payment methods than Apple has been, in my experience. Living overseas, it's not always possible to satisfy Apple's required payment methods.

Ever since the Mac came out Jobs' vision has been the computer as an appliance. At the Mac introduction in 1984: "The Mac is a desk appliance, the first since the telephone."

Like it or not (and I don't much), that's the direction Apple is heading with all of it's platforms. In Jobs' view, the less the user has to get under the hood the better. He's betting that's what consumers want. I think he's right.

Explain how this is compatible with Apple making efforts to get OS X Certified as Unix?
It is true that for most activities, users don't need to muck about with the System. You don't need an admin account for moving documents around, running apps, even writing AppleScripts, Services and Actions.

Apple certainly makes it UNNECESSARY to get involved in the Unix under-pinnings of the system, but I don't think they are going to prevent people from working with that.
The CLI is very powerful, but having to remember all the flags and whatnot is quite tedious, and if you can get the same result from a menu, then why not use that?

Computer languages are intermediaries between the machine and humans. Modern computers are so powerful that if I can get the same result by speaking "Computer, override!", rather than typing "clr_file -xdf $perms" or whatever, then I'll go for the most high-level method. And that's what Apple is all about.

I don't see high-level abstraction as a threat, but a boon.

7) Apple becomes the web host.

I don't know if the Mac App Store is going to put any third-party web hosts out of business immediately, but the cumulative effect of the mass migration to Apple's servers will surely be felt among web hosting vendors.

• Sites like Macupdate and Versiontracker will become shadows of their former selves.

• If Apple's servers go down, nobody gets access to any Mac apps until services are restored.

• If Apple decides to blacklist a user, that user will have few alternatives to turn to.

• Again, Apple will decide how users will pay for apps. If you can't, or don't want to, conform to those methods, you will be SOL.

• If you don't have the right IP address, you'll be denied, even if all other conditions are met: "We're very sorry, the application that is in your shopping cart is not available in your country. Please visit the App Store in your country (which either doesn't exist, or has only twelve apps)."

• If Apple's servers are maliciously attacked, all purchasing info and licenses could be wiped out in one fell swoop. This would be far less likely to happen in the current system where you have most apps spread out over dozens, or maybe even hundreds of servers.

I think that, sometime in the very near future, Apple intends to lock Mac users out of the file system, exactly like they have done on iOS.

Is iOS not also based on UNIX?

When you get to my age you start to see the value of a rule-driven outlook.
One of my better rules is if a person gives you multiple reasons for something they are usually concealing the real reason. The given reasons are simply justifications for their position.
Some people call this rule business wisdom; I would make no such claim.

I agree. The longer I can avoid cracking open the case (or diving into Terminal) the better.
The more effective the facade is at shielding me from the reality of computing the more I like it.
Although, I don't regard the device as mine, really, until I've actually "got under the hood". My G5 DP is mine, the Macbook and the iPod Touch aren't... yet.
Otherwise we might as well go back to bit-switches and LEDs. Oh, no... not again!

Hmm, there may be something in what you're saying.
Smultron seems to have been resurrected from retirement:

SourceForge 2009

As of 2009-07-06 0:00:00 UTC, this project is no longer under active development.

Smultron is a text editor written in Cocoa for Mac OS X Leopard 10.5 which is designed to be both easy to use and powerful.

At that point, another author took over from Peter Borg and released an app called "Fraise".


Yet today...
MacUpdate 2011

WHAT'S NEW
Version 3.8:
Smultron is only available via the Mac App Store. 'Download Now' will launch the app's page in the App Store (requires the Mac App Store to be installed on your Mac).

I prefer options... like not being forced to be online at all times for example. App Store is fine if it's an option.

To me, a good installer will tell you the names and locations of all files that were installed during that session, then save that list separately, in an easy to find location. That way, the user doesn't have to rely on maybe being offered an uninstaller which probably deletes only a few of the most visible files.

In renaultssoftware's case, it would have been nice if the installer itemized which files couldn't be installed.

Does the Mac App Store do anything like this? I'm asking because I don't know. I see no need to progress beyond 10.6.5 yet.

I feel the same way exactly.

So many software companies these days expect users to have 24 hour internet connections. Steam is just one example of a company with this mindset. I keep an archive of the most recent software .dmg files on my local drive just in case internet connectivity goes down, and it does go down. With Steam that's not possible, they refuse end-users access to those kinds of files. You must be connected to the 'net if you want to download, or update, or register a game. No internet connection? Too bad.

This is relevant to the Mac App Store because Steam may have been among the models that Apple looked at when they were designing it. Actually, this is such an important point that I'm going to make it number eight on my list.

8) Apple will expect users to keep an internet connection.

Good find Hal. If you run across anything else like that, please post back here. I imagine it will be a more common occurrence as time goes by, but for now, it's still kind of shocking.

http://gizmodo.com/5727080/mac-app-s...ked-for-piracy

Well the app store has been hacked

That is shoddy reporting. The store has not been hacked.

I see that VLC has been pulled from the iOS app store over the differences between the GPL and Apple terms of service. In other words the contract between author and user has been breached by the distributor. Not a good sign; especially when the closed design of the device prevents direct dealing between author and user.

At least with OSX we still have a choice...

Wow, that really made me stop and ponder the ramifications.
Do you think that VLC's developers will simply re-write the EULA for the iOS App Store?

The VLC developers are bound by the GPL. They can't change the terms just for the app store.

What this essentially means is no open source software on the iOS app store.

Oddly, I bought an application on the Mac app store today that is openly based on the GPL command line tool GPSbabel.

Okay, I should have said "…simply draft a new EULA…".
Perhaps they can't change the terms of the GPL, but can they not discard it altogether and make up something new?

I don't think so because their iOS VLC is based on the broader open source Video LAN Client project. They are bound by the GPL.

Like many I believe the App Store will be good for Users who have a simple end effective way to Add, Remove, and find software.

It has been somewhat of an issue that there was a strict dependency on developers to provide un-installers which many did not. And even those that did meant users had to keep track of the un-installers.

And It is not true to say that no Apps caused problems.

I see where you are coming from, and I agree that those are nice things to have, but for me, the few benefits to users are greatly outweighed by all of the negatives.

I have used Mac intensively for years now, and sporadically for many years before that. I still struggle with finding apps, but the struggle has nothing to do with where the apps are located. The trouble lies in defining what kind of app I really need, then proactively searching for one that fills that void. Consolidating every Mac app in the universe into a single store will not fix this issue, and generally speaking, when I define what sort of app I need, a simple search (engine) will lead me right to it.

I also sometimes enjoy getting app suggestions from places like Mac Gems, MacUpdate, or even those MacHeist bundles.

You know, a developer's website speaks volumes about the application(s) that they are offering. By putting all those apps into a single location and homogenizing the presentation, Apple is really putting buyers at a disadvantage. Gone is all the uniqueness and subtle nuance that helps customers to make purchasing decisions when browsing a dev's website.

Developers Web Sites
 

The Developers Web sites will not roll up and disappear. Plenty of IOS Apps have Websites. The only difference is the method of obtaining the App. And in the case of Mac App Store there is still a choice of how to distribute, though some suspect that some day that choice might disappear. That is not something that can be divined at the moment.

I personally think that over time most developers will choose to live in the App store. Non App Store purchases will become something more like on Jail Broken phones with out the Jail Breaking.

It will really be a matter of supply and demand.

That's basically how I envision it too.

Many iOS apps have websites because the developer also makes Mac apps. If the developer also migrates his/her Mac apps to Apple's store, their entire site will likely be left to rot.

You could say the same about supermarkets vs. high-street shops.

It appears that over one million downloads were made on the first day. But then popularity is no judge of anything. Look at democracy!!:D

From what i understand of that little soap opera, it's not as if the entire VLC development team is up in arms... but rather one particular programmer —who just happens to work for Nokia, and whose contribution to the VLC project may only amount to a few lines of code.

So while he's picking nits about the wording of the EULA, the eventual result of his action would actually do more harm than good (in terms of limiting end users' enjoyment of VLC). Also, i think one of the complaints had to do with Apple limiting stuff to 5 devices... but "stuff" in that case refers to purchased music not apps. And anyway, i believe that limit of 5 "devices" applies to computers... not iToys. (if someone owns 2 iPhones, 5 iPods and 10 iPads... then whatever they get from the iTunes Media Store could be placed on all 17 of those devices).

It's one of the oldest tricks in the book. You give something out for free to entice new customers and to get them in the habit of buying from you. Apple made sure that there were freebies and heavily discounted apps in the store at launch. I wonder what percentage of that 1 million downloads was the free Twitter app.

Oh yes, and this little cosmetic issue.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5045/...e9cd1ff8_m.jpg

Picky, picky, and nothing major. It just bugs me, y'know?

What about it bugs you, exactly?

The slightly different shade of blue, the white A instead of black, or something else that I'm not seeing?

Well, both points above. I know it's nothing major, but still.

Well the whole app store thing on OS X is sort of moot if it does not get approved. I can still go to VLC's site and download and install the app itself if I like. It not being on the app store makes no difference to me.

Though it will affect iOS devices since all their apps must be installed via iTunes or the app store unless you jail break it.

Web sites do not cost much
 

Web sites do not cost much and drive loyalty. I seriously doubt that developers will drop them.

Of course Developers won't drop websites. It's the best way to describe and talk about their work. They can post much more detail than they can on the App Store. Perhaps some have not noticed that the App Store has a clickable link to the developer's site. The store is just a store. Just because I might buy a product at Walmart, doesn't mean it's not available by other means.

Here's a readable explanation of the controversy:

VLC app removed from App Store

and one with a bit more detail:

No GPL Apps for Apple's App Store

It's definitely broken. Compared to iOS development, Mac OS X development is stagnant and unpopular.

The websites are only interesting to people who enjoy shopping for software as an end in itself. For those who want to purchase and use the software as quickly as possible, they are tedious and disorienting.

I'm not saying that the App store is perfect, but it's easy to see why Apple did this.

many reasons
 

Many reasons to visit a web site. Shopping. Company polices. Bug Reporting. Tips on how to do things. Every person has a different reason. For many though the App store will be the beginning and end.

Well, though it lacked details (like the dude's name perhaps), I thought my summary was quite "readable". ;) It seems to boil down to some Nokia tool from Finland trying to make a name for himself. I guess the hatred of Apple in general (and Steve Jobs in particular) runs pretty high over there.

Hopefully, VLC's usefulness will be short-lived. (I only use it for playing Flash vids myself).

I love VLC. It runs on every platform and plays every piece of media out of the box with no extra codecs. I run it on my Mac, my Windows box and my Linux box.

There shouldn't exist so many varieties of media. That's the source of the problem, and that's what needs fixing. VLC shouldn't be necessary. Yeah, I like it too... big deal.

Off topic, but I don't think that will ever happen, at least not for a long time. MS adopts XML in the latest version of Office, but it is their version of XML. Abode gets flak from Apple about flash and yet I don't see HTML 5 kicking flash out of the market.

Then you have the anti-piracy crowd that want to out proprietary DRM formats. Heck, I sometimes still find companies that put things out in real player media format....that just boggles my mind.

My point about it not being on the App store for Macs is not that big of a deal as you can still download it yourself. In fact, I am not sure if I would even just download an app form the app store personally without going to the home page of the app to read more about it. At that point I'd just download it from the developer's site.

For me AppStore is like a Police Station. If you go there normally everything is friendly and cosy. But you know all the time that they have the power.

For me VLC on the iPad has been a real pleasure because it enables me to put XviD encoded videos on my iPad and view them whenever. It eliminates the time-consuming transcoding task necessitated by iTunes limited repertoire.

I wish I'd had some warning so I could get VLC.

What's stopping you? http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-macosx.html

[if you wanted warning about the iOS version, then you should hang out at MacRumors. They issued that warning over 3 months ago.]

Wait a second, wasn't he referring to VLC on iOS? You linked him to the Mac OS X downloads page. Here is the iOS version.

Thanks for the link. Unfortunately I can't figure out what to do next :confused:

Good point. I was browsing the App store yesterday and ran across an application (My Tracks) that does many things with GPS tracks, including cataloging them, geotagging photos, displaying tracks on a variety of maps, etc. But, I wasn't sure if it was something that I really wanted.

I followed the link to the developer's web site where you can download a 30 day trial version. I tried and liked it. I will probably buy direct from the developer rather than from the App store, even though I probably never would have found it without the App store.

After downloading it you probably need to jailbreak your device, or buy an iOS Developer Account.

Given that he hasn't mentioned iOS or iPad once in this entire thread (which is entitled Mac App Store btw), and given that his last utterance was to complain about the about the icon of all things (again Mac OS), and given that the iOS situation was highly publicized back in Nov:

Ars Technica
Engadget <--note carefully the date & title of that article--
MacRumors <--note carefully the date & title of that thread--

and perhaps much earlier even:
FSF

(all of which would have served as sufficient "warning") -- so,
perhaps my assumption/confusion was not too unreasonable.

:p

Until just now, I was not aware that you must be 13 years of age, or older, to use the Mac App Store.

An interesting statement given the quantity and quality of Mac OS X applications. Do you have any numbers to back up this wild statement?

Seconded. I've been following this for a while now, and I've sort of got the feeling that Mac OS X development has been growing in popularity and momentum since the PowerPC to Intel switch.

Then again, mclbruce did say "compared to iOS development". Comparatively, maybe you have a point, but I'd say that iOS apps tend to be focused on being "first to market" instead of delivering a quality experience, whereas Mac apps generally tend to be just the opposite. You rarely find a Mac application that looks as if it has been thrown together in a couple of hours. iOS developers, a few of them, openly brag about how little time they spent on development.

Another way to look at it would be: "get rich quick" vs. "take your time and do it right".

I have not yet been into the store because I do not want to upgrade to 10.6.6 just to gain access to it. It makes perfect sense that Apple would include those external links while the MAS is still in its infancy. Apple knows that all eyes are on them now, and they have to live up to the high standards that MacUpdate and VersionTracker set. I think it also makes perfect sense that those links will disappear after the Mac App Store has gained popularity, and its competitors are no longer a threat.

The iOS App Store has been around for quite some time and the links to developer sites are still there.

Close one! I turned 14 just before the Mac App Store opened.

And for VLC, I didn't see anything on Macworld. There was (under-publicized) warning, that I missed.

Many of your objections seem to be based on your own predictions of things that you know Apple "will" do in the future. I'm not convinced by the certainty of what you claim will happen. The one thing you can predict is that predictions are rarely accurate.

As I said before, the MAS is perhaps analogous to a supermarket. Yes, there may be less choice in where you do your shopping and lack individuality, but there are many conveniences and benefits for the end user. If you have more "niche" needs, then you may well prefer to do your business direct with smaller individual outfits.

It may be the end of an era in the way that most people get their software -- with Windows set to introduce their own store; and there may even be a Linux equivalent of a "store" from where apps are centrally downloaded and updates notified. ("I remember the days when you had to go to individual websites to get apps...)

It's hardly the end of democracy as we know it. It's a shop. :D:D

I'm very late to the party here (perhaps a relief to you all?), but while I agree that predictions of Apple's future behavior with respect to the store are iffy at best, I agree with the "tone" of BKK's objections: that a free market in Mac Apps is about to become less free; that Apple will exert more control of what we can buy for our machines.

Wikipedia is a good place to start for iOS info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_store#Milestones

One source, often repeated in web searches, says that there are 43,000 iOS developers.

http://www.edibleapple.com/number-of...id-developers/

Has OS X ever had 100,000 new apps published in 1 year? I don't have numbers on that, but I doubt it. Have there been 43,000 new OS X developers since the iOS app store started? I don't have numbers for that either.

While I disagree with the dire warnings this thread has spawned, it should be no surprise that Apple wants to exert more control over the entire experience.

The best way to give a consumer the best experience is to control it from beginning to end (a la Disneyworld, iOS, etc). The only question remains is, are you willing to give up that control? If not, and you believe you will NOT agree with Apple's Way, then it may time to investigate another platform.

Just remember, the grass is not always greener.....

My first Mac was a 512Ke purchased in 1986 that I later sold and upgraded to a Mac SE/30 in 1989. I still have that SE/30 in working order running Sys 7.5.5. A few weeks ago, I discovered that if I put an equally antique dumb Asanté 10base-T Ethernet hub between my Leopard machine and the SE/30, I could still file share with it. Can you imagine that I'll be "investigating another platform"? I'll just be less happy, not ready to switch.

Let's imagine a world where Apple's latest Mac has no Terminal app along with other restrictions.
1. Download the necessary Terminal apps, etc from the internet. (assuming that non-Apple websites still exist, also the ability to download files.)
Bingo. Control restored.

2. Restore whatever functions have been restricted by using Xcode. to roll your own.
Bingo. Control restored.

3. Unless Xcode has been crippled in some way to prevent this. Then use GNU tools.
Bingo. Control restored.

4. If all else fails, modify the disk from a Linux computer.
Bingo. Control restored.

I cannot see how Apple could "lock down" the Mac. It's a general purpose Unix computer. (iOs is Unix-based, but Not Unix.)

You can jailbreak the iPhone and iPad. Explain how it's going to be more difficult on a Mac.....?

I'd love to get a real command line on my iPad (without jail-breaking). I just know there are a ton of localizations and crap-filled cache files consuming space needlessly (which is more precious on the small "disk" sizes of such iDevices).

I would like to be able to explore the filesystem myself, on an iOS device.

In my personal experience with my jail broken iOS devices I own, you sort of toss the "it just works," out the window when you jail break it. Then loading non supported apps like Terminal (which I have) also don't work as well as you would hope they would. They run sluggish at times, and sometimes they crash for no reason.

My app that controls phone calls actually would not run once I jail broke my phone. I had to restore it and jail break it again. It works now, but I have had built in apps not function 100% when jail breaking.

The truth is, some of us are not in the demographic of the average consumer Apple is targeting. We want command line access and the ability to load home-brew apps/functions/scripts and any third party we wish with out it being approved via the App store. For most users, what Apple offers is great, because they don't want such things. However, for a few of us, we really want those things.

Yes, I agree. The OS X App store is just one more step along the path Apple and Jobs have always been on.

Well put. I'd say most of us. Right now Apple will trade a few disgruntled hacker/hobbyist/IT types for a lot more happy users.

OS X is not based on UNIX. Most people think it is, Apple says it is, but according to an interview I heard of Amit Singh, it's not. I believe him. He is one of the few independent (non Apple) people who has thoroughly studied OS X.

http://www.osxbook.com/

One point he made: What UNIX code is executing when you use Core Video? Another point: Microsoft could add POSIX compliance to Windows if they wanted to, but that wouldn't make Windows "Unix based." It's a topic deserving of another thread.

The relevance to this thread is that sometimes Apple does things that make advanced users, hackers and hobbyists happy. When they switched from OS 9 to OS X they needed all the support they could get. Things are different now.

The GPL, the App Store, and you <- Note that this refers to the iOS App Store, not the Mac App Store, but the underlying principles are the same.

OS X is based on NeXT which is based on BSD. It has a Unix shell, and the kernel is based on BSD. Furthermore OS X is Unix 03 Certified, meaning it meets the standards of the 03 Single Unix Specification (SUS - not to be confused with Software Update Service/Server).

Is OS X GNU Unix? Nope. Is it HP Unix? Nope. Is it Solaris? Nope. It is Apple's version of Unix. However, it is still Unix.

Also, when you jail break your iOS device and install terminal, there is a full blown shell, and there is also launchd running. I didn't tinker with it too much but I was able to have launchd run a task and use launchctl to launch it.

Lower level things like Directory Services, is organized by the Berkley Database which is very commonly found in other forms of Unix/Linux.

I'd say you could argue that OS X is not Unix in the classical sense perhaps (due to all the tweaks that Apple does), but it is still Unix. Certified Unix to be exact.

"Mac OS X is now a fully certified UNIX operating system, conforming to both the Single UNIX Specification (SUSv3) and POSIX 1003.1."
A list of Unix brands conforming to the spec can be found here:
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/

If it walks like a duck.....

Except that the internet as we know it today did not exist when Jobs first set up shop. Digital download media stores have only been public for a few years. Tech and trends are changing rapidly, and I'd say that Job's vision, maybe even his ethics, has changed too.

Wow, is that actually in the pipeline? Microsoft shouldn't even bother with that one. Everything that they touch seems to turn to… whatever the opposite of gold is. Their own efforts to put together a music store (iTMS competitor) fell flat on its face. Hotmail, in my opinion, is atrocious. Don't even get me started on Windows Mobile.

I was actually thinking last night about how ironic it would be if Apple put together a PC Program Store, then made a ton of money off of Windows software sales. (It wouldn't be called "App Store" because they don't use that terminology in PC land, I think.)

Welcome to the party. There are two BKKs, at least, in these forums. The other one is GavinBKK.

I still maintain that the number one reason we were given the iOS App Store was that Apple could not pass up getting the commission from all of those millions / billions of transactions. That, and they had contractual agreements to uphold with AT&Crumpets. Based on the IU, design, and layout of the store at launch, giving customers the best experience seemed to be a lesser concern.

Well, it's all about convenience. If / when it progresses to that point, I don't want to have to go through any of those steps just to get back to square one, where I was before the MAS opened.

I don't own an iPhone today because I don't want to replace factory firmware and/or software with something that the hacking community has provided as a workaround. Doesn't seem like a safe and reliable course of action to me. Tlarkin's earlier post verifies that it's not a reliable approach.

The App Store is a mess.

I've received several emails from developers regarding their products and the App Store.

Some will sell some of their their applications exclusively via the App Store, some can't/won't use it at all and some will sell their products both ways.

My personal gripes are:

1) There's no "Download" button to try-before-you-buy, which surely is the whole basis of the shareware industry. (The "Downloads" section of Apple's website had this option).

2) Apple force you to sign up and give them your credit card details, even to download free Apps (just like the iTunes store).

3) Version numbers and prices vary between the App Store and developers sites.

So I won't be using the App Store in it's current form. I would rather support developers direct than Apple in this instance.

However, some "Buy" links on developers websites take you direct to the App Store so they will miss out on my purchase.

Or, looking at it another way: you will miss out on their app and its features.

I've found a few shortcomings in the App Store, and some things not handled as best they could be: but your response is not to buy an app if it uses the App Store, no matter how useful to you it might be?

That, as my grandmother would have said, is cutting your nose to spite your face.

Many paid-for apps have "Lite" free versions, so you can test the features. This is pretty much the same as shareware demo mode.

Giving your credit card details to a shop is now a hardship? Come on!

What contractual agreement led to the App Store?

Agreed, but this is fixable by either Apple or the designer (put a Lite version up on the store or offer the trial from their website).

No surprise here, is there?

Who cares about version numbers? As for pricing, if you want to buy it, buy it. If you don't, don't.

I hope you will let them know your reasons for not purchasing...otherwise how will they know?

benwiggy I respect your opinion but the thread title is "Reasons not to like the Mac App Store" and that's what I responded to.

I am the (prospective) customer and I have freedom of choice, however stupid that might be.

The "cutting off the nose" comment also applies in reverse to developers who sign up exclusively to the App Store (or any other exclusive outlet).

I doubt I am alone or I wouldn't be receiving emails from developers. They all say they've receive concerns over the App Store.

Another reason to not like the app store:

If I have an app installed already, the Mac App Store app won't upgrade it automatically when an update comes out.

This is an unfortunate issue, but it's a somewhat understandable limitation. The MAS shouldn't blindly upgrade your existing applications, what if the developer doesn't intend that version of a non-MAS purchase to be a free upgrade?

My solution would be to allow developers to issue promo codes for their apps. The developer can then handle their own upgrade path (discounted upgrade, free with existing registration, etc.). This doesn't need to be something that Apple gets involved in at all, aside from the promotional code infrastructure.

Yeah, but it's a little bit less great when purchased through the MAS. Did you read this?

"In BBEdit and TextWrangler, authenticated saves (the ability to save changes to files that you do not own) and the command-line tools are not available in the App Store versions, in order to comply with Apple’s submission guidelines… "

Hmm, I seem to recall that somebody in this thread suggested that Apple might try to lock users out of the file system, and also put pressure on developers to create alternate versions of their software to conform to Apple's desires.

…and this is only the third day it's been open!