I only have a couple of apps from the App Store, which I'll archive before updating (and I'll clone more often) because of such concerns. That is less convenient - but it's a trade-off for the convenience of the App Store, about which I remain ambivalent.

And it is convenient, but there often a price for convenience. Too many are inattentive to the potential costs.

They make even more money by charging fees to merchants, particularly for transactions on rewards cards, which is why I stick to my old fashioned card; it's used judiciously and hasn't accrued interest or fees in years.

A topic for a different thread, but:

They are, if you can persuade Mom to turn on the computer. Mine refused to take her rarely used iMac with the troublesome display in for repair because "it was too much trouble" (it was still under warrantee :eek:). She also refused to pay the $29 ("too expensive") to upgrade to Snow Leopard. When it eventually became unusable, her friend gave her an older one running Jaguar. But over a month later it isn't even plugged in. I don't offer to help any more.

Another valid problem with the MAS. Updates are vetted by Apple. This introduces a delay in getting the new version out to your customers. More so than the iOS Store, I feel like this is emphasizing the problems with Apple's review process.

Good article.

As a "direct user" of Transmit (from way back when) I was able to upgrade a bit earlier. Until there's a seamless way to get apps you own directly registered with the store, I can't imagine I'll use the store much.

If you downloaded the app from the store, you will get notified when there is an update available... a small number will appear on the app store icon in the dock.

I'm thinking this is going to be okay once the store's selection of software is fully developed. Certainly not a perfect answer to all software needs, but still pretty good.

Yeah, I knew that, AEH. The problem is the transition from apps purchased by direct sales to the store which then registers you for those notifications. In the meantime, there are two ways to go. A lot of apps embed automatic notifications of upgrades anyway using the free Sparkle framework. In my case, I've decided to make the switch when there's a paid upgrade on offer.

I usually just do a manual check for updates when I feel it's convenient. This prevents apps from using up all sorts of system resources and network bandwidth when I might be trying to maximize upload or download speeds for another app. I like having the ability to select auto or manual updates, which most developers currently allow users to choose between.

I just discovered that if you navigate directly to a section within the Apple downloads site, such as: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macos...rnet_utilities, you can still access the site and its contents. The main page at: www.apple.com/downloads, provides no obvious way to access those sub-pages. Am I overlooking something on that page?

Well, I for one don't care for the selection. Open/Neo Office, hpijs, ghostscript, and other open source applications aren't even listed. I would guess that either they won't agree to Apple's TOS, or they would rather be independent and keep with their own distribution network.

The few times I have used it (upgrading iMovie), I never received a .dmg. Instead, the older version of the application was completely overwritten. Yeah, it worked, but that's not the way I like to do things. I actually want to understand how my computer does things.

As it happens, I have not used the AppStore so I actually don't know what the selection is. So far, that hasn't been a problem.

The GNU General Public License prohibits Apple from distributing any of these examples through any Apple app stores. This is because Apple includes some digital rights management (DRM). But we know what Apple does with that DRM, even if the software is distributed through an App Store at no charge:

• Apple enables users to easily install any app store downloads on any Mac connected to an Apple ID.
• Apple provides recommendations based on past user purchases.
• User can always re-download the software in the event of data loss.
• Users get a single window notifying them of all available updates for software they've acquired through the App Store.

That last point, along with the simplified installation process, is a boon to the majority of users who, after more than two decades of the WIMP (Windows, Icons, Mouse, Pointer) interface, have demonstrated that such issues are barriers to computer usage.

Yup I have yet to use the app store either. In fact I haven't even fired it up yet. No real desire to, to be honest.

I like how the App Store pretty much does the searching for you. The apps are chosen by Apple, and therefore legit. I've found useful stuff that I wouldn't have known about.

I'd rather hit the developer's page and download direct from them, in case there are features taken out because it goes against Apple's EULA. Things like TextWrangler.

I don't think the Weather Network has any EULA violations. ;)

That's understandable when there's a difference between the Mac App Store version and the one offered on the developer's site. The bigger question is what someone like yourself will do when an application you would like is only available through the App Store.

For me, that's only happened once. I didn't hesitate to use the App Store to purchase QuickCursor, an app which allows me to easily use TextWrangler as my text editor regardless of which application I am currently using. In fact, this post was written in TextWrangler.

And now this.

It has been a couple of months since you wrote this and I wanted to let you know that it is already happening. They are disappearing. Some developers previously had sites but now their links just refer you to the online Apple Store page where a standard App Store layout describes the product and displays user reviews of their software.

Of course, folks who don't like the App Store aren't going to buy those apps.

I have a problem with the app store and volume purchasing. Apple has made themselves one giant middle man. If you want to volume purchase an app you must buy a voucher, then that voucher has to be a set amount of dollars. You can only buy them in increments. The voucher is then bestowed to an employee or representative of your organization/company. They buy the volume license of the apps and then users can redeem the app via a voucher and the purchaser has to maintain them in their itunes account (assuming it is a company account which I think it has to be) but only that person can maintain them. You also can not scrape off excess funds from vouchers and transfer them to other people.

In fact, it is pretty much the dumbest thing I have seen a tech company do in a long time. Apple just doesn't care about anyone using their products in a professional environment. I guess I don't blame them since people are buying iOS devices by the truck load these days.