Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Apr 2010 10:01 UTC
Over the weekend, a rumour spread like wildfire through Apple and Mac circles which stated that starting with Mac OS X 10.7, Apple would introduce the App Store model to the Mac, allowing only Apple-approved applications to run. It became apparent to me right away that this was a load of nonsense, and for once, I was right: Steve Jobs has personally dismissed the rumour.
Thread beginning with comment 420769
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Nitpick: Should have asked OR instead of AND
by MrWeeble on Mon 26th Apr 2010 11:04
in reply to "Nitpick: Should have asked OR instead of AND"
Member since:2007-04-18
Absolutely. I suspect there will be an App Store fairly soon, simply because it is too good an opportunity for Apple to miss because
1) It gives them an additional revenue stream
2) Software via the app store is "checked" so will be regarded as another feather in the cap of the "Apple can't get malware" brigade
3) Smaller developers will relish the chance to get there application out to more mac users without having to worry about competing on google rank with windows and linux apps as well
I can't imagine Mac OS X making this the only installation method, but I can see it becoming the primary one (I use Ububtu and I almost always install via the repositories rather than either compiling or using a .deb).
And then in a few years when people are used to it and all the key applications are available through the store ....
RE[2]: Nitpick: Should have asked OR instead of AND
by Laurence on Mon 26th Apr 2010 11:42
in reply to "RE: Nitpick: Should have asked OR instead of AND"
Member since:2007-03-26
Absolutely. I suspect there will be an App Store fairly soon, simply because it is too good an opportunity for Apple to miss because
1) It gives them an additional revenue stream
2) Software via the app store is "checked" so will be regarded as another feather in the cap of the "Apple can't get malware" brigade
3) Smaller developers will relish the chance to get there application out to more mac users without having to worry about competing on google rank with windows and linux apps as well
1) It gives them an additional revenue stream
2) Software via the app store is "checked" so will be regarded as another feather in the cap of the "Apple can't get malware" brigade
3) Smaller developers will relish the chance to get there application out to more mac users without having to worry about competing on google rank with windows and linux apps as well
Point 2 doesn't really apply to desktop apps as it's very hard check an entire desktop app (given the size and complexity of many of them) for malware. Even with access to source code, Ubuntu has had instances where malware has slipped through into the software repositories - so I can't see how Apple could maintain a verified repository without browsing the source.
In fact, this very point might be the biggest reason why OS X wouldn't see an app store. If Apple build an App Store for OS X, then indirectly they're partnering themselves with the apps on there as people will assume that the apps listed have been "Apple Approved" thus safe. So if there's any dodgy apps, then Apple's image will in turn be tarnished. I could see that being one gamble too much for a company that's as obsessed with public image as Apple are with theirs.
As things stand at the moment, because there's no OS X app store, users accept that they install programs "at their own risk" (just as they would in Windows). Thus all Apple have to do is dictate a style guide to keep their platform (visually) clean but then deny responsibility for rouge software.
So as far as I can see, the only way they could retain a strong image whilst running a desktop app store would be to limit apps to the trusted professional apps and/or those from larger software houses - so basically everyone but the developers in point 3 of your post (ie the developers that would benefit the most would be excluded from the store). In fact, to a smaller degree, we already see this preferential treatment on the iPhone.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
"This is my NeXTstation Turbo Color booting the Mac System 7.1 Operating System using a hardware add-on called 'Daydream'. The Daydream has a Mac ROM and a few custom ICs in it and hooked up to the NeXTs DSP port. Turns your NeXT into a full fledged 68k powered Mac." So cool.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
"The NetBSD Project is pleased to announce NetBSD 6.1, the first feature update of the NetBSD 6 release branch. It represents a selected subset of fixes deemed important for security or stability reasons, as well as new features and enhancements. Please note that all fixes in the prior security/bugfix updates (NetBSD 6.0.1 and 6.0.2) are also in 6.1."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
"At the end of a week in which Electronic Arts confirmed it wasn't developing a thing for the Wii U, one of the software engineers in EA Sports' Canada studio, in a series of since-deleted tweets, disparaged the console as 'crap' and suggested Nintendo should give up on hardware altogether. 'The Wii U is crap. Less powerful than an Xbox 360. Poor online/store. Weird tablet', tweeted Bob Summerwill, listed as a senior software engineer at EA Canada, in a reply to a tweet posting a link about EA's no-Wii U news. 'Nintendo are walking dead at this point'." The Wii U is turning into the 21st century's Virtual Boy.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
"In NixOS, the entire operating system - the kernel, applications, system packages, configuration files, and so on - is built by the Nix package manager from a description in a purely functional build language. The fact that it's purely functional essentially means that building a new configuration cannot overwrite previous configurations. Most of the other features follow from this." Interesting approach. A Linux distribution, sure, but with some very refreshing ideas about system configuration.
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Appfour added, among other features, C/C++ support to its new version of AIDE. From Android-IDE, "Now you can write parts of your app or your whole app in C/C++ on your device. AIDE supports the Standard Android NDK toolchain (GCC 4.6 + Bionic, STL, ...). No changes are necessary if you want to build an app developed on a PC with Eclipse. C/C++ development is fully integrated: Build errors appear in the error list and files can easily be navigated to with Go to file. The editor supports C/C++ syntax highlighting."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Ars nails it: "The answer is that Google did announce what amounts to a fairly substantial Android update yesterday. They simply did it without adding to the update fragmentation problems that continue to plague the platform. By focusing on these changes and not the apparently-waiting-in-the-wings update to the core software, Google is showing us one of the ways in which it's trying to fix the update problem."
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
"It is good for programmers to understand what goes on inside a processor. The CPU is at the heart of our career. What goes on inside the CPU? How long does it take for one instruction to run? What does it mean when a new CPU has a 12-stage pipeline, or 18-stage pipeline, or even a 'deep' 31-stage pipeline? Programs generally treat the CPU as a black box. Instructions go into the box in order, instructions come out of the box in order, and some processing magic happens inside. As a programmer, it is useful to learn what happens inside the box. This is especially true if you will be working on tasks like program optimization. If you don't know what is going on inside the CPU, how can you optimize for it? This article is about what goes on inside the x86 processor's deep pipeline."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
"It was the only moment I heard regret slip into Otellini's voice during the several hours of conversations I had with him. 'The lesson I took away from that was, while we like to speak with data around here, so many times in my career I've ended up making decisions with my gut, and I should have followed my gut,' he said. 'My gut told me to say yes.'" The world would've been a much different place - Apple would have been less dependant on Samsung for its chips, which probably would've meant less money for Samsung to develop its Galaxy business.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Glass is getting some love at Google I/O as well. New applications have been released - Facebook, Twitter, Evernote, Elle, Tumblr, and CNN. Perhaps more interesting: the newly announced Google Glass Developer Kit will allow offline applications and direct hardware access - great for hacking and expanding Glass' potential. This kit will really allow hackers to put Glass through its paces.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
"But Beck and Merrill decided that simply banning toxic players wasn't an acceptable solution for their game. Riot Games began experimenting with more constructive modes of player management through a formal player behavior initiative that actually conducts controlled experiments on its player base to see what helps reduce bad behavior. The results of that initiative have been shared at a lecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and on panels at the Penny Arcade Expo East and the Game Developers Conference." Absolutely fascinating stuff. I'm a League of Legends player, and to be honest, the community isn't nearly as bad as some make it out to be. I'm happy Riot games has the guts to employ science to address the issue.More News »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2006-01-04
Saying "Nope" to "app store and no software without authorisation" still makes an app store a possibility.
I really don't think Apple will disallow apps from third parties that are not in their store, but an app store for OSX will come IMO.