Linked by Kostis Kapelonis on Sat 14th May 2011 15:43 UTC
General Development Application stores are growing everywhere like mushrooms. While users have initially embraced application stores because of the ease they offer with application installation, developers have several complaints. Division of profits from paid application and ineffectiveness of the screening process are among the major issues. Are application stores the best distribution channel possible? Can they satisfy both developers and users?
Thread beginning with comment 473074
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:


- the OS/packaging group assembles the apps, compiles them, tests them, etc, and distributes them

App Store:

- the app developers submit their own apps to the app store

#1 is good for consistency (most of the times), while #2 is good for availability (users don't have to wait/hope/pray for the OS/repo people to package an app they want but isn't available).

Reply Score: 3

Vanders Member since:


- the OS/packaging group assembles the apps, compiles them, tests them, etc, and distributes them

For your distribution upstream repository, sure. There are lots of non-distribution repositories, though, and users can easily add those third party repositories. It's easy to build your own repository, too.

Reply Parent Score: 3

emilsedgh Member since:

In FOSS repository model, app developers could also 'become' a part of upstream.

Many software developers, also maintain packages of their own software on their distro of choice.

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:

On the repository side, one can have the best of both worlds.

Debian's standard repositories for stability and consistency; Main, Contrib, Non-free.


Third party repositories for developer managed packages (availability); Webmin, Mondo Rescue, Firefox 4 (iceweasel 4) and so on.

Subversion or similar methods can provide developers with a way to ship distribution neutral programs also if it's something like Metasploit that benefits from having the latest additions and isn't targeted at user's who'd have any issue using svn or scripting it into a system wide update process.

In general, the first two options, distro and third party repositories, can easily cover average user needs.

I'd also suggest that App Store style repositories could stand to deliver more consistancy. Something between Apple's heavy handed but staff and business strategy limited system and Google's easy to exploit wide open system.

Reply Parent Score: 3

toomuchtatose Member since:

My opinion that multiple repositories (such as free, contrib, non-free) is non-consequential to the lay customers, the target Appstore is suppose to service.

Most "repository" related suggestions fail to take note that multiple repositories only serve to increase distro fragmentation and loss of customer mindshare. The is one of the reasons why Linux desktops for the masses fail to take off.

One also should not assume that commercial vendors and software developers are capable and ready to maintain multiple repositories (if they want to, in the first place).

As of now, application distribution is best provided via standardisation and formalised application store logic. Following the path of least resistance, customers with exceptional demands may get additional "application fixes" via manual sideloading or "informal" repositories (e.g. kinda like PPAs for ubuntu)

Reply Parent Score: 2