> People uses Macs because they want to use Macs and software that takes advantage of the reliability and consistency of that ecosystem
ehhh. I think if you did some analytics of “apps Mac users use” an absolute ton would be “a web browser and very little else”. I can think of very few truly native Mac apps I depend upon and that keep me on the platform.
What does keep me on Macs is that every now and then I need to compile an iOS app. Apple give me no choice. Aside from that I’d say a lot of developers choose Macs because they’re the least worst POSIX platform, not because Mac native apps are a shining beacon on a hill.
> Oh noes, you have to have the platform from the company to make apps for the platform from the company. The horror.
Useless snark.
> I honestly cannot take seriously any complaints about having to have a Mac to make Mac apps. How on earth are you testing if you don't have the platform you're supposed to be targeting?
The point is that you don't have to buy dedicated hardware for the other two big platforms (Windows, Linux). The fact that this restriction is essentially arbitrary makes cross-platform developers reasonably annoyed.
> the usability of macOS software installation is terrible and no, the App Store is not an acceptable alternative. macOS software install UX is worse than Windows. It's worse than Android and iOS. It's better than Linux but that doesn't say much.
Sounds questionable in all the parts.
Mac: Just click-mount an installation disk image and drag an app icon to the Applicationss folder - isn't this a perfect install UX? If an app installed this way wants to handle some URLs it should declare that in its metadata. No app should be allowed to modify files outside its dedicated directories unless modifying those files is its actual mission.
Linux: just type "sudo apt install app_name" - what can be more handy?
Windows: let every app you install do anything it wants with all the system files, leaving traces after uninstallation is a norm.
The only problems with iOS are it removes a user's right to program his own device freely and demands too much money from 3rd party devs.
> Accessing the file system is a constant hassle. Why so hard?
Apple prioritise the user at the expense of the developer. I think this is the right balance.
> I cannot install emacs on my Mac.
What's stopping you?
> Software that is free (as in GNU) is charged for in the App store.
I don't think this is in conflict with the spirit of the GNU project? Paying for software distribution is fine in the eyes of the GNU project and their licence. What's your problem with it?
> I am amazed that they care so little for those who are not quite the most important.
Apple think normal users are the most important, not developers. I think they're probably right.
> Do not attempt to “create software” for macOS. They don’t want you to. If you want to run your own programs, install Linux and suffer like you’re supposed to.
Yeah, I'm starting to understand that more and more. I'm not a big fan of the PWA SPA-approach, but given what's going on I'm going to have to change my tune.
Selecting the "Add to Dock..." option in Safari for YouTube Music has been kind of eye-opening. It works really well.
I'm not sure what they're thinking here. Are native desktop apps done and over? It kind of seems like that's what they want based on behavior.
> The macOS, and especially the App Store model is far more user friendly.
MacOS and App Store models are the worst, most user hostile way to install anything. I like the .exe model best, it offers most flexibility and freedom to the user.
Apple does not have a package manager from my understanding and I uses macOS daily. I don't like the approach with the App Store since there are some FOSS that are charging a fee to use their apps in the App Store. I understand it was due to Apple's Developer fee. App Store is not a package manager, it is an application online store in the same vein with Google Play Store & Microsoft Store.
If you are talking about the package manager, then which manager you are referring to? Brew, MacPorts, Nix? I uses Brew daily and only once have to add one repo (using MBA for less than a year) due to external plugin that the app use which it's easy to add in the command line.
> stopped updating my open-source Mac apps because I can't justify the cost of jumping over artificial hurdles Apple puts in place that ensure users can't run the apps they want to use.
hah, that's the exact reason I stopped using os x and went full Linux on my old Mac book air about 8 years ago.
> Mac are not friendly to a developer. And they never were. The only reason why developer use them is because they need to program on iOS and thus need XCode (that is a terrible IDE) and the iOS toolchain.
That's just wrong on so many levels. The majority of developers using Mac don't touch Xcode at all.
You do not need to put your app on the store. Macs come free with Xcode and always have since OS X was released and you can compile and run whatever you want. You can sign code without submitting to the App Store if you really care.
Macs are friendly to normies, but that doesn't mean you can't tinker with them. You can. They are like an iOS device and a UNIX system and everything in between, not only one or the other.
The day they start making you jailbreak a Mac is the day I move to linux, but until then, most of what you hear about them are just bs from people who've never used one.
> Can you imagine using macOS without homebrew because everything has to come from Apple's app store?
No, because I would have never used macOS if there were limitations that prevented me from being able to do my job. And imagining a world where Apple restricted macOS in such a way is a rather unlikely hypothetical.
The big difference is that iOS has _never_ had these capabilities. Many people have opted into the current model of iOS because they don't consider it a general purpose computing device - they consider it a phone, an iPod, an internet browser, or an angry birds player.
> Can you imagine using Ubuntu without apt because everything has to come from the Canonical's software center?
No, for the same reason. Their customer base would refuse to upgrade, servers would be migrated off, etc.
A closer equivalent there to the current game app stores would be always-on licensing servers which used physical dongles - the game stores are running basically as licensing servers. And professionals _hated_ these. Even software-based licensing servers over the LAN is much less common in professional software these days.
> This is what you get, for free, on all versions of MacOS, ever.
You're trading one slight discomfort (in your opinion) for a thousand others because the rest of macOS is abysmal. There's hidden, undiscoverable functionality everywhere, the window management is absolutely disgusting, the file management is sorely lacking, the amount of tweaking you have to do to get decent terminal utilities is sickening, the hardware choices are extremely limited and the tyrannical company that builds it works regularly to own you.
No amount of rationalization will convince me that it's a good OS for anything other than building iOS apps.
Thankfully at least I can run a better OS on the hardware once Apple stops supporting it. Unfortunately I still must jump over many Mac hardware obstructions just to get something resembling a normal BIOS so I can even boot something else. It's just disgusting when I have to do it. At least I never gave Apple any money though since I buy it all used.
They are the China of the technology world and I wouldn't be proud to support them at all even if their desktop OS was actually desirable. Still, they own half (or more) of the phones in use in the US so I have no choice but to deal with them.
> large app developers seem to not be embracing new systems/APIs, software largely isn't being ported
What makes you think that? Microsoft, Adobe, heck, even Valve have ports of their stuff on macOS. They seem to use new systems/APIs when appropriate, but maybe I'm not sure what you're talking about there. Care to elaborate on what you mean?
As for:
> What is the reason for macOS at this point?
Well, it's for people who want something more usable than Linux, but don't want to deal with Windows. Pretty much the same as it's been for decades. It also works very nicely with the iOS devices that many people love, so that helps, too.
Don't use them then? Seems like a useful feature to me for certain utility apps that don't require a proper Mac app/can't afford to develop one.
reply