Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
what about iPadOS? I need some more reasons to convince me I didn’t spend a S***L*** of money for wonderful, incredible beautiful tablet that, unfortunately, I leave often home because I can do most of the tasks I can do with my Mac, I even bought the most expensive keyboard in the world, the “magic keyboard “!

Unfortunately that purchase is all on you. There are numerous reviews demonstrating the capabilities of iPads and latest iPadOS version so you could have ascertained whether it was something for you, or not.
 
Gurman also said that he expects sideloading to be a Europe-only feature to comply with the Digital Markets Act, that developers may have to incur an additional fee to make apps available via a third-party service, and that these features will likely not be mentioned during the WWDC keynote.
Wait, what?
Crazy, huh? It's the same type of behavior you'd see from a mob boss enforcing his protection racket, or a drug kingpin protecting his distribution network.
 
Gurman seems to be going back and forth on the number of significant changes with iOS 17 🤷🏻‍♂️

It’s because he doesn’t really know exactly which one holds the truth. Stories keep on changing every week. It would be nice if he provides some proof instead of just talking and guessing around. Going back n forth!
 
Finally, Gurman suggested that macOS 14 will not be a "groundbreaking or significant" update. Instead, he believes Apple is focusing on simply baking in support for features brought to its other operating systems for a consistent cross-platform experience.
Widgets in the Launchpad please.
Get them out of the Notifications center, thats something from the iOS 7 days thats basically gone.
Not only would the widgets act a lot better, but also it would work as a kind of DashBoard 2.0, an overlay of Widgets and apps.
Widget only pages would literally be just the DashBoard but new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orbital~debris
Despite how superior Macbook laptops are to Windows laptops, MacOS is starting to lag behind Windows 11, and with Windows 12 around the corner, I am considering switching.

It is not justifiable that we still need several 3rd party apps (Rectangle, etc) to do some basic OS stuff + Why do we still not have notifications mirroring between Apple devices, widgets, etc)
You’re using Windows 11 as a basis for switching? They tried phased upgrades at work from 10 to 11 and had to stop at phase one because of all the issues. They’ve since rolled back almost all those computers and put an indefinite hold on it. Personally, I hate W11 and see no benefit to it over 10.
 
Wait, what?

I think that if apple tries something so sneaky they’ll incur in even more scrutiny. This is a battle they can’t win, they should just give up and focus on important things, rather than anti-consumer policies.

I'll try to explain it simply.

You want to make apps for MacOS, iOS, etc? You have to have a Apple device and a Developer account. There is no getting around that. Even Microsoft Azure in order to compile apps for Apple with Azure Devops they have racks of Mac Minis that can be used as build agents. Apple is a closed ecosystem for both storefront and development. Changing the storefront doesn't change the requirement for development.

So right now as everyone likes to talk about the cost of entry isn't horrible you need a Apple Device to compile and a $99 a year developer account. Been plenty of people that have praised how cheap that developer account is.

Now of course a developer account is cheap if you make money using said account Apple makes money. That goes away with sideloading so Apple is not going to continue offering a reasonable cost of entry.

Apple will change the rules around developer accounts. There is no law stopping them from doing that nor could there be. Your developer account will cost 3% of your annual company earnings etc. It could be tiers looking at company net worth or many other options but if you're making a fortune off a developer account or in general you will pay to have it. This also kills the Epic and other argument of hurting the little guy the little guys won't pay as much while big guys will pay more etc.

Feel free to sell your app however you want Apple will still get paid. Its going to be fun seeing the hoops to jump through to get developer access. You will have to register your company and provide financials. You won't just sign up and pay $99 you will sign a contract with Apple each year with a negotiated rate. This is what the big players really wanted in the end to strike a deal instead of paying per transaction.

You can argue this all day long. You are using someone else's platform and OS to sell a product you pay for that right. That's how the rest of the world works. You will pay for the right to make the thing in licensing fees then you can sell your product however you wish. The concept that people think Microsoft or Epic is going to pay $99 dollars a year to make money on the Apple platform with no money going to Apple is laughable.

You can be Joe the basement programmer and make a fortune one year making that amazing app with millions of downloads. You will pay the following year your share or you will lose developer access and Apple is going to easily implement that if you don't recompile with a new xcode version each year even with no changes then the App simply won't work on the next iOS.

This will be the big announcement at WWDC this year.
 
Gurman also said that he expects sideloading to be a Europe-only feature to comply with the Digital Markets Act, that developers may have to incur an additional fee to make apps available via a third-party service...

Wait, what?

I think that if apple tries something so sneaky they’ll incur in even more scrutiny. This is a battle they can’t win, they should just give up and focus on important things, rather than anti-consumer policies.

Crazy, huh? It's the same type of behavior you'd see from a mob boss enforcing his protection racket, or a drug kingpin protecting his distribution network.
I suspect the idea here is that Apple is claiming that a developer who wants to offer their app elsewhere may have to pay for hosting, etc., so they may have to spend money to escape the App Store. We're probably supposed to conclude that being able to break free of the App Store is bad for developers. :rolleyes:
 
Idk, man , idk

Remember that macOS wasn't getting updates every year even before the crook , unless I'm wrong ?

There were a couple of years after the introduction of the iPhone, and then Steve Jobs had the ‘Back to the Mac’ keynote where they introduced Lion with Launchpad, Mission Control and full screen app windows amongst other things. Features that are core to the OS and have remained virtually unchanged over a decade later and are really showing their age.
 
Last edited:
Minor updates. Sigh.
y’know..android auto got a fresh coat of paint last year.. can we at least do a little something in carplay
 
  • Like
Reactions: sorgo †
I'll try to explain it simply.

You want to make apps for MacOS, iOS, etc? You have to have a Apple device and a Developer account. There is no getting around that. Even Microsoft Azure in order to compile apps for Apple with Azure Devops they have racks of Mac Minis that can be used as build agents. Apple is a closed ecosystem for both storefront and development. Changing the storefront doesn't change the requirement for development.

So right now as everyone likes to talk about the cost of entry isn't horrible you need a Apple Device to compile and a $99 a year developer account. Been plenty of people that have praised how cheap that developer account is.

Now of course a developer account is cheap if you make money using said account Apple makes money. That goes away with sideloading so Apple is not going to continue offering a reasonable cost of entry.

Apple will change the rules around developer accounts. There is no law stopping them from doing that nor could there be. Your developer account will cost 3% of your annual company earnings etc. It could be tiers looking at company net worth or many other options but if you're making a fortune off a developer account or in general you will pay to have it. This also kills the Epic and other argument of hurting the little guy the little guys won't pay as much while big guys will pay more etc.

Feel free to sell your app however you want Apple will still get paid. Its going to be fun seeing the hoops to jump through to get developer access. You will have to register your company and provide financials. You won't just sign up and pay $99 you will sign a contract with Apple each year with a negotiated rate. This is what the big players really wanted in the end to strike a deal instead of paying per transaction.

You can argue this all day long. You are using someone else's platform and OS to sell a product you pay for that right. That's how the rest of the world works. You will pay for the right to make the thing in licensing fees then you can sell your product however you wish. The concept that people think Microsoft or Epic is going to pay $99 dollars a year to make money on the Apple platform with no money going to Apple is laughable.

You can be Joe the basement programmer and make a fortune one year making that amazing app with millions of downloads. You will pay the following year your share or you will lose developer access and Apple is going to easily implement that if you don't recompile with a new xcode version each year even with no changes then the App simply won't work on the next iOS.

This will be the big announcement at WWDC this year.
This long rant you wrote ignores the fact that in civilised countries apple is not the law. Apple can scream and shout all it wants, but at the end of the day the lawmakers will set the limits of what it can and cannot do. I will be very surprised if Europe would allow apple to steal a set percentage of developers income even if they don’t publish on the apple App Store.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.