Does this mean that Adobe, if they wanted to sell their apps on the Mac OS App Store, would actually have to fix their broken Crastastic Suite? Would they actually condense the folders that pointlessly float around in my Applications folder into single applications?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tips for Mac App Store Devs: No Trials or Betas, File System and Custom Control Usage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Indeed, Apple is actively encouraging developers to continue to distribute certain types of software (such as demos, trials, and betas) through third-party distribution channels outside the Mac App Store ecosystem.
They couldn't make such encouragements if they knew that those 3rd-party distribution channels were on the verge of being locked out.
I know I'm a day late, but yes, exactly this! One of my biggest complaints about the app store since recently getting an iPhone is that you can't try most apps before buying them. I would go so far as to say that Apple should be requiring all apps to have a trial mode. It's better for consumers, and really, for developers too. I've passed up on many apps because I couldn't tell if they would meet my needs from the description, and I wasn't about to waste 5 bucks a pop to find out that maybe they didn't.
Apple could and should build in trial mode (and subsequent purchase) functionality in the APIs for iOS and Mac OS X app store apps, and require that developers use it. To go the opposite direction on this is braindead.
I guess the App Store gets more people to buy stuff, so the 30% cut is worth it. Otherwise, you'd have to go through some annoying Paypal or credit card process. The App Store makes it way easier to buy stuff. This is my guess.
No betas?! I hate it when Apple does this. It's like that on the iPhone App Store too. Why don't they just have a beta PAGE and forget about it???
Great Ideas
I like the ideas of making the apps use the file system normally and having recognisable controls. One of the things I dislike on PCs is the randomness of everything and the way applications force you to 'do things their way' and try to take over your computer.
The only issues I have with this is the possible inflexibility of being to strict with the control methods (which even Apple regularly breaks) and the lack of demos. Having everything in one place, with lots of user reviews is what makes the iOS app store such a success. Not even allowing the lite versions on the OSX store seems to me too restrictive. I expect they'll have to change it sooner or later- ultimately, Apple's customers are more powerful than the company itself.
I like the ideas of making the apps use the file system normally and having recognisable controls. One of the things I dislike on PCs is the randomness of everything and the way applications force you to 'do things their way' and try to take over your computer.
The only issues I have with this is the possible inflexibility of being to strict with the control methods (which even Apple regularly breaks) and the lack of demos. Having everything in one place, with lots of user reviews is what makes the iOS app store such a success. Not even allowing the lite versions on the OSX store seems to me too restrictive. I expect they'll have to change it sooner or later- ultimately, Apple's customers are more powerful than the company itself.
That's would create a poor customer experience. Most customers have zero interest in playing with trials and app registrations. They just want to buy apps that work as advertised.
The percentage of nerds who want to play test engineer is small compared with the number of consumers with money to spend.
I find that hard to believe. It may work for the app store, but that's because most apps are < $5. Most software, whether boxed or downloadable, have trials.
I really hope this Mac App Store fails. If it succeeds to the point that it vastly surpasses expectations, then it eventually becomes the only method of programming and application distribution for a future Mac OS w/ iOS user interface. And an OS that is restricted to a Fisher-Price API subset is not one that I will use. No customization, no 3rd-party hardware, no novel UIs, no cross-platform libraries/development, no X11...hell, the no betas / developer releases bit would eliminate half the software on my machine.
And as for the no non-standard UIs rule, Apple proves to be like any modern government: when you do it, it is illegal but when they do it, it's standard operating procedures.
And as for the no non-standard UIs rule, Apple proves to be like any modern government: when you do it, it is illegal but when they do it, it's standard operating procedures.
Tea Party activist?
No, really, that would never happen. And WHERE is Apple doing something they say is illegal??????
I don't know for sure, but I see this the end of Freeware as we know it. All the freeware that many of us use will be now costing money in the online store. Commerce is not a bad thing, but this I have a hunch will cost!
Sure, because there are no free apps on iOS.
I didn't say there won't be freeware, just that it will change. Some of the software that has been free for as long as I know that worked on donations, might start costing a set amount.
Sure, because there are no free apps on iOS.
On the App Store, most free applications tend to be limited "lite" versions or half-baked when I had my iPod Touch.
Or sponsored by ads or both options.
Either way the developer will then receive insentive to update or upgrade the app. Which is better for you as user who will get a better product.
There will still be freeware and cheap ware and hopefully it won't be abandoned just as it's starting to get valuable like seems to happen with most freeware.
I do believe most of your objection has been answered by recent iOS sdk updates of late.
You can use novel UI elements the design guideline states you should only use them if you have to and if all possible build in over the standard UI elements most which have methods for extending them. Cross platform libraries are allow if they compil on the LLVM chain and submitted binary can't download additional code. There are many terminal clients like x11 on the iOS app store already the restriction on iOS is that it can only be used to connect to remote
machine.
Still never let the facts get it the way of a popular opinion
Because it's about ease of use, experience. Geeks can find it the same way they are finding it now and i don't think that beta software should be reachahble outside the beta testers groups. Trial/demos/whatever are need very rarely. This is Mac OS X if you have your Mac at least 6 months (maybe even less) you already know and use tens of apps. How many trial and demo apps do you need?
Exposure. The Mac App Store will be built into OS X. You won't have to surf to websites - you'll just have to know its name and bang, it's there along with the user reviews, ratings, screenshots and developer comments. Or simply browse by categories and popularity, so devs have an incentive to develop good software, which can mean users will start to automatically find and use those apps. That's something that won't as easily happen if you, as a dev, need to rely on review sites giving you good reviews on random scattered web sites.
If people find it more convenient to download your apps, and they know it's not trials that are shown as being "100% free!!!11" on a developer site, that developer may just get more users, offsetting the share to pay Apple.
Compare to the iPhone or iPad. I would hate to have to surf to websites for my apps, now that I'm used to get them from a unified place. The same thing when I'm using Linux. It sucks to have to search and find places, all looking dissimilar, just to find your software, and instead being able to use the organized Linux software repositories.
It'll be very easy for developers to judge whether using the Mac App Store will be worth it. If the Mac App Store is successful, it is worth it for the developers.
It's about time this happens for OS X!
Last edited:
I'm happy the Mac App Store won't offer trials or betas.
I don't want quality issues on a high-profile official distribution site. And I don't want software offered as "OMG FREE!!!" when, after installing it, you find it's "OMG FREEEEEE for 30 days of usage"
No confusion. Simple. Good.
The devs will of course be free to provide links to their websites with info on if there's anything else there, for niche users that want e.g. unstable versions.
I don't want quality issues on a high-profile official distribution site. And I don't want software offered as "OMG FREE!!!" when, after installing it, you find it's "OMG FREEEEEE for 30 days of usage"
No confusion. Simple. Good.
The devs will of course be free to provide links to their websites with info on if there's anything else there, for niche users that want e.g. unstable versions.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
And how many people will actually look for/ find the developer's website compared yo exposure in the App store?
If the iOS app store is any indication, the answer is fundamental.
Sell a thousand copies at full price, or a hundred thousand at 70%. Devs choice.
angelneo said:
And how many people will actually look for/ find the developer's website compared yo exposure in the App store?
If the iOS app store is any indication, the answer is fundamental.
Sell a thousand copies at full price, or a hundred thousand at 70%. Devs choice.
Yes, but why not just have a section for betas that people can go to and download stuff? Like a separate thing that doesn't appear in search results.
I've been wanting a bunch of beta stuff for my iPhone (because usually the betas are OK, like Google Nagivation beta). That's the one thing I like about the Android platform: Google allows a beta page. The problem is that the Droid sucks too much
Yes, this person you replied to is ignorant or confused or tea party (meaning both
). And yes, iOS 4 fixes this. And you can technically jailbreak as you please. I guess once you're brainwashed to see Apple as evil, you end up comparing it to the Government Yes, but why not just have a section for betas that people can go to and download stuff? Like a separate thing that doesn't appear in search results.
I've been wanting a bunch of beta stuff for my iPhone (because usually the betas are OK, like Google Nagivation beta). That's the one thing I like about the Android platform: Google allows a beta page. The problem is that the Droid sucks too much
I understand that, maybe i would even use it, but Apple is speaking on another language here.
This is actually a smart move by Apple. I like it.
Most of the general public doesn't care about trials and beta versions of apps. The Mac App store will be a success simply because it will provide a simple, easy way for most of the general public to get applications for their Mac. For the few people that care about trial versions and betas, they can still get them the same way they always have. No reason to clutter up the App Store with multiple version of the same software. Clean, simple and reliable. This is a good thing, folks.
Most of the general public doesn't care about trials and beta versions of apps. The Mac App store will be a success simply because it will provide a simple, easy way for most of the general public to get applications for their Mac. For the few people that care about trial versions and betas, they can still get them the same way they always have. No reason to clutter up the App Store with multiple version of the same software. Clean, simple and reliable. This is a good thing, folks.