or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › First look: Apple's Mac App Store simplifies buying, updating software
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

First look: Apple's Mac App Store simplifies buying, updating software - Page 2

post #41 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The App Store serves as a place not only to find new software, but also to manage applications and be notified of updates.

I would argue that it is not a place to manage applications, but it should have been. You can download apps and update them, and yeah there is some tracking of what you have downloaded, but I think they should have included an uninstaller. Hopefully this will come with Lion so that users can install, update and uninstall via the App Store without needing to ever visit the applications folder. this will make life very simple for the non techies out there. I always thought it was a shame folders existed in the Applications stack, it got a bit of a fix in SL, but hopefully Launchpad will fix all that.
post #42 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by revilre View Post

The fact I can't try before I buy makes it a deal killer. I want to try out several personal finance apps to decide which one I like, but my only choice is to buy all of them?...

This is a strawman argument.

Just because there are no previews, it doesn't follow at all that your "only choice" is to buy all of them. Another choice might be going to the website of each product and doing some research, and there is nothing stopping the producers of the apps from having a demo copy on their websites anyway.

Personally, if the apps were a bit cheaper, I wouldn't care about a preview before buying it and if there are any developers listening, I think this is true of most people. if you buy the wrong app for five bucks it's not really a big deal, but a lot of the apps are closer to a hundred. If the developers kept everything under 20 bucks or so I think they'd sell the same amount (dollar-wise) on a higher volume.
post #43 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

A few concerns:

No installers: it has been known to happen that sometimes Internet service goes down or your in a location with no connection.

No installers: it has been known to happen that you want to install a compatible version of software on an older OS machine.

Resale: it has been known to happen that you want to sell your older software if you upgrade etc...

No installers: having your Internet cut off because you used 4 months worth of bandwidth re-loading your software could be an issue.

Sounds like a great idea on the surface - for fart app consumers.
I would never trust this service for my professional software and business critical software. If Apple only starts releasing software this way- they are going to loose a lot of customers.

Apple reserves the right to Change their policies at whim, reserves the right to pull their software at will - reserves the right to boot apps from the store on a whim - reserves the right to deny service at will - could be hacked etc...

Anyone willing to put their business in the hands of Apple will get what they deserve. The problem with a walled garden is that while it keeps things out - it also keeps you in... Eventually becoming a prison.

I see this as yet another red flag that Apple is abandoning professionals in favor of the fart app masses. How long before they force all applications to go through the store? You know it's coming.

I don't understand any of those complaints. None of them are real. None are any different than what's going on now. It's just an easier way of doing things. Most apps don't have installers anyway. it's just a drag and drop. The apps that will need installers will have them built-in.

You're not allowed to sell software without getting the permission of the owner of the copyright, so unless you don't mind doing something illegal, which I guess you don't, it's a moot issue. The software you buy is in your applications folder, so you can back them up all you want. no need to re-download them.

As for conditions changing, do you know of any developer, such as MS who doesn't have conditions that are at least as complex and difficult? I don't. Apple is much better in this regard.
post #44 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by jw915 View Post

Apple didn't come up with the idea of an app store; several other platforms had something like this before, including the Danger Hiptop and Linux distributions. App stores have also been available from third parties, for example Steam.

Unfortunately, Apple's version is still inferior since it doesn't handle dependency management and doesn't (appear to) allow the use of third party channels.

I know it must be painful to watch Apple get all the press over these popular Linux distributions, but Apple will probably have a few more users actually buying software.

As far as dependency management, there won't be any dependencies. If your software doesn't run on download, it isn't approved for the store. That's the best way to manage dependencies, eliminate the problem. Linux dependencies are a mess and one big reason why it will never be more popular than it is today.

And, third party channels? Huh? A) Why would they. B) No one actually cares.
post #45 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't understand any of those complaints. None of them are real. None are any different than what's going on now. It's just an easier way of doing things. Most apps don't have installers anyway. it's just a drag and drop. The apps that will need installers will have them built-in.

You're not allowed to sell software without getting the permission of the owner of the copyright, so unless you don't mind doing something illegal, which I guess you don't, it's a moot issue. The software you buy is in your applications folder, so you can back them up all you want. no need to re-download them.

As for conditions changing, do you know of any developer, such as MS who doesn't have conditions that are at least as complex and difficult? I don't. Apple is much better in this regard.

I think rain is one of the serial trolls who pulled an old alias out of the bag. tekstud did that a few times, as I recall.
post #46 of 164
You mean you can now buy and download apps directly from the internet and install them on your PC. WOW, That is priceless!!!! ....and it is so, so cool that Father Apple gets a cut on every sale. That is magical!!!!! The innovation just keeps coming, and coming!!!!!
post #47 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

As posted in earlier topic on this today ... the term 'Update' is to be read with caution. If updating any existing 3rd party software go to the web site of the vendor, Apple do not allow upgrade prices and you will pay full retail even if you are eligible for an upgrade discount. I was told by a representative Cabel Sasser at Panic Software and I quote: " this is definitely a shortcoming of the Mac App Store that we hope Apple will address in the future."

I can quite understand it seems excessive paying Apple 30% and offering discounts to Apple for an update however it seems to me that 30% of a much lower price for an update is not totally unreasonable given the other advantages. The system needs to offer two products in a simple illustration; an update version at one price and a full version.

I think that this is overblown as an issue. First of all, 30% is not a big cut. All developers have to pay a cut to sell their software unless they can afford to have a site that can do it directly, and that's expensive.

The solution is to do what Apple has done with iLife and iWork. Price every copy at an upgrade price. iLife comes free for a new machine, but the "upgrade " price isn't high. iWork has always been priced low. All upgrades are priced the same.

I see no problem. Developers are going to have to get used to the idea of pricing the app the same as the upgrade.
post #48 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by revilre View Post

The fact I can't try before I buy makes it a deal killer. I want to try out several personal finance apps to decide which one I like, but my only choice is to buy all of them?

I could go to the developer site and download the trials. Then I have to delete them and purchase through the app store since it seems the app store recognizes "trials" as installed already. I don't konw if the app store would allow me to "update" software I purchased directly from the developer as that situation hasn't happened for me yet.

I've found a lot of software over the years won't allow you to install the "real" version until you uninstall the trial version. So that won't be anything new. It happens with Office and has happened with Adobe's products, for example. It's annoying, but likely no worse than bfore.
post #49 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

Fortunately for Apple, nobody's ever heard or or gives a hoot about "Danger Hiptop" and nearly zero percent of Apple's target market (ie, everyone) uses linux.

Actually, 2.04% of Wikipedias pageviews are from Linux devices, and rising. Additionally, 5% of school PCs now run Linux, also rising fast.
post #50 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

s far as dependency management, there won't be any dependencies. If your software doesn't run on download, it isn't approved for the store. That's the best way to manage dependencies, eliminate the problem. Linux dependencies are a mess and one big reason why it will never be more popular than it is today.

Agree with the dependencies remark. But to be fair, to eliminate the problem, Apple has forced users to be running 10.6.6. Comparing the App store to Yum is not very logical anyway. Linux is very powerful and with that power comes complexity. Linux is very popular with web server folks but it is highly unlikely it will ever see a dumbed down version suitable for the masses. Still, I would hesitate to call it "a mess".

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #51 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't understand any of those complaints. None of them are real. None are any different than what's going on now. It's just an easier way of doing things. Most apps don't have installers anyway. it's just a drag and drop. The apps that will need installers will have them built-in.

You're not allowed to sell software without getting the permission of the owner of the copyright, so unless you don't mind doing something illegal, which I guess you don't, it's a moot issue. The software you buy is in your applications folder, so you can back them up all you want. no need to re-download them.

As for conditions changing, do you know of any developer, such as MS who doesn't have conditions that are at least as complex and difficult? I don't. Apple is much better in this regard.

If you buy a disc of iLife, you can sell that legally. Anything purchased digitally via itunes cannot be. Same goes for anything on Amazon as far as music is concerned.

If it is cheaper, then that's a fair trade off.

Sorry, but Apple and their banning apps on a whim even when they approved them to begin with iOS is proof enough. Microsoft copied this for their mobile app store so they are not any better, and they themselves wanted to lock down the PC many times, but the public refused, thankfully.
post #52 of 164
The walled garden nutcases are out in force. Let me put your concerns to rest. The walled garden can't exist as long as you have a filesystem and an Internet connection.

Tin foiled hats need to be put away now.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #53 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't understand any of those complaints. None of them are real. None are any different than what's going on now. It's just an easier way of doing things. Most apps don't have installers anyway. it's just a drag and drop. The apps that will need installers will have them built-in.

You're not allowed to sell software without getting the permission of the owner of the copyright, so unless you don't mind doing something illegal, which I guess you don't, it's a moot issue. The software you buy is in your applications folder, so you can back them up all you want. no need to re-download them.

As for conditions changing, do you know of any developer, such as MS who doesn't have conditions that are at least as complex and difficult? I don't. Apple is much better in this regard.

What you can re-download the apps as long as it's tied to your itunes account.
post #54 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I know it must be painful to watch Apple get all the press over these popular Linux distributions, but Apple will probably have a few more users actually buying software.

As far as dependency management, there won't be any dependencies. If your software doesn't run on download, it isn't approved for the store. That's the best way to manage dependencies, eliminate the problem. Linux dependencies are a mess and one big reason why it will never be more popular than it is today.

And, third party channels? Huh? A) Why would they. B) No one actually cares.

Do you actually use Linux? No, you don't, because "dependency hell" no longer exists for the majority of users.
post #55 of 164
It should be clarified that "install on all the computers you own" means "all of the 10.6.6 computers you own".

Also, I downloaded the free game Gold Strike and as an experiment tried copying it to another 10.6.6 machine, not using the App Store. It would not work. It is expected and required that you download and install from the Mac App Store; there are probably bits and pieces you could copy but it may activate via machine serial number or some other method.
post #56 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by phalanx View Post

You mean you can now buy and download apps directly from the internet and install them on your PC. WOW, That is priceless!!!! ....and it is so, so cool that Father Apple gets a cut on every sale. That is magical!!!!! The innovation just keeps coming, and coming!!!!!

No,***** This is a dedicated app downloaded
for macs. Mac users could always download from the Internet. *****

******
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #57 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Do you actually use Linux? No, you don't, because "dependency hell" no longer exists for the majority of users.

Depends on your definition of hell. The package managers handle most of the dirty work now, but it is still very time consuming to install a program that has dozens of dependencies that need to be installed before it will work. And even then you're not guaranteed that it will compile and run properly.
post #58 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCLI View Post

Actually, 2.04% of Wikipedias pageviews are from Linux devices, and rising. Additionally, 5% of school PCs now run Linux, also rising fast.

I'd like to see the information about school PCs.
post #59 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

This is a strawman argument.

Just because there are no previews, it doesn't follow at all that your "only choice" is to buy all of them. Another choice might be going to the website of each product and doing some research, and there is nothing stopping the producers of the apps from having a demo copy on their websites anyway.

Personally, if the apps were a bit cheaper, I wouldn't care about a preview before buying it and if there are any developers listening, I think this is true of most people. if you buy the wrong app for five bucks it's not really a big deal, but a lot of the apps are closer to a hundred. If the developers kept everything under 20 bucks or so I think they'd sell the same amount (dollar-wise) on a higher volume.

Well if that's your solution then that just defeats the whole purpose of browsing and buying for apps in one central location.
post #60 of 164
I downloaded Angry Birds but it quits unexpectedly as soon as I open it.
post #61 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenclaw View Post

Depends on your definition of hell. The package managers handle most of the dirty work now, but it is still very time consuming to install a program that has dozens of dependencies that need to be installed before it will work. And even then you're not guaranteed that it will compile and run properly.

You don't download stuff like that nowadays.

For instance, if you want VLC, you get the repository address, add it via one click, then it installs itself AND its dependencies. Sames goes for apps like Transmission, Handbrake, Chromium, etc.
post #62 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

If you buy a disc of iLife, you can sell that legally. Anything purchased digitally via itunes cannot be. Same goes for anything on Amazon as far as music is concerned.

If it is cheaper, then that's a fair trade off.

Sorry, but Apple and their banning apps on a whim even when they approved them to begin with iOS is proof enough. Microsoft copied this for their mobile app store so they are not any better, and they themselves wanted to lock down the PC many times, but the public refused, thankfully.

You can only sell it if you sell the entire thing, with no copies for yourself or others. Since you don't own the software, just the media, you need permission to transfer the license. Yeah, I know most people don't do it, but it's legally required.

Generally, I think we'll find most apps to be cheaper, as Apple is doing with their own. Aperture at $79.95, for example.

No store sells everything. They all have standards they apply, and all are applied erratically. Apple is no different. I'm not thrilled, but I understand how it works.
post #63 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

There is not currently a way to have the App Store recognize previously installed, paid third-party software, as this would leave Apple out of its 30 percent cut of all App Store sales. That means users who want the convenience of the App Store will need to buy the software again.

Not true. The App Store immediately recognized my copy of BBEdit and labels it as installed.
post #64 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

What you can re-download the apps as long as it's tied to your itunes account.

You can. I was responding to the statement that re-downloading apps would be a pain if they got lost from your device. They are backed up in your app folder.
post #65 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post


It is nice having the store outside iTunes. Hopefully, they split off the AppStore for the iPhone and iPad too. iTunes does too much right now.

I like it too, E. And that was my first thought too. I like it a lot better than iTunes....they should break out

Podcasts
Books
Ringtones
movies
TV shows
Radio
Apps from iTunes just like they have done with OSX Apps...

ITunes should only be for 'tunes' They certainly could have links to the other "stores!"

Really impressed. Already downloaded a few apps...try MindNode pretty cool for organizing thoughts. projects, businesses, life, etc.

They should do the same with a Hardware store, too. I know it's on the website but I think the store should me on the desktop like it is on the iPhone.
post #66 of 164
deleted
post #67 of 164
deleted
post #68 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You can only sell it if you sell the entire thing, with no copies for yourself or others. Since you don't own the software, just the media, you need permission to transfer the license. Yeah, I know most people don't do it, but it's legally required.

Well of course you have to sell the whole thing, but you can. Aside from assholes at Autodesk, you are allowed to transfer the license to others.

Even then, each court case I've read about upholds the first sale doctrine, regardless of what they think they can do.
post #69 of 164
deleted
post #70 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'd like to see the information about school PCs.

Of course: W3Schools
post #71 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

I love how you can easily install your software on multiple machines that you own.

Are you saying you can buy once and install on multiple machines in your house? Used to have to buy multiple copies or a Family Pack to do that.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #72 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

You don't download stuff like that nowadays.

For instance, if you want VLC, you get the repository address, add it via one click, then it installs itself AND its dependencies. Sames goes for apps like Transmission, Handbrake, Chromium, etc.

As you know, in Ubuntu, you simply open the Software Center, search for the application, then press install.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Mac people talking about Linux in 2011 sound like Windows people talking about Mac in 1997.

So true.
post #73 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Dealbreaker for some.
.

It shouldn't be...Apple's "insistence" on upgrading and having all their resources/personnel directed at the latest OS seriously minimizes bugs and glitches.

In other words Apple engineers are only writing code, testing code and implementing said code for one version of the OS.

This make a lot more sense than what MS has been trying to do for years...Legacy, legacy, legacy.

I for one, am willing to sign on to the philosophy because it makes sense. SL at $30 is a deal. I also bought iLife '11.

Best Chris

PS. App store recognized my iLife '11 as already installed!
post #74 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You can back them up. They end up in your applications folder.

I was replying to someone saying there's no need for backups. I was explaining why his argument was fallacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

It shouldn't be...Apple's "insistence" on upgrading and having all their resources/personnel directed at the latest OS seriously minimizes bugs and glitches.

In other words Apple engineers are only writing code, testing code and implementing said code for one version of the OS.

This make a lot more sense than what MS has been trying to do for years...Legacy, legacy, legacy.

And yet businesses don't update because of software that only works with previous versions of OS X. Many, many people don't 1-up until they're two versions behind.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #75 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

It shouldn't be...Apple's "insistence" on upgrading and having all their resources/personnel directed at the latest OS seriously minimizes bugs and glitches.

In other words Apple engineers are only writing code, testing code and implementing said code for one version of the OS.

This make a lot more sense than what MS has been trying to do for years...Legacy, legacy, legacy.

I for one, am willing to sign on to the philosophy because it makes sense. SL at $30 is a deal. I also bought iLife '11.

Best Chris

I initially installed Ubuntu 6.06 for 0 USD, and I've upgraded through every release up 'till now, without paying a cent. Apple makes plenty on hardware and the software sold through the App Store to let people at the very least upgrade their OS for free.
post #76 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I was replying to someone saying there's no need for backups. I was explaining why his argument was fallacy.



And yet businesses don't update because of software that only works with previous versions of OS X. Many, many people don't 1-up until they're two versions behind.

Agreed! But when Apple introduces something new...I don't think it's illegitimate of them to require the latest OS....

From a personal stand point I would prefer all Apple's engineers talents/efforts directed to the latest OS as opposed to redirecting those limited resources towards older generations of the OS. It just seems setting ones self up for a lot of headaches.

Anyway, I take your point about businesses updating, but I think that may be a hold over from them dealing so much with MS...where the rule of thumb was, "NEVER upgrade!

Best!
post #77 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

So how do you back up the software purchases?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

1. No real need to backup as you can download your purchased Apps as many times from the Mac App Store as you like.

Another good reason to plug in a back up drive and turn on TimeMachine. If you have a crash you can reinstall everything, including your apps, from TimeMachine. I had to do this just last week for the first time since starting to make back ups and it made what had formerly been an expensive, time consuming, data losing and nerve wracking debacle into a minor inconvenience.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #78 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCLI View Post

I initially installed Ubuntu 6.06 for 0 USD, and I've upgraded through every release up 'till now, without paying a cent. Apple makes plenty on hardware and the software sold through the App Store to let people at the very least upgrade their OS for free.

Yep free is good, but not always best. I appreciate all the PHD's at Apple perfecting the OS at an incredible rate....I guess I show that by purchasing the latest upgraded SW. I look it as more of an investment in my productivity and encouraging Apple also.

I know that may sound a little naive, but I bought the original iPhone and it instantly changed my level of productivity. Mainly managing contacts, visual voicemail and email. Essentially, I was paying $30 a month for being an early adopter...but it was well worth it.

My iPhone 4 is a dream and can't wait to get the 2nd gen. iPad and MBA!

Best!
post #79 of 164
Seems pretty good so far, and such an obvious step it's amazing Apple didn't do it years ago.

Obviously missing are all of the serious productivity apps, I assume because Autodesk, Adobe, and Microsoft would be rather less than happy to hand over 30% to Apple. Does make the graphics section rather odd though to see Photoshop, Maya, and Mudbox all missing.
post #80 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Seems pretty good so far, and such an obvious step it's amazing Apple didn't do it years ago.

Obviously missing are all of the serious productivity apps, I assume because Autodesk, Adobe, and Microsoft would be rather less than happy to hand over 30% to Apple. Does make the graphics section rather odd though to see Photoshop, Maya, and Mudbox all missing.

Yep, Adobe is stuck in the '90's!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › First look: Apple's Mac App Store simplifies buying, updating software