Amazon takes on Apple's Mac App Store with its own 'Mac Download Store' - Page 2

How strict is the MAS compared to the iAS? I know you cant have installers, but what about the underlying code in MS and Adobes apps? Would they drop all Carbon before they could submit their apps?

From what Ive seen Apple is being just as strict with their own apps. They currently list 10 apps, 2 of which (Xcode and FaceTime) will be accessible for free via Lion. They have a lot more than 10 apps including 3 of the 5 iLife 11 apps which I presume have expunged all the Caron and PPC code.

That's not true. The "equal to or lower price" rule only applies to in-app purchases on the iOS App Store, it doesn't apply to the Mac App Store at all.

So there is no price parity requirement for selling apps in and out of the MAS?

If that were true, then no one would develop for or ensure compatibility with Windows XP or Vista. The reality is developers need to reach the greatest percentage of users taking into account cost and benefit when making a product work with legacy operating systems.

For example, it makes sense to ensure compatibility with Leopard but if Tiger has substantial bugs and would require a significant amount of effort to make an application work, it is no longer a viable option because the cost outweighs the benefit (you're only reaching an additional 6% of Mac users).

Personally, I'd love to see more things compatible with Tiger simply because a lot of schools use Tiger, but I'm also not the one eating the development costs.

ding ding ding

Buy from Amazon and it is unlikely the app will be recognized as installed by the app store. Which means you will receive no updates. Additionally, I'd be curious if an app bought from Amazon would show up in iTunes? Will the app transfer to new computers you buy?

I'd stick with the Mac App Store for Mac specific software. Amazon is great for things like Turbotax, books, plastic junk, etc...

You can't make that statement without knowing the wholesale price.

My mistake. After searching pretty hard I am unable to find that rule. I must have assumed it existed.

+++ qft

It would make sense to use Mac API's that is available on all Mac OS X. Bigger audience, more sales opportunity. As a consumer, I am not sure what version of Mac OS I am running. I buy software for the Mac and I just expect it to work. I don't want to have to upgrade my OS when I buy software. I am ok with this mediocrity.

I have many apps that auto update without the App Store. I am kind of use to that update. TurboTax was the latest software I bought and I am use to buying that way too. Now if App Store was going to give me a big discount, I would give them a try.

Thats certainly an argument for a developer, but the counter-arguement is that you could lose customers if you are selling an app that is slower, has less features and all-around functions poorly because its not made with a newer SDK with better APIs.

For example, once I needed an app for capturing my screen as I used it. Video, not stills. I tried Snapz Pro X and ScreenFlow. ScreenFlow wasnt know by anyone I knew but I was informed about Snap ProZ simply because its been around awhile and was loved at one time. I choose ScreenFlow for many reasons I wont get into here. I then told friends to try it and they couldnt believe how elegant and powerful this app was while using few resources. I seem to recall it was only for 10.5 at the time, ignoring the not so old 10.4.

So now we are going to have to code down to old versions of OSX. No thanks. I'm writing code for the latest versions of OSX software and that's it. That so called developer is holding up innovation...yet people are rightfully quick to blame msft without acknowledging that some rogue developers are lazy and will not upgrade when they should costing your company more money and pain when they are finally forced to upgrade.

Some of us do more then just surf the web and send emails.
Snow Leopard is a disaster.

Stop trolling this site. It about time the real members started taking it back from the 'investor interest only' trolls.
Some of us rely on Apple to generate REAL income through production... Unlike all the wallstreet leeches who produce nothing.

Because installing a Windows app often needs a call to tech support in order to complete. The Mac apps typically do not.

I don't see it being very successful either. But even if it is, it doesn't hurt Apple. Remember, Apple is in the business of selling hardware.

Anyone care to elaborate on why SL is "a disaster"? I run 10.6 on four machines and 10.5 on just one now, and I haven't yet found anything that 10.6 does worse.

True. Not as per Apple implementation which is much more integrated and quite importantly, works beautifully.

Had a look at the Amazon Mac Download Store. Noticed that 'Airport Mania: free flight' was a free download. Attempted to download it after 'purchasing' it with a credit card, still needed for 0.00 transactions, and:

Game Downloads are only available to US customers
We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. Please continue shopping on the Amazon.com home page.

That's even though I've successfully bought books, music etc. from Amazon US before. So much for ever buying any software from them.

Hmmm doesn't seem to be out in the UK, rather annoying how companies release something for the US only and ignore the rest of the planet, guess Amazon does not want me to spend my British Pounds with them..... Twats

iiii^ - in lieu of a "thumbs-up" button... I agree 100%!

Certainly there is nothing about it in the MAS Review Guidelines, but there is in the iOS one.
Mac: http://developer.apple.com/appstore/...uidelines.html
iOS: http://developer.apple.com/appstore/...uidelines.html

deleted

Simple answer. Amazon probably gets the same cut from Microsoft for a boxed or digital sale. No 30% BS.

Now I've seen everything .... An obvious troll (check history) calling someone else a troll... laughed so hard at the sheer stupidity of it all .... lost 1/2 cup of coffee. Damn you.

Actually 30% is less than normal retail channels. Especially when you consider the associated costs and services that Apple assumes (purchase records and tracking, returns and customer service, re-downloads, upgrades, etc.) Most software you would buy in a store is marked up as much as 60-100% (or more) over what they paid wholesale (which is a 37-50%(+) cut) and they do pretty much nothing else (especially not returns or customer service.) This is true for typical small operation titles, but I have to admit I'm not familiar with Adobe or Microsoft's price structures.

Says the "real member" who has been posting since way back in February 2011.

Perhaps the poster dislikes SL because it makes other OS platforms look bad in comparison?

I have one old PPC Mac that is pegged out at Leopard. The fact that it is stuck there has finally stimulated me to replace it with an intel machine (I guess I have gotten to like SL.)

I'm sorry but that's just a whining noise. Stop blethering piss.

I totally agree. I can't wait to replace my aging iMac and to have OS X Lion with the Mac App Store. I will prefer getting my software there because it will keep my software up to date. But a dedicated Mac software store at Amazon will only help Apple grow the Mac's market share. As far as competition goes, Apple doesn't mind. They are not locking people into the Mac App Store because people are used to getting their software other ways and developers aren't used to conforming to some of the rules associated with the store. Amazon's store only highlights the fact that there is plenty of software for the Mac. Besides, I'm sure Apple knows that the Mac App Store will be very successful because there are plenty of users like me that want integration, convenience, and security. I may still get software other places, but most of it will come from Apple.

However, if you look at their page, they have simply traded one copyright problem for another. They do not acknowledge Apple's trademarks, so their use of 'Mac' without trademark notice is a violation of copyright laws.


Foolish logic. By that logic, Windows developers should be programming for Windows 95 since Win95 apps (if properly coded) will run on more machines than modern apps.

In the real world, developers want to take advantage of the features of new operating systems. This is particularly true since anyone running an OS that's more than 3 years old probably isn't spending a lot of money on software, anyway.


Exactly.


Actually, it's lower. Normal wholesale discounts are about 50%.


Not at all. Start pricing software at various outlets and you'll find that the price can vary.


As stated above, that's foolish. By that logic, developers should limit themselves to the few APIs that are on ALL systems. So Windows software should be written using only about 20% of all the Windows APIs- so that those people still using Windows 95 can run the software.


There are major differences:

1. Newer versions of OS X will generally run the older apps. That's not the case with Android.
2. Older Macs will run newer versions of OSX while older phones may or may not run newer versions of Android (my daughter has a phone that's less than a year old which won't run anything higher than Android 2.1).
3. Applications in Android are VERY limited in terms of the OS version they will run on.

You almost never run into people having problems running Mac apps on different systems (other than the very old apps when Apple stops supporting something). It is very, very common to hear of people running into problems with Android. For example, see what the Angry Birds developer has to say about it.