narwhal

My delay was I'm switching from Cocoa to Catalyst for my macOS apps. It's a lot of work. I think I've figured everything out now, but the learning curve is long. For one thing, Xcode 12 GUI doesn't support building for both macOS 10.15 (Intel) and 11 (Intel and M1), you need to tweak the project in a text editor. For another, you need to implement the old Mac help system in your Catalyst apps, including Help Indexer, and there's zero support for it in Xcode. Another thing is, Apple didn't post sample code showing how to implement menus on Catalyst apps, so it's a guessing game getting it working. There's zero sample code for the transition -- which is insane. Some frameworks simply don't work in Catalyst apps: you can forget about StoreKit and GameKit, they don't work on M1. There's more, I could make a longer list, but now that I've figured everything out, I'm busy releasing apps.

I don’t mind Apple removing old apps from the store. But as a developer, I really wish they would fix a related bug. Apps that have been pulled from the store don’t work with TestFlight. TestFlight has become an essential tool for developers, and blocking access to it for apps we are trying to update is annoying.

coolfactor said:

The fact that Apple is returning nearly one half of the original fee is more than generous, i say. Again, how can someone complain about this? It's a gift.

Just out of curiosity, are you a small developer who ported his apps to Apple Silicon using the DTK, and is now faced with going without an Apple Silicon machine for a month? I have to PACK UP my DTK, wait for apple to issue a coupon, then order an M1 Mac mini (wait time is 3 weeks now for 16 GB version). It would make a LITTLE more sense if we could replace the mini before sending it back; but going a month without an AS dev/test machine is CRAZY!

I was an Epson user for maybe 20 years, but recently dumped them for a Brother inkjet, which has given us no troubles. Epson cartridges and their new refillable ink tanks were always drying up, requiring cleaning between every print job. Also, Epson's paper handling mechanisms are so flimsy the past 10 years, you can't print on card stock. And for photos, I'm using the drug store down the street. I can send the photos via their web site, then just drive a mile to pick them up. A lot easier than printing photos at home.

lorca2770 said:

Just a question, since time makes me forget. Wasn’t Arm developed by Apple, and Steve Jobs sold the company in the times of necessity? Careful! I am not talking about the false narrative of Microsoft. Only about Arm

In 1990, when Acorn's RISC chip division didn't have the funds to implement Apple's requested changes for Newton, ARM was formed, a joint venture of Apple, VLSI and Acorn (with Acorn's IP). When Steve Jobs returned to Apple, Newton was discontinued and Apple sold its stake in ARM for a big profit, helping Apple's balance sheet until Steve could release iMacs, iPods and eventually iPhones and iPads. (Ironic that both Newton and iPhone were based on ARM.)

jas99 said:

Apple has no competition. Microsoft makes some of the world’s worst software and hardware. 

Honestly, Apple should be at $500 per share and Microsoft should be out of business.

Microsoft's market cap is due to its Azure and Office businesses, not Windows or Surface. Microsoft doesn't really compete with Apple.

wozwoz said:

"Mac shifting to ARM may come as soon as ..."  ... ore more likely, it may not. 
It's a dumb idea that breaks the Windows compatibility that has been Apple's hook into bringing people over from the dark side, and will involve huge amounts of angst for everyone, with no 'noticeable' difference (other than your software won't work). By noticeable, it needs to run 40 times faster for anyone to care. 

Have you noticed what software is popular on Windows? Chrome, iTunes, Office, Adobe CC, anti-virus, torrent software. All of these are on macOS too. I have a feeling the people running Windows VMs on Mac are the geekier among us; and it's not the potential audience Apple desires for Mac. (Apple is content with geekier phone users buying Android, and regular folks buying iPhones.) If Apple produces chips running twice as fast as Intel's at lower cost, that would be fast enough to be noticed. Forty times faster would be better though, you're right.

I also think macOS devs won't have much trouble with a recompile unless Apple drops AppKit and goes UIKit-only on the new chip.

Well, I had Tiles for a couple years -- but they were expensive and not great. Seemed nobody was running the Tile app, so your lost stuff stayed lost. I bought a bunch of Apple's AirTags when they came out and they work better and are cheaper. Tile and now Life360 are a business with no future. And to hear that Life360 sells customer data -- they've slit their own throat.

I get that Epic doesn't like to pay 30% commission to Apple, but Amazon and Netflix didn't want to either and they found a solution that works for them. I'm thinking Epic would be better off negotiating with Google and Apple, not suing them. Make some money while their product is hot. By the time the Epic trial is over, they may not have a product anyone wants. Or more likely they'll get bought out by someone, someone who doesn't want to participate in a multi-year lawsuit.

As for Spotify, I think they have a case. Since Apple competes in music streaming, Spotify should NOT be charged a commission. It gives Apple an unfair advantage. Same with other categories. If the host OS competes, they need to eliminate commissions for competitors in that product category. Probably should do the same for video streaming and audiobooks. Apple's not making money from Netflix and Audible anyway.

seanj said:

Sticking old versions of HDMI and SD reader utterly pointless.

As a frequent presenter, every venue has an HDMI cable running from the Epson projector to the podium for me to plug into a laptop. You can talk about how slow HDMI 2.0 is, but I've never even seen an HDMI 2.1 Epson projector. I'm very pleased that Apple stuck an HDMI port in my new MacBook Pro 16.

robin huber said:

Uh, remember iAd? 

I do. I'm an app developer, and the iAd banner ads generated more money for my apps than AdMob does with combined banners and interstitials. iAd was wonderful for developers.