Customers love the Mac App Store . At least , it seems likemany of them do . But as Apple ’s one - stop shop class for Mac apps grow older , it becomes increasingly more restrictive to the developers who sell apps there .
In a post on his web log titled “ The Mac App Store ’s future of irrelevance , ” Instapaper developer Marco Arment asked : “ How many good apps will be pulled from the App Store before Apple cares ? ” He proceed : “ My self-assurance in the App Store , as a client , has evaporated , ” since he can no longer feel sealed that an app he buys today will rest available in the store subsequently . Arment argue that “ the App Store is no longer a reliable position to buy software package , ” at least for him and other Mac App Store customer who buy apps that developers later feel impel to pull from the store . His conclusion : “ The Mac App Store is in significant risk of becoming an irrelevant , depleted - dealings flea market where buyers rarely embark for serious purchases . ”
Arment references the most common Mac App Store concern — its sandboxing requirement that can throttle what functionality developers may admit in their apps . By requiring that developers sandbox their apps , Apple can assure that apps wo n’t prod around where they do n’t go on users ’ Macs — but that limit can potentially want apps to incur significant changes .
Arment ’s post touched off another round of Mac App Store disputation . He believes that because the Mac App Store is bad for app developer , that the overall quality of apps in the store will steadily decrease , which will be speculative for developers , customers , and Apple alike .
The case against the Mac App Store
Of naturally , the Mac App Store ’s restrictions come with at least some common law . All its limitation — sandboxing , lack of upgrade pricing , and so on — were part of its older , more democratic brother since sidereal day one : The iOS App Store . But , Arment tellsMacworld , preciselybecauseit ’s always been that way , “ there are n’t huge class of [ iOS ] apps that people have grown accustomed to using that are of a sudden not uncommitted anymore . ”
The iOS App Store ’s restrictions work ( “ for the most part ” ) , Arment says , “ because the platform has grown around them . They mostly do n’t get in the way . But on the Mac , the App Store policy are being retrofit into a well - establish environment that they ’re moderately ill-sorted with . ”
There ’s no arguing that there ’s a divergence between restriction in place from the get - go ( the iOS App Store ) , and restriction retro - fitted over time ( the Mac App Store ) . That ’s not to say that the Mac App Store launched without any restrictions;from day one , it lack support for upgrade pricing , limited root approach , and ban apps that accessed private APIs ( practical app programming port — computer code provided by Apple that developer can use to make their apps ) or attempted to tweak elements of the Mac ’s port .
And Arment is n’t the only developer who opine the Mac App Store is troubled . Paul Kafasis of Rogue Amoeba toldMacworldthat he agrees with Arment ’s disceptation that the Mac App Store faces a risk of becoming irrelevant , or at least , far less than dominant , because of Apple ’s failure . Many apps , Kafasis says , “ including our own , have never figure the store due to the onerous restrictions in place from day one . surface and Audio Hijack Pro are both enormously popular applications which would need to have major feature bump off to correspond within the App Store . Castrating our apps is simply not appealing . ”
Kafasis recognise the benefits of the Mac App Store : “ [ It ] made it loose for developers to trade software program , without a muckle of operating cost . ” But , he add up , “ the obstacles to selling software have been shrinking for years … sell directly is easier than it ’s ever been . The Mac App Store is a nice enough approximation now , but it would have been truly revolutionary 20 eld ago . ”
“ customer will go where the software program is , ” Kafasis continued , and “ if the software is only available outside the store , most customer will still line up it . ” And indeed , they did just that for decades before the Mac App Store ever existed .
In fact , Kafasis contend , “ it ’s possible the entrepot is educating folks as to the existence of third - party software program , time period , ” and once young potential customers are aware of that fact , it becomes easy to trade to them anywhere . That may become increasingly of import for Rogue Amoeba : Kafasis says the company is work to sandboxPiezo , but that doing so may be unacceptable . “ If we ’re unable to do that , we ’ll have little alternative but to shift Piezo from the Mac App Store to direct sales exclusively . ”
And as it does for Arment , that sorting of uncertainty turns Kafasis off as a customer : “ For me , when I see an app is only available in the Mac App Store , I ’m really less likely to be interested . Will it still be there in 6 months or a yr ? Will Apple force it to withdraw functionality ? That uncertainty makes me desire a direct version , every time . ”
In defense of the Mac App Store
One common reception to Arment ’s argument is that they really employ only to geeks and office users — hardcore Mac users who run muscular software most potential to get bitten by App Store restriction . In a followup office , Arment countered with his impression that the Mac App Store problems he describesaren’t fix to such users . Because geeks are evangelists and guess leader , Arment suggests , their influence attain many distinctive Mac user too , and those user will feel likewise put - off by Mac App Store apps that get impel out of the store .
But not all developer see the Mac App Store situation as negatively as Arment and Kafasis .
James Thomson from TLA Systems sells apps in both the Mac and iOS App Stores . And in important room , the Mac App Store continue to work out great for him : “ We ’ve had PCalc in the Mac App Store since it open up , and we ’ve watch noticeably higher sales from the App Store than through other channels . So , from a visibility and ease of purchase degree of view , it would seem that [ the Mac App Store is ] a winner . ”
That said , Thomson does have concerns . He toldMacworldthat TLA is “ in the outgrowth of submitting our first update with sandboxing switch on , and we ’ve had to remove an ( admittedly , very venial ) feature of speech ” to do so . “ It ’s not ideal , but we do n’t really have much of a choice if we desire to sell in the entrepot , ” he says .
But Thomson does n’t needfully fit with Arment ’s suggestion that more customers will increasingly shop for apps elsewhere : “ Even though you’re able to see a great deal of folk talking about it within our modest sphere , I do n’t remember we ’re the mean consumer by any means . Most people will just corrupt through the memory board because they are used to the experience from iOS , and it ’s right there in front of them . ”
Rather than bear more customers to desolate the Mac App Store , Thomson predicts the opposite : “ A modest , and shrinkage , bit will corrupt specialist software directly . ”
What it all means for Mac users
If Arment and Kafasis are right , and the Mac App Store is destined for inconsequentiality , that ’s a exonerated problem for Apple . While Arment was speedy to clarify that he never intended to suggest that users would “ completely desolate the Mac App Store , ” he add up that such abandonment is n’t the only direction that the storage could digest : “ The problem is that it ’ll be break mostly to simple , cheap , often subpar apps , and for the few good apps that remain , users will mistrust the Mac App Store as a stable space to bribe them and have a bun in the oven succeeding upgrades . ” The solution ? In Arment ’s view , without significant change , the Mac App Store “ will just never become good enough that Apple could need that Macs only scat App Store software . ”
Is that divinatory Mac App Store - only OS Apple ’s catholicon for the Mac ? iOS , of form , splendidly supports only running third - party apps purchased from its App Store . Does Apple hope to one day make Macs execute the same room ?
Mountain Lion ’s new Gatekeeper featurelets exploiter limit which apps can consort on their Macs ; the default option confine Macs to running Mac App Store apps and apps from “ identified developers”—developers who ’ve register ( for $ 99 ) with Apple , but whose apps are n’t capable to Mac App Store restrictions . Could a more restrictive , Mac App Store set become the raw default — or perhaps , theonlyoption ?
Arment ’s guess : “ I do n’t guess it will happen for a while , but I do think that [ restricting Macs to Mac App Store apps is ] Apple ’s eventual finish . And if it does happen , no matter how far in the time to come that is , I bet we ’ll all holler that it ’s too soon . ”
Thomson ’s take : “ Yes , I can entirely see Apple interlace things down more in future . But , I would expect them to first completely remove the ability to carry non - signed computer code , and I do n’t imagine too many the great unwashed would complain about that . We ’re a in effect couple of age aside from only allowing App Store apps I ’d say — probably not in 10.9 , but after that it would n’t surprise me . ”
And Kafasis ’s linear perspective : “ I think that would be disaster for everyone . It would be bad for developer who do n’t check into the Mac App Store , certainly , and that ’s a growing number . It would be bad for users , who would no longer have entree to a wide image of very useful products which only do n’t fit within the Mac App Store . Ultimately , I consider it would be very bad for Apple as well , as their now - thriving Mac platform would be damage . ”
What Mac users should do
Perhaps , at this dot , you ’re wondering what you should do . The first step is conclude howyoufeel about the Mac App Store and Apple ’s increasingly rigorous rules regarding the apps that can be trade there . If you do n’t mind them , keep contentedly shopping in the fund .
But take pause . When we talk about the importance of backing up , we often say that it ’s a question of when , not if , your voiceless drive will go bad . With the Mac App Store , it ’s nearing foregone conclusion that if you have n’t yet been stymied by the impact of one of Apple ’s Mac App Store rules , you will be soon .
That stymieing might take one of several forms : A developer of an app you love might release a mark new variation with a blade new price ticket , since there ’s no option to offer promote pricing . An app you love may be force to strip out feature of speech you calculate upon to comply with Apple ’s rules . Or developers behind an app you love may find that they simply ca n’t keep the app in the Mac App Store any longer , and draw out it ( seePostbox , Alfred , TextExpander , andMoom , each of which has been force to move out of the App Store and return to a direct sales only role model ) . Whether you ’ll be capable to “ grouchy - grade ” from your Mac App Store version of that app to a standalone , external version will be at the whimsy ( and maybe even technical expertise ) of the developer in doubt .
While the Mac App Store remains a o.k. place to buy certain software deed of conveyance today , the issue are real , and Apple thus far has expose its characteristic conclusion to deposit to its current plan . If you ’re concerned , you have two tools you could apply : The first is to discontinue shop at the Mac App Store when potential , and buy apps direct from developers instead . And the 2nd is toshare your feedback with Appledirectly .
It ’s definitely too before long to panic about the future tense of the Mac App Store and OS X. But it ’s not too presently to be concerned .
[ Lex Friedmanis a Macworld staff author . ]
Updated at 8:10 a.m. PT to correct an error . The article originally stated that developers could become “ identified developer ” with Apple for free . In fact , only developer who are part of Apple ’s Mac Developer Program — membership in which cost $ 99 per class — can hold the security from Apple to signalize their apps as identified developers .
