Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by webmobdev 1991 days ago
But do you believe Apple should be the ultimate arbitrator of such silly things like the name of an app you create?
2 comments

In their environment that they clearly indicate is their environment from the outset? Yes..

They are not telling the author they can't call his app whatever they want. They are saying they will not sell it in their app store under that name.

And that's the bargain you enter into when you sell in a walled garden ecosystem.

> They are saying they will not sell it in their app store under that name.

But they were indeed selling it under that name for 6 years!

How would you like it if you spend a lot of money to advertise your company or product and create a brand value to it, to one day Apple telling you that they would like you to change the name or they will not distribute it on their store?

Yes, the app store is a closed environment where they can dictate some terms. But don't forget that the developers PAY THEM to use it, and as such their terms cannot trump the consumer laws that exist to protect against such abuse. (By the way, "my shop, my terms" have already faced legal scrutiny some of which were found to be illegal - popular ones include refusing to serve people of colour or gays.)

They are also doing everything they can to block people from distributing apps outside of their walled garden.

So they are in fact telling the author that he can't call his app whatever he wants. Because if he does, they will do everything they can to prevent anyone else from ever using that app.

They probably want their users to use their proprietary store, but I got a new MacBook Pro for work in September and I installed everything I needed and wanted using Hombrew and brew cask, so I didn't use the Apple Store at all. You can also Download .dmf files and install Apps that way. What is it that you say they do to prevent people installing Apps outside the Apple Store?
Apple requires software to be "notarized" (signed by apple) be able to run on newer Macs. Apple also blocks developers they do not like from notarizing apps. See Apple vs Epic.

You might be able to bypass the notarization requirement as an end-user, if you have enough technical know-how, but good luck explaining that to your customers. Especially when all the dialogs are calling your software malicious, untrustworthy, etc.

>Apple requires software to be "notarized"

This is not exactly true and you know it. For example:

>if you have enough technical know-how

You right click the app and then click open.

>Especially when all the dialogs are calling your software malicious, untrustworthy, etc.

Another lie. The dialog says "this is from an unidentified developer" and does not say anything about being malicious or untrustworthy. What is your beef with Apple that you're so willing to say so many outright lies on a forum filled with people who know better and can call you out on it?

Windows does this with UAC. Many Linux distros require executables to be explicitly set with the +x flag. macOS is not unique in this, and like with the other OSes it's a security feature.

Check out the warning and "bypass" for yourself: https://www.macworld.com/article/3140183/how-to-install-an-a...

There's no need to be confrontational. Apple themselves say that software must be notarized going forward in Catalina, as GateKeeper will check all apps that are quarantined, which is essentially all apps that you download from the internet. Apple would very much like you to notarize your applications and the workaround you provided is not intended to be a general-purpose solution.

GateKeeper will also flag your app as malicious and having the potential to damage your Mac if Apple revokes your certificate, which they have done in the past by mistake.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/notarizing_m...

> Beginning in macOS 10.14.5, software signed with a new Developer ID certificate and all new or updated kernel extensions must be notarized to run. Beginning in macOS 10.15, all software built after June 1, 2019, and distributed with Developer ID must be notarized

>They are also doing everything they can to block people from distributing apps outside of their walled garden.

People keep saying that but nothing on my Mac has ever stopped me from installing whatever software I want. I wish people would stop repeating this lie.

You already forgot about the Epic games debacle where Apple did exactly that?
I must have forgotten it because I can open the Epic store and play Fortnite on my Mac right now without any warnings. I actually just downloaded the installer right from epicgames.com and it installed just fine. Apple doesn't even try to stop me.

I remember Apple revoking Epic's access to Apple's developer tools because of a disagreement over their developer program TOS, but that only stops Epic from using Apple's tools. It does not prevent me from installing any software.

I have a ton of software on my Mac that's not part of the Apple developer program and the developers have never asked Apple's permission nor given Apple any money for the software and Apple has never once tried to block those developers from creating that software or me from installing and running it.

Yes, there were lawsuits and the courts forced Apple to stop their ridiculous behavior. That is why you can do this right now. Not because of Apple's goodwill, quite the contrary.
I'm going to say yes.

This isn't unique to Apple. Debian and other Linux distributions have also had similar discussions when considering the distribution of packages with obscene, morally repugnant or inappropriate names, as well as the package contents themselves.

Whether it's a commercial entity or a volunteer organisation, there are considerations regarding image and reputation. People can and will push the boundaries of what is acceptable, and somewhere you're going to have to draw a line.

The difference is that Debian or others still give both the users and the developers a CHOICE to distribute / acquire the app through other means. Apple cripples (and even outright denies this) on some of its platforms.