[Bobby_Tables]

The iOS App Store does the same thing with changing the rules in the middle of the game, but it is not subject to potential irrelevance because it is the only place to get software for iOS devices. So the obvious solution for Apple is to make the Mac App Store the only place to get software for MacOS.

I'm actually a little surprised this didn't happen in 10.8.

[archgrove]

Which would instantly kill the Mac as a development platform, and render all previously purchased software irrelevant. This just won't happen, though I can see a version of OS X that does this by default (perhaps on all "non-pro" models).

[Splines]

I think the only viable way to do this would be for Apple to make Macs obsolete. Like boiling a frog, if they upscaled the ipad to a desktop-lite device over the next few years, and eventually replaced their fully featured cousins with these devices, they would be able to accomplish it with far much less resistance.

(The iMac may have been a few years too early - they could have positioned the iMac as the trojan horse in this story).

[St-Clock]

But you need a Mac to develop most (i)OS applications and I cannot imagine some of the more complex apps being developed on an iPad-like device.

[untog]

It's all about where the mass market is. Just like the low-selling Mac Pro machines, Apple could quite happily keep OS X going for the professional minority that require a POSIX-like experience. The vast majority would use a slightly upgraded iOS, where all of that is hidden away.

[efsavage]

"render all previously purchased software irrelevant"

Remember how much business they lost last time they did this (the intel switch, or even the os x switch)? Oh wait...

[archgrove]

OS 9 -> OS X was supported by the Classic runtime for years. PPC to Intel was supported by Rosetta for years.

I suppose if the announced that this was the plan, and gave people years to migrate across, it might be something they'd do. But it would kill basically any technical use of the platform (development, scientific computing). I find it much more likely they'll evolve iOS "up" to support users for whom a closed appliance approach is helpful, whilst adding options to OS X to cater for those who want a more traditional computer but need a bit more help.

[kristofferR]

But they didn't - they made Rosetta and supported it a couple of years just to give the developers and the users time to update their apps/computers to Intel versions.

[juliano_q]

The day they do this is the day that I will partition my disk, install another OS and never look back. OSX is the only Apple product that is still attractive to me, but I fear that I will have to jump out sooner or later.

[pnathan]

With the shift towards iOSness and sandboxing for Windows & OSX, I don't see myself using anything but Linux - or recommending anything but Linux - for the future.

[Tyrannosaurs]

A few reasons why I think this will never happen:

* Taking something away from someone that they've always had (as would be the case with OS X) is very different to never giving them it (as has been the case with iOS).

* People are used to doing stuff that isn't possible with the current restrictions - with iOS they've only ever had those restrictions so they're not aware of what they might be missing out on.

* Developer goodwill would evaporate overnight. I'm not even sure it would be possible to develop on a Mac with this sort of restriction in place given the low level activity you often need to play around with.

* They'd need to develop a parallel mechanism for managing machines or lose what little they have of the Enterprise who are never going to use the app store.

[nsxwolf]

They'd need to make a "developer version" of OS X, which would just be OS X with this hypothetical super-Gatekeeper shut off. Then the whole thing just gets silly.

I believe the PC will remain a PC. Take away its nature and you might as well just hand everyone an iPad.

[Tyrannosaurs]

I can see them changing the language around the various Gatekeeper options and adding additional "are you sure?" warnings to scare people off the allow everything option and unsigned / non-Mac App Store installations but I don't think it will go any further than that.

[bishnu]

By default Mountain Lion can only run software from the App Store or by developers Apple has specifically certified. You can tune this restriction both up ("App Store only") and down ("any software can run").

[masklinn]

> by developers Apple has specifically certified.

There is no "special certification", it's just a matter of creating a developer account and generating a certificate.

Also, right-click -> open will bypass the verification under the assumption that if you know about that command, you probably somewhat know what you're doing.

[Terretta]

By default, you can right click anything from anywhere and choose "Open". It will install/run, and you will never be asked about that program again. But you have to make a conscious decision to run it.

[Tyrannosaurs]

That wasn't the case for me.

Gatekeeper was on for appstore and signed applications and I had to disable it to install something I downloaded (ironically because OS X told me to - X11).

[jonknee]

Right click and choose open. Don't double click the app. It definitely works.

[Tyrannosaurs]

Ah yes. Didn't know about that.

[gwkoehler]

Here's one thing I imagine: 10.9 by default won't allow apps outside the App Store, and you have to buy the 10.9 Server upgrade to have this privilege. They would bundle XCode with it or something to rebrand it as a "developer-friendly" add-on, and developers will be happy to pay, but all the consumers will be chained to the App Store.

[franzus]

Heh, good luck with that. Any pro user who needs more functionality than a ToDo-app will be enraged.

[ryanwaggoner]

The only thing that gives me comfort is that Apple itself has thousands of developers writing its own code, so they can only cripple their OS X so much. Otherwise what would they do, write all their software on Windows machines?

[Aloisius]

That will be the day I go back to Linux.

[spudlyo]

I thought the same thing as I was reading John Siracusa's review of Mountain Lion. My stomach sunk when I saw the default 'gatekeeper' options.

    [ ] Mac App Store
    [x] Mac App store and identified developers
    [ ] Anywhere

Seems likely at some point down the road the third option will no longer exist. My next project is getting Linux to run on an old MBP. I still love their hardware, but OSX is getting fuckin' uppity. I realize that this is just an attribute on a binary that you can set and unset, but still, the direction this is going seems clear to me. The further iOSification of OSX is driving me back to Linux on the desktop.

[bishnu]

It doesn't seem likely to me at all. In fact I think it's much more likely that you'll see THIS permissions system end up on iOS than vice-versa.

It's actually a fantastic security feature for the average user, so it doesn't worry me that much.

[spudlyo]

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little... oh fuck it.

[radley]

I seriously doubt it. Can you imagine Adobe's Creative Suite in the Mac App store? Never going to happen.

[spudlyo]

Adobe's binaries are already signed, they're an 'identified developer'.

[ohhmaagawd]

what's wrong with "identified developers" only? You don't want to pay the $100 a year to be in the mac dev program?

[spudlyo]

What's wrong with Apple trying to control which binaries it will and won't let you run on its OS? Doesn't Apple always have your best interests at heart?

[Aloisius]

Political activists in China no longer able to anonymously release software?

[technomancy]

Why wait? It's clear they would love to do this and are just holding off until they think they can get away with it.

[kristofferR]

Since OS X is a better/simpler choice for many people and has WAY more quality supported apps than Linux has. If Linux became the superior choice for most people, a lot of those people would switch.

[larrik]

I disagree with all of your first sentence.

As a full-time Linux/Django and iOS developer, switching over to the Mac from Ubuntu is f'ing painful.

Linux's reputation is far worse than it deserves.

[pavel_lishin]

What was painful about it?

[larrik]

Installing software has no consistency.

The built-in terminal is basically broken: -page-up and page-down don't work unless you hold shift -It uses CTRL-C instead of Command-C, unlike the rest of the OS. -I still can't find hotkeys to jump to the beginning of end of line, or skip over entire words (home, end, ctrl-arrow in Linux and Windows)

Home and End are COMPLETELY USELESS on OS X. I have never, in decades of computing thought "Oh, I want to scroll to the top or bottom of this document with one keypress, but not even bring the cursor with me." Given how often during programming I want to select an entire line, this is broken.

The mouse acceleration is stupid. I know you can get used to it, but then try to play StarCraft or something on it, and you will be awful (or at least severely handicapped), because the mouse acceleration system just doesn't work for stuff like that. Also, Lion broke all the work arounds.

The XCode debugger doesn't let me inspect anything that even might be out of scope. Most of the inspections are useless anyway. You can't even see a list of what is in an NSArray (isa = Class, puh-lease).

Viewing hidden files in Finder is hard enough to not remember. Viewing hidden files on a remote server seems to be impossible (maybe it isn't, I don't care). Simply typing in the folder you want to go to is a huge project.

OS X is a poor network neighbor. It rarely detects my other machines, and when it does it's after waiting forever, and it still barely works.

And, oh yeah, it cost me as much as my other 3 computers combined and is the worst of the 4, spec-wise.

[groovylick]

Once you have used a quality package manager everything in the osx ecosystem is painful to use.

[illumin8]

iOS has never had a legitimate way to install code in userspace outside of the App store. OS X has a long and rich history of allowing people to run any code in userspace that they want.

This is one of those situations where you can't really close the barn door after the horse has already left.

[arihant]

This probably won't happen in OSX, I think.

What Apple may do is stop developing MacOS altogether and make a variant of iOS for desktop after OSX (or simply rebrand). And I don't think this would be a total shock for the users by the time. Largely because Metro app would be following the store model too.