Some years ago I looked at developing a MacOS app and distributing it through the App Store. I came away from that experience with two showstoppers:<p>- Apple does not disclose to you who bought your app.<p>- There is no mechanism to make paid updates possible. If you want to release a big update and get paid you need to release a new app. There is no way to contact current users and offer them an inexpensive update.<p>Are these two issues still true of the MacOS App Store?
OP here, happy to answer any questions. I know Apple gets a lot of well-deserved flack, but for a small-time dev like me, them taking a 15% cut makes things a lot simpler for me.
A "better experience"? Maybe for a Mac only app. But once your product spreads across multiple platforms is much easier for the customer to download the app for all platforms in one place--your website.
FWIW, I refuse to buy stuff from the Mac App Store because it's just not compatible with my life. I don't have any i-devices. I have a handful of iCloud/iTunes accounts of which I'm not sure which is technically the one I want to use (one of them is even a legacy pre-email one).<p>I never connect my OSX box with my personal email and I will not in the future. I get it, but I just won't buy software from that store, hands down.<p>Maybe I'm just in the dwindling minority of Mac users.
Does the 15% have a shelf? Like... if a business makes $1,000,001, do they owe 30% on the entire amount, or just the extra dollar? In other words, is there a disincentive to go above a million until you're above two million?
As a consumer I hate the Mac App Store so much if only for the reason that every time I want to do something I have login again and again. The Mac App store is quite buggy. Sometimes I have to log in two times in a row. I hate it so fucking much that I almost consider not buying a good product just to avoid the Mac App Store's shitty app.<p>I also hate that the purchase is tied to my Apple ID, especially for a utility that I'd like to use in another computer. Say a workstation where I might have a different Apple ID.<p>If an app, for example, can be installed in two work machines, I don't want my Apple ID to dictate which machines.<p>Anyways rant over.<p>I get that for the seller's point of view the Mac App Store's updated policy is a boon.
Let's not forget the international headaches.<p>This is an issue in both iOS and Mac app stores. Certain apps are (arguably rightly) only available in certain regions (like banking apps) but Apple's poor design means you now have to switch stores to upgrade.<p>So Capital One tells me I have to upgrade my app I need to log out my Apple account, switch the region to USA, type in my address, phone numbers, and a USA credit card (this is for apple), then start the store back up. Sometimes it takes a while for it to switch. I can then download the new version of the Capital One app. Then my MUFG Bank app needs an update so I have to repeat the process to switch back the Japan store.<p>Even funnier, the app store will tell me I need to upgrade but then won't upgrade (Because I'm not on the right store) so it's clearly the same store since the upgrade notices flow through the same store app, it's just bad design.<p>Why Apple can't figure this out is beyond me. They're an international company. They must have 1000s of employees that have to deal with this issue. Sure I get it does not affect the majority of users. The same can be said for accessibility features yet they still make them.
I buy directly from the publisher whenever that is an option simply because I figure they need the 30% more than Apple does.<p>But I agree that the App Store is a far better experience both in purchase and then upgrade. My mum has one non-app store app on her Mac and is always befuddled by the upgrade prompt. Even for my own use I find the App Store upgrade is almost always better than other means.
This is disappointing and sad. The more people who do this, the more difficult it becomes for those who don't.<p>You can't download even free apps from the App Store without providing an email address, phone number, and street address (to get an Apple ID). The App Store app also sends the mac's hardware serial number to Apple when you launch it, associating it with your identity in the logs. The email and phone required are verified so you can't just make some shit up.<p>This means that to get any apps from the App Store, even free ones, you must be thoroughly de-anonymized.<p>Not caring about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like not caring about free speech because you have nothing to say.<p>Developers should reject the App Store on customer privacy grounds alone. When this becomes the sole method of distributing apps on the mac, as it is on iOS, the world becomes a much worse place, as then the US government had permanent access without a warrant to every app you use.<p>Please don't contribute to building that world.
Is there a convenient way to sandbox non-appstore apps?<p>It's a real chore to figure out what apps that aren't available through the appstore (Chrome, VSCode, etc.) are doing to my computer. So much so that I'd rather just castrate them by default and deal with breakage later.
The problem with the Mac (and iOS) App Store is too many API restrictions - Apple can do too many things that developers can’t. And I don’t mean crazy things. I mean normal things that a normal application would want to do.
I don’t have much to say about the move to the App Store except that given that there is apparently a market for a standalone paid indie photo browser, the Mac market may be more vibrant than popularly assumed.
I am a bit split on that one. I see the convenience of using the app store, but I try to buy directly if I can. I lot of tools for power users have problems with scripting when containerized, direct purchases are much more convenient if I need to buy an upgrade license (which means cheaper in the long run) and developer gets more money that way.
Starts the article:<p>> [not-publicly-disclosed-but-substantially-less-than–30]%<p>Later in the article:<p>> a 3.5% fee with all those downsides is substantially worse for both me and my customers than a flat 15%.<p>I wonder what Paddle's fee is...
What a nice piece of whataboutism. Convenience is king. And stupidity is his queen. When I sell products I want full control of my CX, just as Apple. Creating, maintaining and optimising CX is not for everyone. It requires new mindset, new priorities, new expenses and mind geared towards product for customers, feedback, support etc. If your dream software is egoistic projection with profit only goal you will be better with App Store bonanza. If by any chance you want to Serve people and have valuable product the idea of using App Store is absurd. In App Store you have no control over UX. It is what Apple is decided to be. You have no direct customer feedback or connection. Apple owns this channel. In summary: You are working not for you and your customers. You are working for Apple and paying for the "privilege".
I prefer the Mac App Store over any other alternative, as a consumer.<p>I understand 30% is a large cut and I wish they'd cut it down to 15% across the board [it could be a competitive advantage, too].
As a user, I have the following honest question for anyone who's clamoring for the abolishment of the App Store(s):<p>Can you guarantee that your proposed distribution mechanism will give me a refund if I ask for it?<p>Apple has always given me a refund for <i>all</i> third-party apps, almost no questions asked, ever.<p>Whereas on the other hand, apps/services which bypass In-App Purchases and use their own payment systems stall me for weeks or months before they refund, if ever. For example I'm still trying to get my money back from Couchsurfing after they basically hijacked my account about a month ago until I paid a "COVID contribution" just to delete my info.