There goes OpenGL for Mac.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker ... -macs-date


I hope and expect this "ARM desktop" narrative goes bust. Save $30 on a CPU cost and lose $50 on software upgrades, bad economy for everyone.

Just $50?

Maybe magnitudes more, of course, multiple billions on the world scale, actually. I was just giving a base example.

My speculation is maybe Apple wants to flood macOS desktop with App Store mobile apps. Chances are, independent macOS developers don't generate as much income for them.

[Cinebient]

I also think mac is not really important for Apple. It will need some more years but iOS is clearly their main focus since there is all the money.
But until there is no full X-code for iOS and their pro apps like Logic are not available for iOS they are still trying to please the niche users with some crappy mac upgrades and macOS updates.
Maybe developers should focus more on iOS as well to be ready for the (unwanted?) future or focus on windows only

[quikquak]

Their two OSs are probably going to merge at some point, after all the iMac is basically just an iPad on a stick I was surprised to hear there’s a new Mac Pro on the horizon though...

[Aleksey Vaneev]

I also think mac is not really important for Apple. It will need some more years but iOS is clearly their main focus since there is all the money.
But until there is no full X-code for iOS and their pro apps like Logic are not available for iOS they are still trying to please the niche users with some crappy mac upgrades and macOS updates.
Maybe developers should focus more on iOS as well to be ready for the (unwanted?) future or focus on windows only

I think merging of iOS and macOS may be the end for professional use of Mac, may put Mac into entertainment computer category. There are chacnes, App Store's existence will make pro software producers hesitant to sell software there at hugely discounted prices ($5 per plugin isn't much). 6 years ago Windows music producers rushed to Mac, then they'll probably rush to Windows back. Indeed, Apple can't quite stay up to date with their desktop hardware updates.

[lorcan]

More bad news: Apple Rejects iOS App For Using MoltenVK (Vulkan Over Metal)
Looks like Apple wants to kill MoltenVK as well

[Aleksey Vaneev]

More bad news: Apple Rejects iOS App For Using MoltenVK (Vulkan Over Metal)
Looks like Apple wants to kill MoltenVK as well

Apple was also the first to dump Flash. They obviously do not like the idea of someone making money out of their "innovation". Specifically, they are not interested in providing "multi-platform" development tools, so while they talk about "non-public API", they force to use their own APIs which can't be called "public" in cross-platform sense. On a side note, HTML5+JS instead of Flash has an obvious capital investment problem: the code is open for anyone to "steal" or "borrow", there's even a lot of deobfuscation tools available.

In fact, creating cross-platform development tools and libraries becomes a risky business with such Apple practice.

Or maybe I'm misreading what "non-public API" means. Is it a hack into Apple's APIs or just a bunch of wrapper code on top of Apple APIs.

If it means using something like "ThisGonnaBePrivateVar=true" in API call and calling it a "non-public API", my notion about risks developing for Apple ecosystem stands. Such "private vars" should be left private in programmatic manner.

[stratum]

There is a more basic problem here: Apple is allowed to run a store which is a monopoly on the iOS apps market.

[lorcan]

Update: apparently a deprecated/undocumented flag was inadvertently added to MoltenVK on iOS, removing it should fix this.
So most probably a false alert.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

There is a more basic problem here: Apple is allowed to run a store which is a monopoly on the iOS apps market.

Almost the same applies to Google Play (except that you can disable the lock-in in Android's Settings). Well, it's a business that took certain business decisions based on the history of personal computing. I think if Apple or Microsoft could reverse the history, they would lock-in all app developers to their "stores". I do not see any other reason beside "control" and "income" to not allow installation and version tracking of app packages from any online source. I think it's the OS which should be secure enough to not allow any admin-level or "non-public API" operations for usual apps.

"App stores" naturally have a lot of traffic, and their promotion strategies are basically monopolistic - you can't count on usual capital investment or user satisfaction logic, you can't run ads in app store, it's a lottery for an average developer. On web-search you can at least compete offering a better and more relevant content (but then Google also fails at times - e.g. it shows/promotes Spectrum Analyzer by Seven Phases at Splice as a highly-visible Google Knowledge panel on "spectrum analyzer plugin" search).

Not that I whine about all this, it just a thing one should consider when entering an "app developer" market.

[marzelli]

On web-search you can at least compete offering a better and more relevant content (but then Google also fails at times - e.g. it shows/promotes Spectrum Analyzer by Seven Phases at Splice as a highly-visible Google Knowledge panel on "spectrum analyzer plugin" search).

What's the problem with that?

[Aleksey Vaneev]

On web-search you can at least compete offering a better and more relevant content (but then Google also fails at times - e.g. it shows/promotes Spectrum Analyzer by Seven Phases at Splice as a highly-visible Google Knowledge panel on "spectrum analyzer plugin" search).

What's the problem with that?

Well, instead of providing a general "knowledge" of what spectrum analyzer plugin is, they've injected a description of a competing product.

[stratum]

There is a more basic problem here: Apple is allowed to run a store which is a monopoly on the iOS apps market.

Almost the same applies to Google Play (except that you can disable the lock-in in Android's Settings). Well, it's a business that took certain business decisions based on the history of personal computing. I think if Apple or Microsoft could reverse the history, they would lock-in all app developers to their "stores". I do not see any other reason beside "control" and "income" to not allow installation and version tracking of app packages from any online source. I think it's the OS which should be secure enough to not allow any admin-level or "non-public API" operations for usual apps.

"App stores" naturally have a lot of traffic, and their promotion strategies are basically monopolistic - you can't count on usual capital investment or user satisfaction logic, you can't run ads in app store, it's a lottery for an average developer. On web-search you can at least compete offering a better and more relevant content (but then Google also fails at times - e.g. it shows/promotes Spectrum Analyzer by Seven Phases at Splice as a highly-visible Google Knowledge panel on "spectrum analyzer plugin" search).

Not that I whine about all this, it just a thing one should consider when entering an "app developer" market.

For Android there are alternative app stores, not that they are very popular, but the door is open: https://resources.samsungdevelopers.com ... Publishing

[Aleksey Vaneev]

For Android there are alternative app stores, not that they are very popular, but the door is open: https://resources.samsungdevelopers.com ... Publishing

Over the years, I've tried a lot of "app stores" - starting from the "shareware" and "download.com" age and ending with PluginBoutique. App stores are a failing strategy for an average developer in IT. They promote apps that already have a big retail followship (e.g. pizza brand apps), and usually have a bad category management - e.g. Audio Software without sub-categories like Audio Plugins/Equalizer, Mastering, Reverb. And anyway you usually can't compete by means of content due to poor content search facilities (not always but happens). So, you still need to build your online capital elsewhere and just "route" your customers to App Store in the end (and pay Apple a royalty for basically nothing).

[vortico]

There is a more basic problem here: Apple is allowed to run a store which is a monopoly on the iOS apps market.

This is the reason I don't release for iOS or Android. Mobile might actually be where the consumer audio market is going (although I'm still not convinced for the long term), but until I can secure $500/day of my time on iOS ports, I'll leave that market up to existing fantastic software like Audulus. History repeats itself again and again. When a single vendor has a monopoly over the software installed on its system, all developers are at the expense of that company, and any minor disagreement between the vendor company and the developer company will mean destruction. No single company controls the internet, and the three major desktop operating systems don't (yet) prevent users from installing what they want on it, so desktop OS's are mostly "open" platforms and safe to develop on.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

There is a more basic problem here: Apple is allowed to run a store which is a monopoly on the iOS apps market.

This is the reason I don't release for iOS or Android. Mobile might actually be where the consumer audio market is going.

"Consumer" audio market is already on mobile. But I wouldn't worry about "pro audio production" market going mobile that much, if iPad was so great for audio production we would witness an exodus many years ago. Pro audio apps were released for iOS, you can actually find 4 equalizer plugins by doing App Store search entering "audio equalizer plugin", but this isn't much.

I see parallels of "mobile" story with "playstation" story. While game consoles are popular and huge sellers, professional streamers don't use them. There's difference between "convenience" and "precision". You need precision when you produce stuff (be it music recording or consistent gameplay), mobile and game consoles can't provide it.