Email from Apple about Catalina :)

DSP, Plugin and Host development discussion.
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:49 am
FabienTDR wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 12:31 am Urs, it's clean, fair and fun until they Apple decides to develop and sell synths. ;)

I admit this is an extreme example, but I wonder how you can welcome such an additional risk, at your own expense, for so little benefit. I do not enjoy Apple trampling over this question as they do now, and I certainly don't want to encourage them to impose "more of it". They'll do until they can't (e.g. EU regulations, bad PR, pros publicly questionning Apple as an audio platform).

From their last report, "Apple service revenue is expected to grow" over the next years. This is one part of it, I guess not just the first.
+1
Uhm?? you guys are aware Apple puts out Logic and Garageband right? You know, with dozens of high quality synths and instruments included in a DAW for $199? Pretty much the most complete package outside of Reason. Some people including myself have pondered switching moving back to Logic just for Alchemy, Sculpture etc.

I own all of U-He synths as well as Logic etc. You put out a good enough product, not an issue. :shrug:

Post

Fabien meant if Apple would start selling synths for other platforms/DAWs, I believe. Unlikely, yes, but with them you really never know...

Post

machinesworking wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:40 am
Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:49 am
FabienTDR wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 12:31 am Urs, it's clean, fair and fun until they Apple decides to develop and sell synths. ;)

I admit this is an extreme example, but I wonder how you can welcome such an additional risk, at your own expense, for so little benefit. I do not enjoy Apple trampling over this question as they do now, and I certainly don't want to encourage them to impose "more of it". They'll do until they can't (e.g. EU regulations, bad PR, pros publicly questionning Apple as an audio platform).

From their last report, "Apple service revenue is expected to grow" over the next years. This is one part of it, I guess not just the first.
+1
Uhm?? you guys are aware Apple puts out Logic and Garageband right? You know, with dozens of high quality synths and instruments included in a DAW for $199? Pretty much the most complete package outside of Reason. Some people including myself have pondered switching moving back to Logic just for Alchemy, Sculpture etc.

I own all of U-He synths as well as Logic etc. You put out a good enough product, not an issue. :shrug:
Forget the first two lines, it was an example of reductio ad absurdum. Nobody is safe if he is in conflict with their business on their platform.

Post

I'm trying to. The days where any software can just do anything is over. You dislike certificates? Don't blame Apple for it, blame the Alexander Nyxes of this world.
That's broadly fair.. the problem is bad enough to demand a serious solution (although, tbh, the idea amongst liberals that CA and Facebook were the primary effectors of Brexit & Trump is misplaced... creepy and powerful, for sure, but both sides of the debate have an interest in exaggerating their effect).

However, there really should be a more public debate about whether we're going down the right path in solving this. Handing absolute control and right-of-approval to the platform vendor (Apple, in this case) is just one of several possible technical ways to address it. VMs and Docker containers, for example, are another - they keep programs isolated from one another (and more importantly, from your data) at the cost of some inconvenience to users. But in the end it's a social and legal problem as well as a technical one.

The problem with Catalina isn't the hassle of doing the work. That's normal Apple.. anyone on the platform should be used to it by now - if it's unfamiliar enough that you're surprised by it, consider yourself lucky. It's the transfer of right-of-approval that takes place as part of the notarization process. This is correct and normal for a walled garden app-store (although they have gotten decidedly slack about scam apps in recent years, really need to tighten that up), but AFAIK unprecedented in a conventional "open" software marketplace.
This account is dormant, I am no longer employed by FXpansion / ROLI.

Find me on LinkedIn or elsewhere if you need to get in touch.

Post

Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:35 amMaybe it is a lot of work if your install manager is patching executables (and I'm not alone, avast has a similar issue)
We used to do that, but that stopped for us with codesign several years ago. Even if it was optional back then, the advent of EDEN signing for AAX would finally put an end to it.

Post

Angus_FX wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 8:11 amHowever, there really should be a more public debate about whether we're going down the right path in solving this.
Sure, but that debate needs to take place without "32 bit", "OpenGL", "Mac haters", "extra work" and whatever whataboutism.

I think GDPR was already a milestone in this, and it was a hell of a lot more work and money for us than anything we've discussed here.

Post

Urs wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:22 amI think GDPR was already a milestone in this, and it was a hell of a lot more work and money for us than anything we've discussed here.
Yeah, GDPR was a big f** up, on the other hand it was done by EU parliament, not an individual company, where a big guy just said "let's do this, f** the developers" :D
Vojtech
MeldaProduction MSoundFactory MDrummer MCompleteBundle The best plugins in the world :D

Post

Urs wrote:
I think GDPR was already a milestone in this, and it was a hell of a lot more work and money for us than anything we've discussed here.
GDPR is en European law. It effects websites and is not related to audio-software at all.
GDPR was not much work for us (1 hour), since we never did use tracking cookies.

Post

GDPR and in particular browser consent is a sh-tty bit of European law. Non-standard UX for every site, everyone making up the implementation as they go along? I mean, come on. They should have mandated a standard and implemented it at browser or even OS level. If they'd gotten that right, people might even understand what was happening to their data, rather than being conditioned to blindly click YES.

If we're going to complain about bad EU laws though.. VATMOSS is IMO ten times the cluster that GDPR is. Particularly for UK-based microbusinesses (UK being a mostly law-abiding country that expects laws to be sane and proportionate.. other EU countries either expect much more bureaucratic regs on small firms, or pass laws without expecting anybody much to obey them).
This account is dormant, I am no longer employed by FXpansion / ROLI.

Find me on LinkedIn or elsewhere if you need to get in touch.

Post

Markus Krause wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:28 am Urs wrote:
I think GDPR was already a milestone in this, and it was a hell of a lot more work and money for us than anything we've discussed here.
GDPR is en European law. It effects websites and is not related to audio-software at all.
GDPR was not much work for us (1 hour), since we never did use tracking cookies.
Unless of course you're 10 or more guys in a company and you need to hire an external service which does all those pesky protocols, which controls how, where and why you store user data and employee records, which requires you to set up secure email and email storage, which sets up secure document disposal, helps you do a proper privacy statement for your website. Plus secure backup management and what not.

Post

Urs wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:18 am
Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:35 amMaybe it is a lot of work if your install manager is patching executables (and I'm not alone, avast has a similar issue)
We used to do that, but that stopped for us with codesign several years ago. Even if it was optional back then, the advent of EDEN signing for AAX would finally put an end to it.
Well, up to Catalina we have not had any problem, also because fortunately aax is a format smarter than au, which claims to store the name inside a resource file within the folder.
But let me tell you a story: using this system we have cut costs and as a company we have reached the current size, which I would call unusual for this small niche of audio software.

We were lucky.
I was lucky.
Today I don't care much: we finally have a lot of resources and I can afford to hire the right person to fill this gap. But I feel sorry for the less fortunate developers. I'm not saying "everyone should have my resources, or suffer, that's their problem". I see a problem, that less fortunate people will have less means than me to deal with a situation that is rapidly getting out of hand and becoming a few expensive cases for a small developer. All this I regret, and with the long distance lead to a problem for some, and it means that the platform will have less software, leading to a decline. And we all lose out, even those who are well

Post

Angus_FX wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 11:04 am GDPR and in particular browser consent is a sh-tty bit of European law. Non-standard UX for every site, everyone making up the implementation as they go along? I mean, come on. They should have mandated a standard and implemented it at browser or even OS level. If they'd gotten that right, people might even understand what was happening to their data, rather than being conditioned to blindly click YES.

If we're going to complain about bad EU laws though.. VATMOSS is IMO ten times the cluster that GDPR is. Particularly for UK-based microbusinesses (UK being a mostly law-abiding country that expects laws to be sane and proportionate.. other EU countries either expect much more bureaucratic regs on small firms, or pass laws without expecting anybody much to obey them).
Agreed, Moss is a nightmare for a medium sized company, and there is no escape.
There are also other consequences, we "pay" Italian vats when we buy goods

Post

Angus_FX wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 8:11 am
I'm trying to. The days where any software can just do anything is over. You dislike certificates? Don't blame Apple for it, blame the Alexander Nyxes of this world.
That's broadly fair.. the problem is bad enough to demand a serious solution (although, tbh, the idea amongst liberals that CA and Facebook were the primary effectors of Brexit & Trump is misplaced... creepy and powerful, for sure, but both sides of the debate have an interest in exaggerating their effect).

However, there really should be a more public debate about whether we're going down the right path in solving this. Handing absolute control and right-of-approval to the platform vendor (Apple, in this case) is just one of several possible technical ways to address it. VMs and Docker containers, for example, are another - they keep programs isolated from one another (and more importantly, from your data) at the cost of some inconvenience to users. But in the end it's a social and legal problem as well as a technical one.

The problem with Catalina isn't the hassle of doing the work. That's normal Apple.. anyone on the platform should be used to it by now - if it's unfamiliar enough that you're surprised by it, consider yourself lucky. It's the transfer of right-of-approval that takes place as part of the notarization process. This is correct and normal for a walled garden app-store (although they have gotten decidedly slack about scam apps in recent years, really need to tighten that up), but AFAIK unprecedented in a conventional "open" software marketplace.
You have imho the best point here. I'm surprised it is still not clear to many.
We are speaking about "3 lines of code" and not about the real issue, a first step toward the apple store.

Post

Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 5:39 pmYou have imho the best point here. I'm surprised it is still not clear to many.
We are speaking about "3 lines of code" and not about the real issue, a first step toward the apple store.
To me it looks more like the other way round: "Oh, we've made good experience with security in our closed store system, let's transfer that to our open market."

But even if you're right, inevitably it would mean that macOS would become AUv3 only. AU2, VST2/3, AAX, RE, all that stuff would go away. Installers, installation issues and direct customer support would go away. PACE would be dead on Mac. Subscription would go away, unless in-App-purchases. Is any developer really gonna lose any tears about that?

Post

Urs wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:23 pm
Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 5:39 pmYou have imho the best point here. I'm surprised it is still not clear to many.
We are speaking about "3 lines of code" and not about the real issue, a first step toward the apple store.
To me it looks more like the other way round: "Oh, we've made good experience with security in our closed store system, let's transfer that to our open market."

But even if you're right, inevitably it would mean that macOS would become AUv3 only. AU2, VST2/3, AAX, RE, all that stuff would go away. Installers, installation issues and direct customer support would go away. PACE would be dead on Mac. Subscription would go away, unless in-App-purchases. Is any developer really gonna lose any tears about that?
So you have two possible scenarios
1) everything is super good
2) Everything is super bad
And in both the reaction is as follows
3) Does not matter. It's not my business. Apple and fate will take care of my future. They complain for no reason, meanwhile they don't see how lucky we are: these inexperienced villains who write trojans in malaware installers scripts that I would never run the risk of installing won't have a way to steal my bank account data using CNN learning and my wedding photos (which I would never put online anyway because it's not a good idea)?

I give up

Post Reply

Return to “DSP and Plugin Development”