Win 7 users, what's your plan come end of the year?

[dr_st]

15 minutes ago, seed said:

Postphoning updates depends on your edition though. Home didn't have an option to postphone monthly updates until version 1903. But you're right otherwise, there's more control over them than people get it credit for (likely because of MS' aggressive campaign of forcing people to upgrade). You can postphone them, set your PC not to update over metered connections, and not to restart during active hours, which you can configure.

Win10 Pro/Enterprise has a simpler global option - NoAutoUpdate, and then it will never auto-update, just like before. It might suggest updates, but will never install them without your express approval. The downside, of course, is that it's all up to the user now - if you forget / don't feel like it, you will miss all updates - feature, security, whatever.

 

Once you do decide to update, though, it tends to take everything it finds and avoiding specific updates may be tricky. You can postpone feature updates specifically by switching from Semi-Annual (Targeted) to the regular Semi-Annual channel (Although I think it's gone in 1903).

[Graf Zahl]

51 minutes ago, seed said:

MS is also fully transparent about what they collect as well, and every user on a newer version than 1803 (I think it was this one which introduced the advanced Diagnostics & Feedback feature) can see exactly what is being collected. Granted it's raw code so the average Joe will probably not understand much, but for those who do and care, it's there for them to see (oh, and even delete from the cloud). Give MS a break when it comes to privacy...

 

Strangely, that age old image of the Evil Empire is hard to extinguish. There was definitely some truth here when Steve Ballmer was still at the helm, and the product decisions of this time clearly reflect that.

 

What's even funnier is that those haters often point to Apple as an alternative. I beg your pardon? Apple? The company that wants to control everything you do on your system? Funny that even 10 years back when the iPhone started to become huge I once said that Apple was the most dangerous company in the world, because unlike Google and Facebook they do not merely want to control information but instead control their users' entire behavior. Unfortunately that's exactly where things went.

 

No, compared to all these, Microsoft is relatively harmless these days. I think the current management has realized that they can do far more profitable business by not being the bully they were in the past. Of course it'll take years for that image to fade.

 

[seed]

5 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

What's even funnier is that those haters often point to Apple as an alternative. I beg your pardon? Apple? The company that wants to control everything you do on your system? Funny that even 10 years back when the iPhone started to become huge I once said that Apple was the most dangerous company in the world, because unlike Google and Facebook they do not merely want to control information but instead control their users' entire behavior. Unfortunately that's exactly where things went.

 

Holy shit, is that so? First time I hear about something so severe.

 

Can you provide some insight?

[therektafire]

Yeah people who bitch about privacy on windows while unironically stanning Apple are hilariously hypocritical, I would never even consider buying a MacOS or iOS device even IF I had the money to do so unless i had no other choice, the only options I would consider are Windows or Linux, while I know there are more OSes than just those two their software support is usually far worse than other more popular options so they would probably just be relegated to something i might live boot intto and screw around with on occasion unless there was some specific program that i really wanted to use that the developers decided to *only* make for that specific platform for some reason

[Graf Zahl]

12 minutes ago, seed said:

 

Holy shit, is that so? First time I hear about something so severe.

 

Can you provide some insight?

 

You want some insight:

 

Buy Apple, you have to use Apple's App Store to buy software. Apple is the sole policing instance that can decide what you are allowed to buy.

Want to do mobile payments with your Apple device? Better hope that the store supports ApplePay - because there's no competition allowed on an iOS device.

Want to buy from iBooks? Congratulations, you now got a product that can only be used on Apple devices thanks to the proprietary DRM, while buying the same thing elsewhere will allow you to use it on any device you want (that is, until Apple decides one day that the Kindle app competes with their own store and blocks it. Remember: Apple can do that on a whim.)

I could go on with a little research, but since I do not use their services I am not the most informed person about their shenanigans in other fields.

 

So yeah, I see a lot of evidence that Apple is all out on controlling their users' behavior.

And now they are also starting a crackdown on "unauthorized" macOS software. As usual, it's being sold as beneficial for the end user, and initially with reduced invasiveness, but it's quite clear where this will head: Apple also wants total control of what people do with their Macs, not just with their phones. If these certification processes become mandatory, Apple can decide all on their own which software to run and which not.

 

 

[therektafire]

12 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

 

You want some insight:

 

Buy Apple, you have to use Apple's App Store to buy software. Apple is the sole policing instance that can decide what you are allowed to buy.

Want to do mobile payments with your Apple device? Better hope that the store supports ApplePay - because there's no competition allowed on an iOS device.

Want to buy from iBooks? Congratulations, you now got a product that can only be used on Apple devices thanks to the proprietary DRM, while buying the same thing elsewhere will allow you to use it on any device you want (that is, until Apple decides one day that the Kindle app competes with their own store and blocks it. Remember: Apple can do that on a whim.)

I could go on with a little research, but since I do not use their services I am not the most informed person about their shenanigans in other fields.

 

So yeah, I see a lot of evidence that Apple is all out on controlling their users' behavior.

And now they are also starting a crackdown on "unauthorized" macOS software. As usual, it's being sold as beneficial for the end user, and initially with reduced invasiveness, but it's quite clear where this will head: Apple also wants total control of what people do with their Macs, not just with their phones. If these certification processes become mandatory, Apple can decide all on their own which software to run and which not.

 

 

Not to mention their draconian behavior in regards to 3rd party repair shops as well, it isn't even just software they try to control, they also try to control who can even FIX your DEVICE if you are having a problem with/something on it is broken/etc. Something that DOESN'T happen with microsoft or google products (at least not that i'm aware of)

[seed]

3 minutes ago, therektafire said:

Not to mention their draconian behavior in regards to 3rd party repair shops as well, it isn't even just software they try to control, they also try to control who can even FIX your DEVICE if you are having a problem with/something on it is broken/etc. Something that DOESN'T happen with microsoft or google products (at least not that i'm aware of)

 

Yea, I've definitely heard about this.

 

Apple doesn't want anyone else touching their products anymore, only authorized services can repair their products now. Or that's what they're planning, I'm not 100% sure it happened just yet.

[ReaperAA]

1 hour ago, therektafire said:

Not to mention their draconian behavior in regards to 3rd party repair shops as well, it isn't even just software they try to control, they also try to control who can even FIX your DEVICE if you are having a problem with/something on it is broken/etc. Something that DOESN'T happen with microsoft or google products (at least not that i'm aware of)

 

And this is why I will never buy an iPhone (or any apple product for that matter) over an Android phone.

[Rathori]

3 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

You want some insight:

 

Buy Apple, you have to use Apple's App Store to buy software. Apple is the sole policing instance that can decide what you are allowed to buy.

Want to do mobile payments with your Apple device? Better hope that the store supports ApplePay - because there's no competition allowed on an iOS device.

 

EDIT: As pointed out below, if you were actually talking about iOS and not macOS then ignore this comment completely :P

 

No offence, but have you actually used Apple products? Because I've been working with macOS for like 4 years now (developing cross-platfrom desktop applications for Windows, macOS, and Linux, in fact), and I also have my own MacBook Pro, and this claim couldn't further from the truth. In fact, it sounds borderline paranoid.

 

You can download and install third party software literally the same way you do on Windows: by downloading an installer from the application's website and running it. As well as the same way you do on linux - by using a package manager, and those aren't controlled by Apple either.

Edited September 12, 2019 by Rathori : Added disclaimer

[Cacodemon345]

15 minutes ago, Rathori said:

You can download and install third party software literally the same way you do on Windows: by downloading an installer from the application's website and running it. As well as the same way you do on linux - by using a package manager, and those aren't controlled by Apple either.

I think Graf was talking about iOS, not macOS.

[Rathori]

I think you might be right, I've edited my post in case that was the case :P

[Graf Zahl]

Actually, I have to endure macOS every day at work (as an iOS developer) and have wished it to hell more than once a week the entire time I had to work with it.

At my workplace people are generally scared to update their MacBooks for fear of Apple's latest update breaking more software they need and the upcoming 10.15 will probably be pushed off as far as possible because we still depend on a 32 bit utility that still hasn't seen a 64 bit replacement.

 

And than there's this. So please don't tell me about Apple not trying to exert stronger controi about what people can do with their Macs. It can only get worse if this stuff continues.

 

 

[insertwackynamehere]

You guys are talking about Apple’s walled garden approach and conflating it with privacy. I don’t know peoples privacy concerns with MS at this point or if they are relevant, but privacy concerns with Apple are a separate topic from whether you appreciate Apple’s approach to a product and ecosystem. Apple is a great alternative for those interested in privacy but not interested or able to be a “power user” with regards to privacy when contrasting iOS with Android. MacOS is also a secure system from the ground up. There is always the looming fear of “maybe the NSA is intercepting all chips for physical backdoor installation” that one can ponder about for every device they have but putting aside that level of fear, Apple actually is interested in protecting user privacy from governments and malicious entities. The premium you pay when buying Apple products is you paying the true cost. People are conditioned to think all tech should be cheap and free because of all the spyware and tracking trade offs. The exact stuff people seem upset about regarding Windows coming prepackaged with bloatware. If you can recognize that you are the “product” in the case of Facebook and Google etc, Apple is what happens when a company charges you the real cost and doesn’t make you the product. You can’t have your cake and eat it too; keep complaining that you are being treated as the product but acting outraged that others pay to be the consumer as if they are idiots.

 

I work in the advertising industry as a software developer and Apple has been on a multi-year long crusade against advertisers and trackers. They aren’t playing around, they are straight up breaking things in the context of web to root out tracking and malicious advertising. It’s not a marketing ploy, most people outside the industry probably don’t even know they are doing these things. They recently released a memo that says basically while their tech should block most tracking, they know it’s a game of whack-a-mole and they will keep perfecting their tech but are not afraid to straight up blacklist bad actors. This isn’t a cutesy media campaign they mean war. I know I work in advertising but as a consumer I’m very happy with their hardline stance. The iPhone has been further written off year after year as a worthwhile target for tracking-driven advertising.

 

If you don’t like Apple’s approach to a cohesive ecosystem then that’s perfectly fair and as a consumer you have no obligation to buy Apple products. But it’s disingenuous to try and paint their practices as anti-privacy. They don’t exist for people who are proud to be on the in-group of know-how when it comes to tinkering with something to make it barely workable like most Windows “power users” who pride themselves on being able to tweak their system into a workable state like everyone in this thread is arguing about re the upgrade path. It’s straight up wrong however to insult Apple’s stances on privacy and consumer protection in the context of privacy.

[Graf Zahl]

13 minutes ago, insertwackynamehere said:

You guys are talking about Apple’s walled garden approach and conflating it with privacy. I don’t know peoples privacy concerns with MS at this point or if they are relevant, but privacy concerns with Apple are a separate topic from whether you appreciate Apple’s approach to a product and ecosystem. Apple is a great alternative for those interested in privacy but not interested or able to be a “power user” with regards to privacy when contrasting iOS with Android.

 

You know, here I see the problem. How am I supposed to trust a company that wants to control everything?

The simple answer is, I can't - anyone with such a mindset may also consider privacy invasions to push their ideology.

 

 

13 minutes ago, insertwackynamehere said:

MacOS is also a secure system from the ground up. There is always the looming fear of “maybe the NSA is intercepting all chips for physical backdoor installation” that one can ponder about for every device they have but putting aside that level of fear, Apple actually is interested in protecting user privacy from governments and malicious entities. The premium you pay when buying Apple products is you paying the true cost. People are conditioned to think all tech should be cheap and free because of all the spyware and tracking trade offs. The exact stuff people seem upset about regarding Windows coming prepackaged with bloatware. If you can recognize that you are the “product” in the case of Facebook and Google etc, Apple is what happens when a company charges you the real cost and doesn’t make you the product. You can’t have your cake and eat it too; keep complaining that you are being treated as the product but acting outraged that others pay to be the consumer as if they are idiots.

 

Sorry, but that's just bollocks - and easily proven at least on the PC side. The 'true' price of a computer is when you buy all its parts and assemble them yourself - and then compare the result to prebuilt solutions. And Apple fares very badly here, their hardware is totally overpriced, and their portfolio far too limited. (Yeah, I know it's hard to do for a smartphone - but we all know how high Apple's profit line on them is.)

Actually, their stance on 'privacy' is something I cannot take seriously. It's the only real weapon they have to push their product into the market, if that went away they'd be toast. And it's easy for them because the companies they target include their strongest competitor so it's very beneficial to their business as well.

 

13 minutes ago, insertwackynamehere said:

 

If you don’t like Apple’s approach to a cohesive ecosystem then that’s perfectly fair and as a consumer you have no obligation to buy Apple products. But it’s disingenuous to try and paint their practices as anti-privacy. They don’t exist for people who are proud to be on the in-group of know-how when it comes to tinkering with something to make it barely workable like most Windows “power users” who pride themselves on being able to tweak their system into a workable state like everyone in this thread is arguing about re the upgrade path. It’s straight up wrong however to insult Apple’s stances on privacy and consumer protection in the context of privacy.

 

 

The irony here is - once Apple was the stronghold of power users - today they treat power users as an inconvenient necessity and their main target is people who prefer others to think for themselves.

 

[insertwackynamehere]

You’re right about Apple dismissing power users to a detriment in different instances but the crux of these arguments is still “Mac is closed so you can’t trust it” which is a very FOSS attitude and completely legitimate when dealing with certain types of security analysis but also not really relevant in a comparison with Windows or with regards to a security analysis for a regular Joe versus the full on paranoia driven “every single thing has to be compiled by me after I personally do a security audit before it runs”. An Apple device isn’t selling your keyboard input data whereas one of the top play store keyboards was. That’s more concerning then the mindset of “what if Apple has a direct line to the NSA deep in their source code” for 99% of people especially since those concerns exist for Windows and even open source projects where in theory “more eyes” but in practice, that’s been shown many times to not be a magic bullet to finding flaws or malicious additions.

 

As for the home brew build is cheaper, that looks specifically at hardware costs. Yes a spec to spec comparison of Apple devices to PCs makes Apple look overpriced but my point is that the cost of the entire machine is you paying for an Apple product and all that entails which is the system and their commitment to privacy which is why they sell their own “overpriced” machines not filled to the brim with crapware in an attempt at offsetting the cost to the consumer. A home brew Windows machine clocks in at less money and presumably no crapware but that’s also the result of hobbyists who aren’t likely a huge threat to the general PC buying marketplace. Those costs would shift around I bet if everyone started building PCs from scratch.

[Rathori]

1 hour ago, Graf Zahl said:

And than there's this. So please don't tell me about Apple not trying to exert stronger controi about what people can do with their Macs. It can only get worse if this stuff continues.

 

Yeah, we are also currently battling notarization at my workplace (luckily, not me personally), but I agree that Apple is going in a weird (and possibly wrong) direction, making developers' life very difficult. Which is strange to me, given how it's not exactly a very popular platform to begin with. Then again, maybe it'll turn out to not be as bad as it's being painted. At least it seems like it can be automated.

 

Also, notarization looks like another nail in the coffin of gaming on macOS, because it makes it even less worth it for developers to even bother making macOS versions of their games, especially given how small Apple's market share is.

 

Despite the developers' problems on macOS, my experience with it as a power user on my personal macbook has been positive - it's basically like having linux, but with the quality and polish of a commercial product, and as a portable PC I wouldn't trade it for anything else because it's great at managing sleep and battery life, and is actually usable without a mouse even in GUI apps.

 

I also haven't acquired the fear of system updates over the two years that I've been using it because I haven't run into any problems myself. If anything, I'd be more worried about a major update to Windows 10, given Microsoft's history of releasing updates that delete files in user's directories, and their general tendency of breaking stuff for no reason.

[insertwackynamehere]

Sorry to spam the thread but frankly things like signing executables is a step forward in the right direction. So much of the expected flow of web and OS behavior has been insecure or less than ideal secure due to historical requirements and pushback on UX complexity but signed apps is completely correct from a security perspective. This is like pushing back on HTTPS which people were doing 10 years ago. And Windows has been doing that kind of thing for ages hasn’t it? I remember people complaining about Vistas confirmation pop ups. I hope Apple allows people who know what they are doing to bypass or self-sign as a developer  but this kind of behavior should absolutely be part of a secure environment. And if a game dev company can’t be bothered to sign their applications that’s more a statement of their level of motivation. This isn’t some huge burden.

 

Think about what happens when you visit a (HTTPS) site that’s been hijacked. Your browser nowadays freaks out and prevents you from visiting without digging deep into the warning page. This is the kind of thing people 10 years ago would say makes the internet more closed off, but in fact it’s the browser protecting the hapless user from likely being exploited. The browser doesn’t stop you from going but it makes it very clear it might not be a good idea. Imagine now you download Tool.app but it’s actually Malice.app because someone owned the download link. It’s a positive that your OS would know to not trust it. That kind of behavior should be present for most users. Downloading random crap was the bane of the 90s throughout the modern OS era and the root of a decade plus of AOL newbie users getting “hacked”. So now it just feels like more complaining about security while getting mad at other vendors valid security solutions.

Edited September 12, 2019 by insertwackynamehere

[Rathori]

9 minutes ago, insertwackynamehere said:

And if a game dev company can’t be bothered to sign their applications that’s more a statement of their level of motivation. This isn’t some huge burden.

 

I have to disagree on this one, because the majority of games on macOS are made by small and/or independent studios, and it's precisely this kind of companies that are going to be hurt the most by it, because they often don't have the resourses and/or manpower to spare to deal with such things, unlike big companies who can afford to just hire a person specifically for that task. It's not really a matter of motivation at this point. It's a matter of having to spend time and effort they could have used for developing features or patches for the sake of as little as 3% of the PC games market, and most likely less than 1% of video games market if they also release on consoles. From pure business point of view, macOS as a gaming platform doesn't even exist (just like Linux), so IMO we should be grateful to the companies that even bother to release macOS and Linux versions at all, rather than blame them for lack of motivation. Trust me, from developer's point of view, macOS already has a lot of weird quirks that can be a total PITA to solve.

 

I do agree that improved security is a good thing, though, but there are two sides to this coin, and for me as a gamer this particular change seems like it brings more harm than good. Even if it doesn't really affect me personally (I don't use my laptop as a gaming machine), it will affect the industry in the long run, and just I can't see it as being "in a good way".

[therektafire]

@Rathori Well the upshot of this is that it might push at least a few developers over to linux which is always a good thing, though idk how many gamedevs release mac versions of their game but not also linux, compared to the vast amount of windows only games. I feel life if they were going through the effort of making a mac version they would probably already be maintaining a linux version too since the two platforms are more similar to each other than say mac and windows

[inkoalawetrust]

I have way too much stuff that i can't move to another machine on my Windows 7 installation and from my experience Windows 10 is absolute garbage in every conceivable way from how dull and lifeless the GUI looks to the constant unnecesary forced updates, ads and bloatware to how much said unnecesary trash makes PCs slow down so when Windows 7 support ends i'll just keep using the OS. After all i don't even think that my Windows 7 has updated in months anyway.

Edited September 12, 2019 by inkoalawetrust

[dr_st]

Your experience is not completely accurate. On modern PCs you will find Win10 faster than Win7 because of better drivers and optimization tweaks. On an older machine you may find the opposite (but you still may be surprised, unless you go so far back that you don't get proper drivers). All of the annoyances can be turned off on Win10 Pro; on Win10 Home you may be stuck with some of them.

[Cacodemon345]

I use Windows 10 but still have Windows 7 installed on my computer. I won't remove it even after Microsoft pulls support for it. I still need it for games that can't run well on Windows 10.

2 hours ago, therektafire said:

@Rathori Well the upshot of this is that it might push at least a few developers over to linux which is always a good thing, though idk how many gamedevs release mac versions of their game but not also linux, compared to the vast amount of windows only games. I feel life if they were going through the effort of making a mac version they would probably already be maintaining a linux version too since the two platforms are more similar to each other than say mac and windows

The issue here is that Linux itself has its own share of issues that makes it more unappealing to use as compared to Windows. One issue is that the binaries built have to be either statically compiled or dynamically linked locally (aka depending on its own library so files instead of the system ones) for them to work on any Linux distro. Unfortunately the default behavior is to dynamically-link everything to the system's one, requiring you to launch it with the LD_LIBRARY_PATH variable set to also look for the libraries in the directory from where it has been launched. Not doing that can lead to issues, which is probably why I don't seem to see a lot of Linux software having precompiled binaries.

Another issue is the lack of the popularity of it as compared to Windows, also why macOS has fewer games than Windows. Linux also uses a case-sensitive file system (maybe that could be worked around by using the FAT32 filesystem where applicable or even a case-insensitive file system, I haven't checked all of those file systems yet) that makes it more user-unfriendly. Linux also requires you to resort more to the command-line interface as compared to Windows.

 

All of these issues leads more people to use Windows instead. As usual, always feel free to correct me if I am wrong. :)

2 minutes ago, dr_st said:

All of the annoyances can be turned off on Win10 Pro; on Win10 Home you may be stuck with some of them.

Not all annoyances can be turned off in Windows 10 Pro; some require you to have the Enterprise license.

[jeroa]

22 hours ago, Murdoch said:

 

It is not an absolute guarantee you will get problems, but yes those types of sites are a bit of a security mine field. They support themselves with the help of ad networks from, shall we say, questionable sources. I would not go on one without decent security software and your BS detector tuned to maximum.

 

how could i know if i already have malware?

[seed]

1 hour ago, dr_st said:

Your experience is not completely accurate. On modern PCs you will find Win10 faster than Win7 because of better drivers and optimization tweaks. On an older machine you may find the opposite (but you still may be surprised, unless you go so far back that you don't get proper drivers). All of the annoyances can be turned off on Win10 Pro; on Win10 Home you may be stuck with some of them.

 

This.

 

I also wonder what people mean by "annoyances". Ads and crapware a la Candy Crush? That can be easily removed or disabled, as well as other pre-installed apps. I'm using Home and I have not experienced a single such "annoyance" popping up, ever. It really isn't as intrusive and hostile as some people love making it look like.

[wallabra]

On 9/10/2019 at 5:37 PM, Graf Zahl said:

 

Software that doesn't exist, simply doesn't exist, regardless of distro.

 

 

The thing is, there is every kind of existing software to deal with each item of the set of daily problems of a common Linux user. You can't tell whether software exists or not, since there are always so many places to look up. There are several graphical applications available on Linux (Krita? GIMP? aseprite? etc), same goes for audio stuff (Audacity? OpenMPT*? MusE? Aria Maestosa? MuseScore? Timidity? Patchage? JACK, ALSA or OSS?), and so forth.

 

There are way too many software sources to deem a software niche empty on Linux.

 

* runs on Wine, but has an integration module specific to Wine

[Cacodemon345]

Not all software that exists on Windows has a port to and runs on Linux however. They require Wine. I have seen that mainly with games. Those require Steam Proton to run on Linux.

 

And as for the software development, I would easily use Visual Studio over Codeblocks any day. The former is better than the latter.

9 hours ago, seed said:

 

This.

 

I also wonder what people mean by "annoyances". Ads and crapware a la Candy Crush? That can be easily removed or disabled, as well as other pre-installed apps. I'm using Home and I have not experienced a single such "annoyance" popping up, ever. It really isn't as intrusive and hostile as some people love making it look like.

Did you ever deal with the pre-installed stuff coming back after each feature update?

[dr_st]

11 hours ago, Cacodemon345 said:

Not all annoyances can be turned off in Windows 10 Pro; some require you to have the Enterprise license.

Such as? Just curious as to what it is I haven't encountered yet.

 

46 minutes ago, Cacodemon345 said:

Not all software that exists on Windows has a port to and runs on Linux however.

The opposite is also true, though. For most practical purposes, they have a lot of common nowadays, but at the core - Windows was built as an OS for users, Linux was built as an OS for developers.

[CyberDreams]

I knew this thread would eventually turn into an Apple shittalking fest (not that i currently use any Apple products although i did really like my i-pod back in the day).

 

I was just thinking something...if Apple is so bad why does Romero still use the products? Because he's been using them since the 80's or because they just work well for what he does for a living? I know that he loves Apple.

 

About Win 10: I still hate the fact that MS shoved Win 10 down everyone's throat, especially back when it was super buggy. That was total bullshit. Tbh, that's what really made me hate it (besides the fact that i was still somewhat new to Win 7 so i didn't plan on switching anyways). I get they were trying to advertise their new OS but damn...

 

I'm sure people who were on 8/8.1 jumped on the Win 10 bandwagon real quick though and i don't blame them from what i've heard about those OS's. Like i stated before, i'll switch to Win 10 Pro when the time comes for me, more than likely with a new build probably sometime next year as i do want to try to build something of higher quality than my first build and since i don't work it tends to take me a longer time to save up money for things such as this than the average person.

 

[seed]

1 hour ago, Cacodemon345 said:

Did you ever deal with the pre-installed stuff coming back after each feature update?

 

Not once.

[Graf Zahl]

16 hours ago, Rathori said:

 

I have to disagree on this one, because the majority of games on macOS are made by small and/or independent studios, and it's precisely this kind of companies that are going to be hurt the most by it, because they often don't have the resourses and/or manpower to spare to deal with such things, unlike big companies who can afford to just hire a person specifically for that task. It's not really a matter of motivation at this point. It's a matter of having to spend time and effort they could have used for developing features or patches for the sake of as little as 3% of the PC games market, and most likely less than 1% of video games market if they also release on consoles. From pure business point of view, macOS as a gaming platform doesn't even exist (just like Linux), so IMO we should be grateful to the companies that even bother to release macOS and Linux versions at all, rather than blame them for lack of motivation. Trust me, from developer's point of view, macOS already has a lot of weird quirks that can be a total PITA to solve.

 

This is precisely the problem I see as well. Apple is erecting more and more red tape to cut through in order to publish on their platform.

And for lots of types of software that's simply uneconomical, games in particular. Thanks to Apple not offering any affordable system with a good graphics solution we end up with a low end target platform that's unattractive for big titles so smaller developers have to fill the void.

And those may eventually do a cost/benefit analysis and come to the conclusion that serving those remaining 2% of the gaming market with a significant amount of effort is not really worth it. And all this red tape costs time and money which someone operating on a tight budget might not have.

 

For example, I'm not sure yet how this will affect GZDoom. Fortunately we got someone taking care of the macOS port but I'm not sure how willing he is to invest the needed work to pass Apple's certification requirements - so if he says 'no' and Apple makes this process mandatory, there won't be any future macOS GZDoom, and I am quite convinced that the same might happen with other low volume software where the added hassle of that notarization process is the deciding factor for continued work.

 

 

Quote

 

I do agree that improved security is a good thing, though, but there are two sides to this coin, and for me as a gamer this particular change seems like it brings more harm than good. Even if it doesn't really affect me personally (I don't use my laptop as a gaming machine), it will affect the industry in the long run, and just I can't see it as being "in a good way".

 

Of course security is a good thing - but in my opinion handlng over the control over the security to the hardware manufacturer is a dangerous game - it gives Apple total control over what people can do with their hardware, and we have already seen how Apple abuses this power on iOS to push competitors out of their market or to force the market to make unfavorable deals with Apple (e.g. ApplePay) by just refusing to accept such software. Expect the same behavior on macOS in the future. Apple has already proven to be a ruthless monster when it comes to profit maximization.