I just read an article about Windows (S) refusing to run applications not downloaded from the Windows Store
I had to download a less than a week compile of an application I wrote to check if a bug I had (discovered that day) was present (it was not): macOS told me that the application is not signed
(my application that I downloaded from my own url
So, in the near future, someone who want to share for free its application(s) will have to pay to buy (each year) a certificate or they will not be able to share the application(s).
As of today, the market is far more than suspicious about applications: I shared one to the right place for its target (dealing with Comics, but not only) and I do not get one feedback (not even a bad feedback, that is a sign
I will not publicize here what the software can do for the Comic (Strip, Book, but not only; think at a list manager), know it have everything I could think I need to deal with a character and more (take a list from the Internet / WikipediA and improve it 'till you do not recognize the original list: from checking the date if they are week days or Sundays, length of a story from start to end dates, etc.).
I do not really care about that, I do not build it to sold it.
But with the current trend, spending your time and sharing an application will be far too expensive for a person.
BTW: maybe I am wrong: I may have to sold it and perhaps people do not want it because it is free ?
What is your feeling 'bout that ?
if it’s for free, then you can release the sources on github: it’s completely free. until ?
That future is now. Like it or not, if your app is not signed, it will be viewed with suspicion by anyone downloading it. That is true of both Win and Mac
Windows S is higly specific and not targetted at the general public.
Also, isn’t it possible to self sign an app with a self generated certificate? That should be free.
You should either sign your application or release its code.
Most websites do not even offer non-SSL for basic web browsing. Why should an unknown application have unfettered access to my system?
Most applications I install these days I run in a VM to monitor and test them first. I do trust the App Store because I know Apple has vetted it for API usage and constrained it to a sandbox. Even if as a developer it is terribly annoying or not practical for all utilities.
[quote=372156:@Emile Schwarz]I just read an article about Windows (S) refusing to run applications not downloaded from the Windows Store
That is the nature of Windows(S) - a dog of a thing that should be hanged by the neck until dead. No - we don’t want to have to get things from your store, Microsoft - we wan’t to run free down the software trail as we always have. The insanely restrictive world of Apple is not for us.
this might be the end for many “recreational programmers” or it would cause a total switch to wep apps but they are too expensive. Xojo cloud is 40$ a month it’s very expensive unless you are making some money out of it
Let us be realistic. Today the bulk of computing devices starts with the absolute number one Android (over 50% of all computing devices), where most software is distributed through the Google Play Store. Sure, amateurs can distribute apk themselves, but for users, it is akin to Russian roulette, so many trojan and viruses are spread that way.
The second one, iOS, cannot be distributed out of the App store.
Now, Window(S) appears only like a logical evolution of the record player model initiated by Android and iOS.
Now, is there still room for free distribution ? Yes, most definitely, through freeware repositories, like it always was. Are there many users ? Probably much less than in the past, since users are less an less inclined to fuss with the system.
But let’s not forget there is a system where most if not all distribution is free : Linux.
Linux market share: 2.5%.
[quote=373115:@Michel Bujardet]Today the bulk of computing devices starts with the absolute number one Android (over 50% of all computing devices),
The second one, iOS, [/quote]
[quote=373129:@Peter Job]Android 40%
36% is not for mobile windows
Last time I looked a desktop was still a ‘computing device’.
Which squarely demonstrates the anecdotal importance of freeware.
[quote=373129:@Peter Job]Android 40%
These are browsing stats, which are badly skewed by the huge (and old) Windows installed base. I was referring to sales.
Whatever the details, truth is today most of computing devices are mobile. Windows by it’s own admission is aiming at 17% of the global computing devices market in the coming years.
On a personal note, I used to release freeware back in the eighties. I soon discovered it was rather futile, and switched to shareware in early nineties. I decided to completely do away with freebies around the turn of the millennium. Sorry, there comes a time when growing up means leaving old toys behind. Unlike some, I cannot simply do software as a leisure. I depend on sales to pay the rent.
[quote]I do not really care about that, I do not build it to sold it.
But with the current trend, spending your time and sharing an application will be far too expensive for a person.[/quote]
If software is useful enough to use, it is useful enough to pay for .
Even if the payment is $3 by PayPal to cover the costs you describe.
Remember these are people who have paid several hundred dollars for the machines they want to run it on.
If no-one will pay - life is short. Why waste it writing software? Go out and smell the roses.
I miss that.
Yes, Jeff, you are right. This is a conclusion I reach.
Asking for a few fee will cover the costs and an application for a few fee is better than no application at all.
This recalls me a Ringo Starr LP (CD): Stop and smell the roses.
I will say just:
Welcome to the world of syndicate.
@Emile Schwarz you forgot to tell that certificate must be so called green certificate and you can’t use your own PKI to make certificates for code/app signing which means adding ‘S’ to the end of word, syndicate.