- Apple decides which apps go and which don't.
- I have to read a list of rules to know if I can actually sell my application
- Apple takes 30% of my money.
- Apple decides what programming language I can use.
I thought it was agreed upon that the app store is not overall good for developers.
An App Store isn't that great for developers (in the "developers being free to do whatever they want" sense of "good for developers") when it's the only option available.
That is not the case with the Mac App Store. If you don't find any benefits in the tradeoffs that particular option provides, don't pursue it. Write your "own licensing code, host a web payment code, and host autoupdates" like the "good old days", if that's what floats your boat. But it's still better to have another revenue option at your disposal than to not, even if you don't choose to use it.
I keep hearing this, but I've yet to be convinced.
Over the last 5-10 years Apple has pushed developers more and more aggressively. They put giant efforts into things like Classic and Rosetta, only to strip them from the OS entirely a few years later. They repeatedly trumpeted the full equivalence of Carbon and Java to Cocoa, and now it's infeasible to use either as the basis for any full-featured application. They developed all kinds of new APIs for QuickTime in 10.5, and then in 10.6 introduced "QuickTime X" as the only 64-bit native solution, effectively deprecating everything else. And most recently there's this unusual attack on the Flash plugin of all things. It's as if they now revel in actively destroying backwards-compatibility.
All of these decisions had the effect of reducing Apple's support and maintenance overhead while strengthening their control over the direction of their platform.
I would be surprised if Apple's very clearly demonstrated zeal for taking control and eliminating developer options did not extend to the new Mac App store.
a) support the legacy systems forever. b) don't support them at all.
Option A leads to a Windows-esque environment where support for older platforms actively holds back development and innovation for newer ones. Option B kills everyone's existing apps. Neither of those sounds like a very developer-friendly or even user-friendly option.
Frankly, the fact that they built those at all shows that they're willing to go the extra mile to make sure that their developers have the heads up to upgrade their applications before breaking them entirely.
The known facts about the Mac App Store are that it is only going to be an additional way to obtain software. It doesn't make sense to condemn it as "Bad For Developers" based on groundless speculation and presumed irrationality on Apple's part.
Yup, plus the effect of improving user experience.
The most developer-friendly thing a platform vendor can do is attract users. Apple's done that in spades.
