But the amount of overreach in gatekeeper to try and make the failed Mac App Store profitable and milk $90 a year at the expense of apps users want to run is egregious.
But the amount of overreach in gatekeeper to try and make the failed Mac App Store profitable and milk $90 a year at the expense of apps users want to run is egregious.
The only scenario in which I think it's excessive is broke student devs, not sure if there's a scheme to waive the fee for them.
Not allowing regular folks to run unsigned apps is something I also agree with -though I would love if Apple allowed us to trust third-party root certs so that apps would be both signed and free of Apple's control.
Rolling up the ladder much? Most who can program nowadays in one form or another owe the learning experience to the fact we could write and run unsigned apps without nannery measures like Gatekeeper.
I flat out refuse henceforth the do anything that encourages mind share on fundamentally anti-user, gatekept platforms.
That is the default on the internet, and even enforced. I'm merely saying that for average users (or power users even, who understand the risks) the default should be that the same guarantees apply to desktop apps as well (especially considering those usually have far more access).
HTTPS shows that such a world where people live with this restriction is possible and practical, and far from the jackbooted tyranny you describe.