Writing data to a bundle subfolder

[pasquale]

Have things changed in Mac OS 10.8?

Yes, the standard behaviour will change. The user will still have the option to download and run unsigned apps, but this variant has to be activated in the system preferences first. Standard behaviour will be that only apps from the app store or from registered developers are allowed to be exeuted.

This is very bad news. In simple terms, Apple are forcing developers to sell their apps through their App Store, because, if I understand correctly, you can only code sign your software if you are a registered developer. To me, this is clearly a monopoly abuse and I really hope that the European Community will intervene.

[jwdietrich]

No, you are not obliged to sell your apps through the app store. However, it is advisable to become a registered developer in order to get a certificate that allows you to sign your applications.

I am not too happy about this development, but I think there is no workaround. However, I would not feel offended if the European Commission or other governmental organizations would sanction these clauses.

[jwdietrich]

There is an interesting podcast of the MacWorld journal about the pros and cons of sandboxing at http://podcast.co.uk/macworld-podcast-sandboxing-and-mac-apps/.

Previously I only saw the cons, but after hearing it I am also aware of the pros in an age of continuously rising Mac OS market shares that increase the risk of viruses, trojans and malware.

I think this discussion gives a balanced and fair overview of opposing opinions.

[pasquale]

No, you are not obliged to sell your apps through the app store. However, it is advisable to become a registered developer in order to get a certificate that allows you to sign your applications.

I am not too happy about this development, but I think there is no workaround. However, I would not feel offended if the European Commission or other governmental organizations would sanction these clauses.

Do you need to pay the annual 99 euro fee to become a registered developer?

[jwdietrich]

Yes. Apple needs the money ;-)

[Shebuka]

No, you are not obliged to sell your apps through the app store. However, it is advisable to become a registered developer in order to get a certificate that allows you to sign your applications.

I am not too happy about this development, but I think there is no workaround. However, I would not feel offended if the European Commission or other governmental organizations would sanction these clauses.

bolded part: this start to be odd also to me, we are signing our software with regular Thawte certification that was renewed for other two years 3 mont ago, but you say that in 10.8 it will be rejected?

[marcov]

bolded part: this start to be odd also to me, we are signing our software with regular Thawte certification that was renewed for other two years 3 mont ago, but you say that in 10.8 it will be rejected?

You've been signing your Apple apps with Thawte?

[Shebuka]

bolded part: this start to be odd also to me, we are signing our software with regular Thawte certification that was renewed for other two years 3 mont ago, but you say that in 10.8 it will be rejected?

You've been signing your Apple apps with Thawte?

Yes, but we are not selling on app store the OS X version. Currently only iPad version is on app store (that is signed and packaged by XCode with our Distribution Certificate).

[pasquale]

Just take a look at this article:

http://gizmodo.com/5885837/this-is-how-apple-will-block-unapproved-apps-with-mountain-lions-gatekeeper

Isn't it reason for concern?

[pasquale]

I lawsuit should be filed against Apple for monopoly abuse.

In my opinion, shipping a free Web browser with the operating system -- as MS did -- is less serious than forcing developers to pay a 99 euro annual fee. Also taking a 30% rake-off from each application sold by somebody else is criminal and usurious if you penalize all the other distribution methods.

Does anybody know of any Web sites where you can submit a case of monopoly abuse to the attention of the European Commission or any other governmental organizations?

In the attached screenshot you can see the disgusting way GateKeeper warns the user about the fact that the application is unsigned and advises him to move it to the Trash! Isn't it unfair competition?

[jwdietrich]

I agree with your basic opinion, but don't forget that the user has still the freedom to open applications without signature.

See

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2012/02/developers-gatekeeper-a-concern-but-still-gives-power-users-control.ars

and

http://www.macworld.com/article/1165408/mountain_lion_hands_on_with_gatekeeper.html

for details. Of course, unsigned applications will appear less professional to most users, and some will refuse to start them.

[pasquale]

Mountain Lion will be shipped with the default option which prevents unsigned apps from being installed, so most users (especially the inexperienced ones) will just give up downloading software from Web sites other than the Apple App Store.

If Apple allowed you to sign your apps free of charge it wouldn't be a problem, but we all know that certification is not free and it must be renewed on an annual basis. In my opinion, this is a clear case of monopoly abuse which should be prosecuted by governmental organizations protecting the interests of the average citizen.

[jwdietrich]

In my opinion, this is a clear case of monopoly abuse which should be prosecuted by governmental organizations protecting the interests of the average citizen.

I agree with your position.

However, Apple will argue that this policy will protect the users from malware.

A solution could be to urge Apple to acknowledge certificates of independent issuers, e.g. Thawte or governmental organizations. For open source projects signatures from services like SourceForge might be sufficient, too.

[pasquale]

Protecting users from malware is only an excuse. A good antivirus piece of software could fulfil this task better than code-signing, which only guarantees the identity of the developer, not the absence of malware in his apps.

The truth is Apple want to take advantage of their operating system to get as much money as possible from developers.

[jwdietrich]

The truth is Apple want to take advantage of their operating system to get as much money as possible from developers.

Possibly you are right.

Unfortunately, alternative providers of Mac OS X code certificates like digicert, VeriSign or Thawte are even more expensive than Apple.

Valuable resources explaining code signing for Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X are Apple's Code Signing Guide and digicert's Mac Codesign Utility Tool.