Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Eliot Miranda-2
So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other cautions suggestions anybody?

best
Eliot

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Apple Developer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apple Developer
.
We are thrilled to announce that on January 6 the Mac App Store will open to millions of users around the world. By bringing the revolutionary App Store experience to Mac OS X, the Mac App Store makes discovering, purchasing, and downloading Mac apps easier than ever, and provides you with the best place to distribute your Mac apps.
Submit Your Mac Apps by December 31
Be a part of the grand opening of the Mac App Store and take advantage of this exciting opportunity to reach new customers. Build, test, and compile your apps with Xcode 3.2.5, then submit them for review no later than Friday, December 31 at 5 PM PST.
As a reminder, iTunes Connect will be shutdown from December 23 - 28. During this time you will not be able to submit apps to the App Store.
Log in now
.
You are receiving this email because you are a Mac Developer Program member who is opted-in to receive marketing or technical information. If you would prefer not to receive future communications from Apple Developer you may unsubscribe.
0



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Jecel Assumpcao Jr
Eliot Miranda wrote:
> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
> cautions suggestions anybody?

I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:

http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022

These parts might be a problem:

# 2.16
#
# Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
# functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected

# 2.21
#
# Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store

And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
compatible):

# 6.3
#
# Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
# icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
# Interface Guidelines will be rejected

# 6.4
#
# Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
# creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
# are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
# or less than very good it may be rejected

At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
Store.

-- Jecel


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

EstebanLM
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
Well, as a first step, just push the current versions of pharo, squeak, etoys, etc. will be fine. In the future, I would like to push some "ready to use" vm + [the distribution you like], some kind the one clicks distributions (but without the other platforms stuff, of course : ). Also, I think there are some guideliness to follow for the applications to be on the app store. I can't say if we already fulfill the requirements, because my developers program for mac expired last month and I forgot to renew it -I'm doing it now, but as I'm at the **s of the world, it is not so automatic :) )

cheers,
Esteban

El 16/12/2010, a las 4:31p.m., Eliot Miranda escribió:

So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other cautions suggestions anybody?

best
Eliot

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Apple Developer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apple Developer
.
We are thrilled to announce that on January 6 the Mac App Store will open to millions of users around the world. By bringing the revolutionary App Store experience to Mac OS X, the Mac App Store makes discovering, purchasing, and downloading Mac apps easier than ever, and provides you with the best place to distribute your Mac apps.
Submit Your Mac Apps by December 31
Be a part of the grand opening of the Mac App Store and take advantage of this exciting opportunity to reach new customers. Build, test, and compile your apps with Xcode 3.2.5, then submit them for review no later than Friday, December 31 at 5 PM PST.
As a reminder, iTunes Connect will be shutdown from December 23 - 28. During this time you will not be able to submit apps to the App Store.
Log in now
.
You are receiving this email because you are a Mac Developer Program member who is opted-in to receive marketing or technical information. If you would prefer not to receive future communications from Apple Developer you may unsubscribe.
0





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Levente Uzonyi-2
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:

> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
>> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
>> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
>> cautions suggestions anybody?
>
> I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
> leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:
>
> http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022
>
> These parts might be a problem:
>
> # 2.16
> #
> # Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
> # functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
>
> # 2.21
> #
> # Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store
>
> And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
> window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
> compatible):
>
> # 6.3
> #
> # Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
> # icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
> # Interface Guidelines will be rejected
>
> # 6.4
> #
> # Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
> # creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
> # are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
> # or less than very good it may be rejected
>
> At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
> Store.
Most web browsers and all virtualization software would be rejected
according to these terms.


Levente

>
> -- Jecel
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Igor Stasenko
2010/12/16 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
>
>> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>>
>>> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
>>> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
>>> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
>>> cautions suggestions anybody?
>>
>> I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
>> leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:
>>
>> http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022
>>
>> These parts might be a problem:
>>
>> # 2.16
>> #
>> # Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
>> # functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
>>
>> # 2.21
>> #
>> # Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store
>>
>> And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
>> window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
>> compatible):
>>
>> # 6.3
>> #
>> # Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
>> # icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
>> # Interface Guidelines will be rejected
>>
>> # 6.4
>> #
>> # Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
>> # creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
>> # are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
>> # or less than very good it may be rejected
>>
>> At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
>> Store.
>
> Most web browsers and all virtualization software would be rejected
> according to these terms.
>

Yep, Apple bar seems to high for professionally made software.
Btw, XCode neither having good interface nor easy one. So ban it. :)

It is adequate only for casual software like Pocket Heat
(http://www.psfk.com/2010/01/iphone-app-overworks-components-to-warm-hands.html)

I don't understand, why we need to jump into this bandwagon of bigots?
Will presence on App Store change anything for Squeak? I don't think so.

>
> Levente
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Levente Uzonyi-2
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote:

> 2010/12/16 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>:
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
>>>> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
>>>> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
>>>> cautions suggestions anybody?
>>>
>>> I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
>>> leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:
>>>
>>> http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022
>>>
>>> These parts might be a problem:
>>>
>>> # 2.16
>>> #
>>> # Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
>>> # functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
>>>
>>> # 2.21
>>> #
>>> # Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store
>>>
>>> And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
>>> window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
>>> compatible):
>>>
>>> # 6.3
>>> #
>>> # Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
>>> # icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
>>> # Interface Guidelines will be rejected
>>>
>>> # 6.4
>>> #
>>> # Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
>>> # creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
>>> # are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
>>> # or less than very good it may be rejected
>>>
>>> At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
>>> Store.
>>
>> Most web browsers and all virtualization software would be rejected
>> according to these terms.
>>
>
> Yep, Apple bar seems to high for professionally made software.
> Btw, XCode neither having good interface nor easy one. So ban it. :)
>
> It is adequate only for casual software like Pocket Heat
> (http://www.psfk.com/2010/01/iphone-app-overworks-components-to-warm-hands.html)
>
> I don't understand, why we need to jump into this bandwagon of bigots?
> Will presence on App Store change anything for Squeak? I don't think so.
It could be used to deliver the VM to more people. People are more likely
to install stuff if they can do it easily or in the way they used to do
it.
Btw it's pretty much the same as adding the VM to various Linux/BSD
distributions. Just remember how hard it was for Debian/Ubuntu.


Levente

>
>>
>> Levente
>>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Casey Ransberger-2
In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko
Boycott from such a small community won't change anything. Absence probably only hurts. It's a rock and a hard place.

I don't know what to think about it.

On Dec 16, 2010, at 2:49 PM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2010/12/16 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>:
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
>>>> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
>>>> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
>>>> cautions suggestions anybody?
>>>
>>> I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
>>> leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:
>>>
>>> http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022
>>>
>>> These parts might be a problem:
>>>
>>> # 2.16
>>> #
>>> # Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
>>> # functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
>>>
>>> # 2.21
>>> #
>>> # Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store
>>>
>>> And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
>>> window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
>>> compatible):
>>>
>>> # 6.3
>>> #
>>> # Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
>>> # icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
>>> # Interface Guidelines will be rejected
>>>
>>> # 6.4
>>> #
>>> # Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
>>> # creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
>>> # are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
>>> # or less than very good it may be rejected
>>>
>>> At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
>>> Store.
>>
>> Most web browsers and all virtualization software would be rejected
>> according to these terms.
>>
>
> Yep, Apple bar seems to high for professionally made software.
> Btw, XCode neither having good interface nor easy one. So ban it. :)
>
> It is adequate only for casual software like Pocket Heat
> (http://www.psfk.com/2010/01/iphone-app-overworks-components-to-warm-hands.html)
>
> I don't understand, why we need to jump into this bandwagon of bigots?
> Will presence on App Store change anything for Squeak? I don't think so.
>
>>
>> Levente
>>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

garduino
I don't know much about Apple Store nor Apple itself because here in
Argentina are so expensives, but seems that a lot of people is selling
solutions using this way.

Is not a bad idea to push our "products" in all the possible places,
and the Eliot suggestion make me think about if we could have some own
repo of ready to use squeak/pharo solutions were each author can offer
their products (free or not, open or not) as a way of concentrate a
portfolio of Smalltalk (aka Pharo/Squeak/other dialects?) solutions.

A sort of Smalltalk Store..........I know that is not a big difference
against any other software repository (as cnet, tucows, etc) only that
here we could join forces in some ways to try to sell/offer our
solutions......Could work?

Cheers.


2010/12/16 Casey Ransberger <[hidden email]>:

> Boycott from such a small community won't change anything. Absence probably only hurts. It's a rock and a hard place.
>
> I don't know what to think about it.
>
> On Dec 16, 2010, at 2:49 PM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> 2010/12/16 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>:
>>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
>>>>> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
>>>>> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
>>>>> cautions suggestions anybody?
>>>>
>>>> I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
>>>> leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022
>>>>
>>>> These parts might be a problem:
>>>>
>>>> # 2.16
>>>> #
>>>> # Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
>>>> # functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
>>>>
>>>> # 2.21
>>>> #
>>>> # Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store
>>>>
>>>> And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
>>>> window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
>>>> compatible):
>>>>
>>>> # 6.3
>>>> #
>>>> # Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
>>>> # icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
>>>> # Interface Guidelines will be rejected
>>>>
>>>> # 6.4
>>>> #
>>>> # Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
>>>> # creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
>>>> # are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
>>>> # or less than very good it may be rejected
>>>>
>>>> At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
>>>> Store.
>>>
>>> Most web browsers and all virtualization software would be rejected
>>> according to these terms.
>>>
>>
>> Yep, Apple bar seems to high for professionally made software.
>> Btw, XCode neither having good interface nor easy one. So ban it. :)
>>
>> It is adequate only for casual software like Pocket Heat
>> (http://www.psfk.com/2010/01/iphone-app-overworks-components-to-warm-hands.html)
>>
>> I don't understand, why we need to jump into this bandwagon of bigots?
>> Will presence on App Store change anything for Squeak? I don't think so.
>>
>>>
>>> Levente
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

LawsonEnglish
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
Once again, it seems like the Squeak community will need to approach
Steve Jobs concerning these issues, using as many avenues as possible
(e.g. Alan Kay letter, etc). The strategy used for the iPhone may or may
not work, but it seems the only course of action.

Lawson

On 12/16/10 3:00 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:

> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>> So we should be ready to provide Squeak, Pharo, Etoys et al on the
>> Mac App Store on 6/1/2011.  John, any advice or should I just go ahead
>> and submit Cog and Squeak 4.1 trunk and see what happens?  Other
>> cautions suggestions anybody?
> I hope it works out! Since I am not a developer, I don't know if this
> leaked version of the "terms of use" is true and current:
>
> http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-mac-app-store-approval-guidelines/65022
>
> These parts might be a problem:
>
> # 2.16
> #
> # Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add
> # functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
>
> # 2.21
> #
> # Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store
>
> And these might or might not be a problem (since the GUI inside the
> window is different, but the menus and the window stuff is Mac
> compatible):
>
> # 6.3
> #
> # Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
> # icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
> # Interface Guidelines will be rejected
>
> # 6.4
> #
> # Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
> # creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
> # are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
> # or less than very good it may be rejected
>
> At least there isn't the code generation limitations of the iOS App
> Store.
>
> -- Jecel
>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mac App Store opens January 6

Michael Davies-2
On 7 January 2011 14:24, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
Once again, it seems like the Squeak community will need to approach Steve Jobs concerning these issues, using as many avenues as possible (e.g. Alan Kay letter, etc). The strategy used for the iPhone may or may not work, but it seems the only course of action.

Lawson

[snip]

# 6.3
#
# Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and
# icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human
# Interface Guidelines will be rejected

# 6.4
#
# Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined,
# creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but
# are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex
# or less than very good it may be rejected

I don't think we need to worry about these last two, given the applications that are already getting through: http://readthefuckinghig.tumblr.com/