GustavoFeb 5

I thought Linux app distribution was weird until I met Mac OS:

The standard way to distribute apps from websites (i.e. not the official store, not homebrew) is to package the app in a disk image (DMG, as it can hold the needed file permissions) then users download it, mount it like a CD from the 90s, then drag it to the applications folder (which, I guess, is how app installing worked since the 90s, but there isn't any hint in the UI explaining that to a first time user). If you open the app from the virtual drive (aka, without installing) it will work in a sandboxed state (seems useful IMHO).

That's weird. Mac OS users say it's simple. It isn't simple. That's fucked up. That's not intuitive at all. Apple surely doesn't care because they have their store.

#ux #linux #macos #technology

Show threadARGVMI~1.PIFFeb 5

@qgustavor

MacOS Leopard (10.5) and newer has a built-in installer program that can install an app from a package file, same as Windows.

The disk image approach exists for historical reasons. In the days before macOS 10, you'd typically install an app by drag-and-dropping it from a CD to wherever you want to install it. MacOS 9 added a disk image system so you could do the same with apps downloaded from the Internet, and this was kept in 10.

Why anyone is using disk images now, I don't know.

Show threadGustavo

@argv_minus_one I searched about it before tooting, but it amused me seeing people saying "it's simple!". No, it isn't! The best DMGs I found include a shortcut to the applications folder and an arrow in the background (which, I guess, they put there using something akin to Windows's desktop.ini), but it surely isn't as intuitive nor simple as people think.

As for why people still use it, I guess backwards compatibility?

I could not install XAMPP at all from the DMG. It just failed. Said it might be unsafe. I then tried homebrew and it just worked. I will be using homebrew for now on!

Feb 5 at 6:36pmWeb
Show threadARGVMI~1.PIFFeb 5

@qgustavor

Backward compatibility with macOS 10.4? I seriously doubt it.

More likely it's just because developers don't know Installer exists.

As for “might be unsafe”, that's what macOS says when the app developer hasn't paid Apple a fee and submitted government ID to get a code signing certificate and then submitted the app itself for scanning and approval. Homebrew bypasses this whole system.