Although i understand anyone´s concern about Apple new requirement for notarization, i welcome Apple´s effort to make Mac OS X apps more secure for the users. I was also not very happy when i first heard that 10.14.6 will not start unnotarized apps right away.
But what are our options here? Either we stop developing for Apple or we fulfill Apple´s requirements. Everyone has to decide for her/himself, if the extra work for this Notarization is worth it. Even if there is a way to run unnotarized apps under Mojave by going to security control panel and allow the app to be opened, i think this is not very user friendly and also not not very trustworthy, regardless if it is a free or a commercial app. Under Windows developers have to purchase a CodeSigining Certificate which costs from 79,- to 300,- USD, depending on where you buy from and depending on the type of the certificate, to be able to codesign. And if i remember right, also under future Windows versions it will be more difficult to run unsigned Apps. At least there will be a popup with a warning message, this is currently in Win10 the case. That is also not very trustworthy, isn´t it? Anyway, some weeks ago i´ve posted a link to a Livecode lesson which not only describes the required manual steps to notarize and staple an app for distribution outside the Mac Appstore , but also includes an helper stack which does all the needed steps. You´ll find the lesson here: <http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/1122100-codesigning-and-notarizing-your-lc-standalone-for-distribution-outside-the-mac-appstore> Regards, Matthias Matthias Rebbe free tools for Livecoders: InstaMaker <https://instamaker.dermattes.de/> WinSignMaker Mac <https://winsignhelper.dermattes.de/> > Am 07.09.2019 um 13:18 schrieb Peter Reid via use-livecode > <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com <mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>>: > > I've been using LiveCode as my development platform since 1999. Practically > all the apps I've developed have been for in-house use by my family, friends > and customers - all very low numbers of copies distributed in an informal > manner. I've no interest in App Store distribution and the users of my apps > trust me such that they do not need my apps to be "approved" by Apple. What's > more important to them is how quickly I can release new apps and new versions > of existing apps. > > Up to and including macOS Mojave my users can run my apps with the minor > inconvenience of having to right-click an app and approve its use, just once. > With macOS Catalina, if I understand things, it's not so simple, instead > these are the options: > > 1. Code-sign and notarise my apps – I'm not interested in this for my kind of > apps which are essentially in-house/at home developments. > > 2. Using an active Internet connection, go through the right-click technique > as now not just once, but EVERY time the app is opened. > > In the past the 'Security & Privacy' General tab had a 3rd option for the > setting 'Allow apps downloaded from:' which allowed you to install and use > apps from any source. It seems that this is not possible with Catalina. > > So with Catalina my users will need an Internet connection and will have to > go through the right-click authorisation process every time they open one of > my apps. > > More seriously, it is becoming increasingly difficult to recommend the > combination of the Mac plus LiveCode for app development. Up to now I've done > all my app development on Mac+LC, even where the target platform is Windows > or Android or Linux – I find it's simply faster, less error-prone and more > pleasant with the Mac. However, from Catalina onwards even simple little > utility apps, created for short-term use, will be tedious when opening or you > have to learn about the complexity of code-signing and notarising and accept > slower development cycles due to the need for Apple's approval! > > This is quite depressing, especially since I abandoned iOS development due to > Apple's distribution restrictions. > > Back when the iPad 2 had just been released I developed for one of my > customers an app to support health & safety audits for a national UK retail > chain. The app took me 15 days to develop in total. As a result of being able > to field a team of 10-20 staff with iPads running my app, my customer was > able to carry out 350 half-day H&S audits for 3 years. However I was unable > to roll-out this app to other customers as the ad hoc distribution method I > was using was limited to 100 iPads per year and the App Store was not > appropriate for this type of app. > > As a result of the limitations Apple impose on tablet app distribution, > recently I developed a speech-aid app just for small Android tablets and > larger phones. I have not made an iOS app. This app is low volume (in terms > of number of users) and requires significant personalising in order to be > effective for its users (typically they are stroke victims). I chose to > deliver the app on Android because of the facility to use developer mode and > because of price – Android 7in tablet plus minimal add-ons: £80, Apple iPad > plus add-ons: £320. Some of my users of this app already have an iPad but > they are having to buy a cheap Android tablet. Like the Mac and Catalina, the > iPad and iOS is driving away potential app developers due to Apple's rigid > control of the delivery mechanisms. > > Maybe I'm wrong, Catalina will be OK – if I am wrong, please correct me! > > Regards > > Peter > -- > Peter Reid > Loughborough, UK > > > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com <mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
