Mac App Store?

Mac App Store has two problems:
1. If the developer has done a great upgrade, he/she has to release it for FREE or release it as another paid product, either way is not good.
2. Mac App Store force the developer to use sandbox, which will limit some functions, such as directory access, etc.
 
Item 2 is a good thing.

Apps can now request whole disk access if they need it, but most apps should never need this. On iOS you can install an app with literally zero fear it will screw up your device. Even if it’s flat out malware, Apple can remotely disable it after the fact. If this makes life a little tougher for developers that’s not a bad thing. The closer macOS can get us to this experience the better.

Item 1 is more of a problem, although in an ideal world it can be handled by in-app purchases to activate extra features or (sigh) subscriptions. (I say ideal because then you’d pay for new features but get bug and compatibility fixes for free, which is pretty much as things should be)

The other objection is the 30% fee. But to get software in a box in a store you essentially give 70-80% of your revenue to the store and have to pay for packaging etc. if you sell software online you at minimum need to pay the credit card company and handle fraud and refunds, or pay a larger percentage to have this stuff dealt with. Kagi used to charge around 10% and went broke because of one major fraud case.
 
The 30% never were my main problems with the App Store although the fee is ridiculously high (if you don't believe me please read Tim Sweeney about app store fees ). I knew in advance how much it costed when I entered it. If that would have been my main concern I would have never entered it. The 30% definitely doesn't make it into my top five.

Also the sandbox hardly makes it into my top 5. It would have been a support nightmare to explain users why they can't load resources automatically anymore. But security-scoped bookmarks existed since quite some time so an inelegant work around is available since years.

I've never revealed the real reasons why I left the App Store and I actually still don't plan to do that although it's already 4 years ago. I don't want to wash my dirty laundry in the public.

So I can just repeat what I've already said many many times. The chances that Cheetah3D returns to the app store are low. Extremely low, since Apple didn't address any of my problems so far.
 
Well said Martin. You know more about the Mac App Store than anyone else on here. You've tried it, given it a fair go, found it wasn't viable for you, and that's the end of it. It's rather remarkable that this issue is getting a second run, simply because certain people have an irrational bias against alternate distribution methods, methods that have worked perfectly well for decades.

Talk about 1st world problems.
 
I completely agree that it is Martin's decision alone to use or in this case not to use the app store (of course the statement that he never told the real reasons behind this decision is a good way to awake the curiosity of the readers here. Which says something about the store, too. Even without the full truth there are reasons enough not to use it. At least I wasn't curious in any way before this. Now I am. Very much so, to be honest).

What podperson said about the positioning of Cheetah in the app store is also true. Except that Strata hasn't only a cheap product there - they even have a free one. And for people who only want to do small stuff in 3d without all the learning there is Adobe's Dimension (which is something like a downgraded keyshot slower than anything else I ever tried out, rendering only, of course). So, no, a software like Cheetah isn't easy to sell. What it would get more on users would probably be eaten up by the hefty fee while the whole supporting would take a lot more time (i. e. fewer customers produce more (in this case well deserved) with another distributor).

I don't agree with statements like Paul's about "irrational bias against alternate distribution methods". The shop is safe for the user, and that not only on the software side (even if that is very, very important. Well, there was a way to get around that, which is why some gambling and porn apps found their way into the store. But all in all, it is safe). One concern of mine always is the credit card payment. The biggest firms like adobe or sony have been hacked in the last years. Smaller ones, too, of course, only they don't get that much attention in the media like the big names. If you use your credit card on a regular basis there is quiet a high probabilty that YOUR data can be bought en gros with millions of others a few clicks away in the dark net (or, of course, more traditional sources). So I always think twice about using the card. And Apple may be a bigger target, but they simply can afford better security than small firms.

I for myself don't use CC in the apple store. The prepaid cards aren't only safer in that regard, you can even get discount on them (I got up to 20 % when I needed something. If you can wait a few weeks or so, you can get even more. Alas, most of the software I use isn't in the app store). For expensive software that's a fine thing and a big save.

Then there is the family use (don't know how they call it in English). The developer can, of course, disable that. Only that looks bad marketing wise. So mostly you pay one licence, and your whole family can use it. So no "you may install it on one other computer but are not allowed to use it at the same time". Up to 6 people can use it for the price of one. At the same time of course, even with a shared iCloud.

So the passwords are not the only reason for customers to use the shop (without a password safe I'd be completely lost. But that I never would have in drop box, not even in iCloud). It's safer in several ways, can be much cheaper and all in all is more convenient for the customer. So I understand the repeated wishes for the return of this app to the store.
 
I'm not saying the MAS is bad. I'm saying that the negative aspects of Cheetah not being there are greatly exaggerated.

I'm a big fan of risk minimisation, but you have to live your life. Anything on the internet can be hacked. Even the Mac App Store may get hacked one day. The chances of being hacked are very low, when you buy software from any reputable source. I should also add that sometimes the individual themselves is more responsible for being an easy victim than any weaknesses in the system, by not following the best practice to make hack attacks as difficult as possible.

Some people only trust things with corporate sponsorship. If it's good enough for Coca Cola, it must be good enough for them.
 
Last edited:
CC as in credit card. Which I don't use in the Apple Store.

For the creative suite I pay Adobe directly like every one else with the card. Still grundingly (and no, at the moment affinity isn't a possible alternative for me. Sadly).

While lots of card data are stolen through pishing (and that's wholly the users fault), that's no concern for people who are after security and don't fall for such tricks. The problem I was talking about, isn't that the users are hacked, but the firms they are customers of. In the news you read a lot of such things, and I got quiet a few mails in the line off ... "oh, ouh, ahem, we were hacked somewhen in the last few months, and we can't say if your data was amongst the stolen records. For your security you should ..." (and so on). The problem is, you only get such mails if they get aware of the fact. Up to now I only shrugged, because not one of them had my cc-data (Adobe was hacked before I had to accept their 'rent only' path).

Of course, the biggest problem is the person, but not only the end-user. The clerk working there, too. There are firms specialized in testing the employees of firms. They try to get access through them to the network of the firm. In one case I know off, they just sent a mail with a contest to all the employees of a target. Not the usual "you have won", but a simple contest, where some 20 % of all those people went to the website, filled out this form and got a file that could have been a customized trojan. It wouldn't have been that difficult to get into the network (and their customer credit cards data). Or how about the clerk who left the firm and took all the customer's data with her? The real problem here is, I could write on and on about such stories.

That about the corporate sponsorship I don't really get in this context. Yes, maybe, and there are people, too, who only trust things with recommendations from users (often faked in reality), with good reviews in professional magazines (sometimes paid) or what uncle Joe thinks, it's good or, today, of course, what an influencer tells them is trustworthy. This isn't a valid argument (but Coca Cola makes it sound bad). The simple fact remains, the more you use your credit card, the more your data is spread and in danger of getting in criminal hands like millions and millions of other people's who are mostly not aware of this. This is a valid concern.

That said, I fully understand that Cheetah isn't available there. For the developer there are a bunch of disadvantages. Heck, already to get in there you have to own a fax (which is something I gave away years ago) or to have a longer phone conversation with some tax clerk in the U.S. (even when your stuff will be sold in Europe only) or to pay someone to get you that u.s. tax number (or else, whatever you sell, the U.S. takes a heavy percentage. In other shops it's at least for private people a thing of minutes to get the relevant tax form you can fill out online).

It's just that there are good reasons for customers to use the store on an exclusive basis.
 
The line about Coca Cola was a joke. Don't worry, it doesn't mean anything.

I agree with your post. There exists, as with all things in life, a spectrum for security consciousness - at one end people who take no care, and leave themselves open to all sorts of mischief, to the other end where people are super strict and create all manner of inconveniences for themselves to be as secure as possible. That's life. People will figure out for themselves where on the spectrum they sit. Personally, I have no problem whatsoever buying Cheetah via the current distribution method, or any other reputable program via their chosen distribution method.

4 years have passed and Apple still has not addressed Martin's concerns - let's be realistic - if that is the case his issues are never going to be addressed. And if they're not getting resolved, Martin has no incentive to return to the MAS. So I would say the chances of C3D being back on the App Store are zero. The only valid question at this point is this : how many potential users will not buy a Cheetah licence because it's not on the MAS, compared to how many will happily buy, MAS or no MAS ? My guess is that only a small minority will avoid Cheetah because it's not on the App Store. The rest of us won't see it as any kind of issue.
 
Like I said, what Martin would get more in users would in my opinion be eaten up with a loss in money (30 % are steep) and the trouble of supporting people who are maybe not aware of what they are getting into. As stated before, I think it's his decision and it's probably in his best interest not to use the store.

At the moment. As soon as there is a similar product around available in the store (actually I don't know about two strata versions), he could lose potential buyers.

In my case, if two products are somehow similar in quality and usability (and price), I would prefer that from the store.

By the way, I still believe that sooner or later Apple will present an own 3d suite (not only VR, but modeler and renderer).

(I had to edit an or into an and ...)
 
I'd be curious to know whether there was any difference in sales for Cheetah between the MAS and current and previous distribution methods.

Apple may indeed do that, either in house or through buying a current developer. But it will be targeted for sure at the consumer, low end of the market. As we all know, Apple lost interest in Pro apps a long time ago.

As for Strata, information on the App Store indicates that Strata Design 3D CXi and Strata Design 3D SE 7 were both last updated in early 2014. Can that be right ? Although their own website shows a new version 8 available for $595, or $20 / month subscription. Yikes.
 
I'm curious. Could the App Store be used the way doorway pages used to be used in early web days? Martin creates a single use app that performs some minimal but useful specific 3d function and the app basically serves as advertisement for Cheetah 3d and the Cheetah website?
 
... there is Adobe's Dimension (which is something like a downgraded keyshot slower than anything else I ever tried out, rendering only, of course ...

Are you disparaging Keyshot here? or just Dimension? I can't really tell, but I think Keyshot produces great renders and has some great features. Just go their forum and see.
--shift studio.
 
Actually it should be clear what I meant, talking about Dimension. It seems to me as if they tried to copy keyshot, especially the ease of use. To my knowledge no other renderer is that simple like Keyshot in it's settings, and looking at the target group, it's not a bad idea to try to get something similar in Dimension. It (I'm still talking about Dimension) should probably deliver good quality, too, as it's actually some downgraded version of Vray. But try it out for yourself. I'm quiet sure, you will not like it. Well, maybe it's better on a Win-PC with an nvidia gpu. I don't know. It's not really well done, and somehow I got the feeling they created it with the idea in mind to sell 3d objects to the customers (they have a few models).

Keyshot on the other hand is very easy to use but delivers real top quality. And it's quiet fast; I don't know if it is still CPU only. Actually I like it. The downside is a steep price, at least for the version that's capable of animation (almost 2k). Actually I wouldn't have mentioned Keyshot if I wouldn't know it. And Keyshot came to my mind when I looked at Dimension.

Dimension is one of the reasons quiet a lot of people are not that happy with the recent news that Adobe bought Allegorithmic, the firm behind Substance (the main one is the simple 'rent only' policy of Adobe). In the near future, they said, Substance will be part of the Creative Cloud (it's not that clear what Adobes subscribers will get without additional cost).

So, while Dimension is nothing special in my opinion, Adobe will sooner or later have a full fledged 3d suite in their Creative Cloud. They need something like that to survive (not only Affinity is the problem).
 
@Hasdrubal - thanks for the response. I haven't tried Dimension - maybe I will. Doesn't sound very promising from your post.
Keyshot - I used for a month on 'evaluation'. It is easy, yet powerful and configurable. I really like it. It is CPU only, but a Luxion salesman told me they are working on adding GPU rendering too. It's not clear if it will be combo, or 'either-or'.

Yes, Adobe's acquisition of Allegorithmic seems like sad news. We'll see I guess.

--shift studio.

edit: I did try Dimension when it was called 'Project Felix' - it was too restrictive for me if I remember correctly.
 
Last edited:
@Shift Studio
Actually Felix was better in my opinion. Dimension, at least for me, only got worse. It's in the price, ok, but still no shadow of competition for Cheetah.

Keyshot is in another league than Dimension, and I fully agree with your assessment of this software. The GPU part sadly usually means Nvidia only, so there is probably not so much in it for most Mac Users.

And I don't know if Adobe's buy really is sad news. The people at Allegorithmic will still be the developers, and we just have to wait if they can keep up their good work under the new regime in the next years. This time around Adobe bought a solid firm, and they hope to get through them into the world of professional 3d. This time they didn't buy just some technology they wanted - they want the people, their knowledge and especially their reputation. In movies, the gaming industry and every aspect of the 3d world Allegorhitmic has a very good name. That's what Adobe really needs (well, actually not for 3D only). They bought the knowledge, the ideas and the talent. I'm no Substance user (which sounds like having a drug habit or, in my case, not), so I really would be happy to see it as a part of the Creative Cloud subscription. Like really, really happy (yes, it's quiet affordable as it is, but if you have a lot of quiet affordable things they do quiet a lot in total).

There is still the rumour that Adobe wants to buy C4d which completely makes sense, as they want to get (back) badly into this field.

As much as I dislike shelling out my money at Adobe, I have to admit, for myself subscription isn't as bad as I always thougt. They continually develop their products, and they try hard, to get (again) ahead of the competition with Photoshop and Illustrator (only with each major update I have to search a few things that I found without troube). So they did something completely new and totally unexpected: They started to listen to their users. At their version of Keynote (I don't remember the name of this Adobe fest) they presented one new function quiet prominently (with quiet some humour, well knowing that stuff like this should have been incorporated some 15 years ago): Ctrl Z. They presented it as if it was the greatest and newest invention in years.

So I hope, they have learnt from the past and will continue this path. Photoshop is still a standard, but there are lots of other apps who can do (almost) the same at a fraction of the price (well, it got cheaper over the years), and some specialized apps that are much more inventive in some parts (see for example that thread about enlarging pictures). At least they know that there is trouble ahead and that they have very strong competition (like affinity for photoshop, illustrator and soon indesign, nuke for after effects and so on. Remember the time when the only possibility to get a good PDF was Acrobat Pro?).
 
Like others I generally find the App Store more convenient, BUT I'd rather see 100% of my license fee going to Martin to keep the great new features flowing in C3D. That wins any day over the minor issues with managing serial numbers (for which, as others have noted, 1password is a superb solution).
 
Like others I generally find the App Store more convenient, BUT I'd rather see 100% of my license fee going to Martin to keep the great new features flowing in C3D. That wins any day over the minor issues with managing serial numbers (for which, as others have noted, 1password is a superb solution).

I agree. I'm happy for Martin to be making as much € as possible, but he did indicate that the 30% fee was a minor issue.
 
I would gladly pay 30% more to see the app in the AppStore. Everything us just much simpler that way. Cheetah3D is one of the few last apps I use that is not in the App Store, after Panic moved some of their apps to the App Store, etc.
 
I just don’t get it! It’s been explained why Cheetah 3D isn’t in the App Store. So what’s the big deal? Rhetorical question.
 
I just don’t get it! It’s been explained why Cheetah 3D isn’t in the App Store. So what’s the big deal? Rhetorical question.


Folks who are hung up about the distribution method of Cheetah simply aren't serious about 3D. It's crazy to think that grown men can't keep track of serial numbers, or updates, or that the Mac App Store is the safest, most amazing way of buying software, and all other distribution methods are compromised or risky in some way. Yes, it's neat and convenient, but it should never be a deal breaker whether Cheetah is on there or not. You won't catch users of serious 3D and related apps complaining about this. Nothing of note from Autodesk, Adobe, Newtek, Foundry etc is on the Mac App Store, and I doubt their users are up in arms. Some of those companies put a few token apps on there, but not their serious stuff. Cheetah was being sold long before the MAS even existed, and it worked fine.

It is, to be frank, an absurd discussion, and I'm surprised it's still getting mileage.
 
Back
Top