As someone who recently worked in game dev I'm not sure why 32 bit was even a factor as 64 bit is likely your default target anyway - has been for awhile. So, killing 32 bit is not a real issue.
Notorizing can be seen as just another cost of targeting a platform. So do it. You will need at least one machine anyway to do basic testing on. So use that. Get the cheapest imac or whatever you require. So, mac hardware isn't a real issue.
I found the statistics a bit strange as well. Sales were 2% linux, 4% mac, 94% windows. Yet support was divided 30% linux, 50% mac and 20% windows. This suggests linux is more problematic per sale than mac. Yet he has no issue with linux. If this was me, I'd be wanting to know exactly why linux/mac was generating so many tickets. The answer will likely help the overall product.
Personally, you need to jump through so many hoops to release software that none of these thus far mentioned should be big enough to stop you. The real reasons should be: is there a demand in this target market; will that demand generate sufficient profit?
As I'm starting my own journey on this I see all the platforms and app stores have various issues. Everything has tradeoffs. The article's author needs to come up with better arguments. I just don't see his reasons as relevant in comparison to the other much larger costs associated with development.
I'd actually recommend targeting multiple platforms just to force bugs to come out. Different platforms / compilers see and expose different issues in your codebase. So far I'm quite happy to have cross platform support even when i don't necessarily release on those platforms yet.
I find art, sound and game assets are more expensive than an apple dev account or even a mac computer. Others have written in more detail on this. Even generic business costs exceed the subscription/computer costs he's stating as being barriers.
What surprises me is the fact that the author doesn't talk about the craziest of Apple's recent choices: the deprecation of OpenGL. This is much worse than the deprecation of 32 bit and, IMHO, it's just Apple giving up on being a relevant gaming platform. This, plus the lack of nvidia drivers and of support for Vulkan.
All the small issues here show, together, that indeed Apple doesn't give a shit about gaming and about interoperability with other platforms. They want developers to be faithful to their locked garden and their technologies.
> All the small issues here show, together, that indeed Apple doesn't give a shit about gaming and about interoperability with other platforms. They want developers to be faithful to their locked garden and their technologies.
Especially if it's only 4% of your sales. If 4% of your sales doesn't cover the cost of a Mac, code signing, and the cost of support on the Mac then it's a _net negative_ - you'll make more money not being on the Mac.
Completely agree. These are real issues with MacOS and Apple. More generally, if you're writing productivity apps on iOS then Apple is also your competitor. Plenty of devs have warned me not to write iOS apps that line up with Apple's existing offerings.
I'm not a game dev but just as a developer I do think a lot of these assumptions are a little unfair. You can't call things "not a real issue" just because they're not a big issue to you.
> ...64 bit is likely your default target anyway - has been for awhile. So, killing 32 bit is not a real issue.
If you depend on 32-bit software, no, it is a real issue. Updating an app and dependencies to all be 64-bit can be a pretty big issue. Not everyone is on a modern stack.
> ...linux is more problematic per sale than mac. Yet he has no issue with linux.
If I were on a PC I would have less issue with linux too, simply because I don't need to buy special hardware or switch computers to deal with those tickets.
> If this was me, I'd be wanting to know exactly why linux/mac was generating so many tickets. The answer will likely help the overall product.
Will it? If they're platform issues, they're not improving the product, just getting it to run.
> Personally, you need to jump through so many hoops to release software that none of these thus far mentioned should be big enough to stop you.
You don't know this guy's resources though. That's like telling someone, if you're already come 25 miles, 5 miles aren't that much more. If they're in a car, sure. If they are running, yes it is— every mile is a lot.
> The real reasons should be: is there a demand in this target market; will that demand generate sufficient profit?
I think the fact only 4% of sales come from macOS means there isn't much demand or profit, right?
> As I'm starting my own journey on this I see all the platforms and app stores have various issues. Everything has tradeoffs. The article's author needs to come up with better arguments.
The arguments are good. You yourself just said it. Everything has tradeoffs, and the tradeoffs of developing for macOS are just not worth this person's time.
> I just don't see his reasons as relevant in comparison to the other much larger costs associated with development.
Except do you really know his costs, and the resources he has to cover said costs?
> I'd actually recommend targeting multiple platforms just to force bugs to come out. Different platforms / compilers see and expose different issues in your codebase.
Wait, what? What's the point of killing bugs for a platform you don't support though? Maybe when I develop for web I should text in IE 5. It'll surface so many "bugs" in my site.
IE 5 is a ridiculous strawman example you bring up in bad faith to drive your point. You know its ridiculous because you specifically list an ancient version that is obviously a bad target. This does not refute what I wrote.
I can point to multiple bugs revealed just by having multiple platform support. Other devs I've spoken to have also had this experience. Different platforms have different tools available.
A computer worth $1600 is dwarfed by cost of business name, software tools, insurance, utilities etc etc. Art, sound etc also are much higher costs.
I'm a one man indie dev. I'm guessing I know a little bit more about this issue. Perhaps not. But I do manage to pay bills etc so I must know something.
> You will need at least one machine anyway to do basic testing on.
You wouldn't if Apple didn't prohibit using VMs. If you want to test compatibility with the actual hardware you probably should have more than one machine anyway.
> This suggests linux is more problematic per sale than mac.
Or that Linux users are more likely to report their problems. IIRC there recently was an article on HN by a game developer who supported Linux in part to get quality bug reports.
”You wouldn't if Apple didn't prohibit using VMs.”
Nitpick: Apple doesn’t completely prohibit VMs; it prohibits VMs not running on Apple hardware running the OS, and puts restriction on why you can run them. https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macOS1014.pdf:
”to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using macOS Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use.”
I think one intended use for that is for testing your software with older or beta OSes, but “already running the Apple Software” to me, implies running the same version in the VM as on the host.
I also think they don’t just allow running in a VM because it would make running hackintoshes perfectly feasible, losing them significant hardware sales.
Notorizing can be seen as just another cost of targeting a platform. So do it. You will need at least one machine anyway to do basic testing on. So use that. Get the cheapest imac or whatever you require. So, mac hardware isn't a real issue.
I found the statistics a bit strange as well. Sales were 2% linux, 4% mac, 94% windows. Yet support was divided 30% linux, 50% mac and 20% windows. This suggests linux is more problematic per sale than mac. Yet he has no issue with linux. If this was me, I'd be wanting to know exactly why linux/mac was generating so many tickets. The answer will likely help the overall product.
Personally, you need to jump through so many hoops to release software that none of these thus far mentioned should be big enough to stop you. The real reasons should be: is there a demand in this target market; will that demand generate sufficient profit?
As I'm starting my own journey on this I see all the platforms and app stores have various issues. Everything has tradeoffs. The article's author needs to come up with better arguments. I just don't see his reasons as relevant in comparison to the other much larger costs associated with development.
I'd actually recommend targeting multiple platforms just to force bugs to come out. Different platforms / compilers see and expose different issues in your codebase. So far I'm quite happy to have cross platform support even when i don't necessarily release on those platforms yet.
I find art, sound and game assets are more expensive than an apple dev account or even a mac computer. Others have written in more detail on this. Even generic business costs exceed the subscription/computer costs he's stating as being barriers.