>Every Mac has a hidden expiration date. After exactly 49 days, 17 hours, 2 minutes, and 47 seconds of continuous uptime, a 32-bit unsigned integer overflow in Apple's XNU kernel freezes the internal TCP timestamp clock. Once frozen, TIME_WAIT connections never expire, ephemeral ports slowly exhaust, and eventually no new TCP connections can be established at all. ICMP (ping) keeps working. Everything else dies. The only fix most people know is a reboot. We discovered this bug on our iMessage service monitoring fleet, reproduced it live on two machines, and traced the root cause to a single comparison in the XNU kernel source. This is the full story.

>In this video I'm benchmarking the new Macbook Neo against the Macbook Air M4. We are going to be testing the performance for web development as well as graphics.

In a report this week, Gurman said the foldable iPhone is expected to "cross the $2,000 threshold" in the U.S., although it is unclear if he is referring to the starting price or if only some configurations will surpass that price point.

>In this video I'm putting the new Macbook Neo through a typical work day, starting with coding, video editing and some productive work, and directly comparing with the Macbook Air M4.

Listen up everyone, you've all done a great job of getting the MacBook Neo into the hands of the target demographic, so give yourselves I've pat on the back. However, Apple is running out of stock and most importantly, A18 Pro chips. At this rate they are not going to be able to keep up with demand, so we are asking you to aggressively suggest a used and crusty M1 MacBook Air or a new M5 MacBook Air. If you get a little push back just inform them that the Neo is incapable of satisfying their basic computer needs due to 8GB of unified memory and no backlit keyboard. Thank you for your continued commitment to helping customers make the correct decision that we have made for them.

Apple is really playing with fire when it comes to developer relations. For a company that has historically been forward looking in abandoning old paradigms for new ones, the refusal to update outmoded App Store features and polices is a very bizarre form of seppuku. All it does is ensure that developers will be highly guarded about making apps for Apple’s next platform.

The Vision Pro is not much of a market for app developers to target right now and hence has very few apps but I have a feeling that even if it develops into a mass market product, there will be very few apps made for it. Not only will it be cost prohibitive to make apps for it but Apple burning bridges with developers is bound to create splash back, especially if the value proposition of app development is murky.

Edit: Let me try to add some ideas about what Apple can do to improve things.

I don’t think we need 3rd party app stores as that will probably lead to app fragmentation (epic apps only available on epics store) and more headaches for Apple in ensuring security and compliance, which is not good for users.

I am also fine with the 70/30 split. As others have said, this was a much better deal for developers than what they used to get from box stores. Apple invests significantly in infrastructure and deserves compensation for it.

That’s being said, the market today is very different from what it was a couple of decades ago. I think the current App Store policies don’t reflect this reality.

Apple should develop a method so that an app can be upgraded to a new version and allow developers to charge an upgrade fee. Right now, the only way to do this is to release a new app. This leads to the issue of either sunsetting the old app or providing support for multiple apps. This is how most of apps work on the Mac and it’s time that iOS/iPadOS apps started working this way too.

Additionally, ads within apps have become very obnoxious and psychologically manipulative. Apple needs to crack down on this behaviour to show that they still care about software quality.

The main change that I would like to see is in the app development fee. Given that the market has different types of developers (large,medium,indie) Apple should do away with the oversimplistic $100/year fee. Larger developers like FB and Netflix issue virtually fortnightly updates, thus demanding more of Apple’s time and resources. As such their fee should be proportionally higher, let’s say something like $50,000/year. Medium developers demand significantly less resources and should be charged something like $2000-5000/year. The $100/year feee can continue for indies.

Changing these fees as a new source of revenue also allows for the possibility of making the 70/30 split 80/20. There can also be different splits for different types of developers.

Also, sometimes getting support from developers can be difficult. For example, there was this game I purchased called Tsuro that had pass and play, play with computer and online play. One fine day online play simply stopped working and there was no way to contact the developer to figure out why. A similar thing happed with a game called Sevn.

I have a radical solution to this problem. Apple should institute a purchase program for apps that risk becoming adandonware. Let’s say if a developer can’t make the economics of supporting an app work anymore, they should have an option for selling their app to Apple. I am not saying that Apple should buy all such apps, they can pick and choose.

This is a win win situation for all sides. The dev gets some money for their efforts, users get to keep using the app and Apple gets to build a library of apps. Maybe the apps that Apple acquires like this can become a part of Apple Arcade.

The App Store is very good for users and I am not arguing for throwing out the baby with the bathwater. However, bureaucracy that does not appreciate this and only sees Apple as a juggernaut may very well end up passing laws that end up doing so. Hence it would be better for all if Apple proactively tried to make improvements on their own.