We investigated many solutions and alternatives for more than a year: We just released TripMode 3 that uses NEFilterDataProvider and people are starting to report these issues, we’ve been trying for more than a year to solve. We cannot deliver on the promise that user’s data belongs to them, and no one else, when Apple hides traffic from its own apps. Have control over their data: who gets to use it and when. hotspots, roaming, limited data packages, throttled plans)Ģ. Stop all unwanted downloads while on expensive networks (e.g. The direct impact this is starting to have on our user base, who uses our app toġ. Apple ignores the user wish to control its system Internet traffic. Allow the user to take block/allow decision on any system traffic - especially anything that has a significant data download/upload potential.įaceTime or System Update are not identified in the list, their volume of traffic is not counted, and the call and system update download take place. Be able to attribute the volume of traffic to specific apps, and report it to the userģ. Be able to measure the volume of traffic on the Mac without exception, and report it to the userĢ. From a developer perspective, we would expect toġ. FaceTime call or System Update do not proceed to download/upload any data. Start a FaceTime call or System Update downloadįaceTime or System Update traffic to be identified in the list of blocked apps. Turn the TripMode switch ON (= only allowed Apps can access the Internet)Ĥ. Install it along with its Network Extensionģ. Download the TripMode 3 trial from tripmode.chĢ. This is a regression in functionality, that was previously possible with Network Kernel Extensions.ġ. The identification of IP adresses or domains where this traffic flows to or from The measurement of the volume of network traffic from those appsģ. The identification of their network activityĢ. Currently there’s only a single rating that I see with limited explanation on what exactly its based on.We learned through FB7665551 that Apple introduced a ContentFilterExclusionList in its NetworkExtensions framework, allowing a list of specific Apple processes/apps to bypass oversight and control from apps using NEFilterDataProvider. One thing Setapp needs to focus on is to make reviews more central. The Mac AppStore, while gated, is not curated or at least not to a high standard and so I generally avoid searching there whenever I can as there’s so much junk floating around. Thinking longer term, this could allow both users and developers to benefit from more non-core apps. I find more and more apps cropping up that I can use (Tripmode was my latest discovery to limit my Mac’s data usage while on metered roaming internet) that I would hate to have to go looking for because they are not essential but great to have without going through a separate payment/subscription process. I hope it works for Setapp and their developers long term with this model as I find it to be a a great curated (this is key and I am happy to pay for curation) collection of apps. From a user perspective I was initially skeptical about Setapp but now I’m a convert. Maybe they get some casual users out of the deal and that makes up for it - but if a user would pay you $6/month, and SetApp uses that fact to pitch users on a plan that causes them to not pay you $6/month, that’s a loss by definition…isn’t it? I’d suggest that at least some devs lose existing licenses to SetApp at a net loss. Keep in mind that people actively pitch SetApp using lines like “if you use Ulysses, that’s half of the value right there” - which is a pitch that potentially draws existing customers away from Ulysses. Is there $6 a month in there for Ulysses? Give that something like a 30% haircut for MacPaw’s cut. So take your SetApp monthly subscription price. Because devs on SetApp don’t get paid unless their apps are used, and they get paid based on the usage of their app. It’s not at a loss – producing a new copy of the software costs zero.īut for something like SetApp, there are multiple apps where it does seem that some devs could be taking a hit. Selling a $30 app on Bundlehunt for $4 would seem to be at a loss for the developer?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |