New(?) Idea for Standalones

[Alex Tweedly]

On 29/03/2021 19:20, Craig Newman via use-livecode wrote:
> Roger.
>
> For about eight users in my business I distribute standalones for desktop only, both Mac and Windows versions. These are developed on a Mac. Simple to update and make, simple to give away, simple to use.
>
> That is the aspect of this thread that I do not understand, perhaps misreading that it is somehow problematic to do what I do without issue. I am certain I simply have this wrong.

Craig,

I think this all depends on your users, and which version(s) of 
MacOS/Windows they are using.

Both OSes require *either* signed apps, or that the user give permission 
to run unsigned apps (either doing that for each app, or once in the 
system settings). In the more recent versions (certainly of MacOS), the 
steps needed to do this have become increasingly well hidden, and the 
warning messages have become increasingly scary.

If you (i.e. your users) have been used to seeing these, and taking the 
steps around the hurdles, they probably do so naturally and without 
worrying (or, they've already down-tuned the protection in the settings 
and so no longer see any warnings for new apps).

In my case, the Macs I own are, like me, elderly, and hence restricted 
to MacOS 10.13 or older - and I barely notice; occasionally I have to 
right-click on an app and agree to it running. From Roger's description, 
this is much more intrusive in newer MacOS, and finding your way to the 
correct place to give that permission is non-trivial.

However, there is no doubt that there is some way to allow unsigned apps 
to run on all current and foreseeable versions of the desktop OSes, so 
if you have a fairly restricted audience, you can simply ignore the 
problems addressed in this thread and focus on getting the permissions 
properly changed for them.

Alex.