The Mac app flea market

Keyword/Typo Squatting and Clones Everywhere

• Commenters note pervasive keyword and typo squatting across Apple, Microsoft, and Google stores, not just for “AI Chat” but any popular app.
• Example: searching the Microsoft Store for WinDirStat returns many dubious clones; the real project lives on GitHub/the web and isn’t in the store.
• Users are increasingly “trained” to trust app stores over the web, so legitimate sites and repos are never found. A common workaround mentioned: append “github” to search queries.

GitHub vs App Stores for Normal Users

• Some find GitHub-based distribution confusing: source archives alongside binaries, no obvious “download here” button.
• Others argue that official download pages are simple enough and that alternative install instructions (winget, scoop) are optional.
• The deeper issue: non-technical users will look in the store first, where clones dominate.

Copycats, Trademarks, and Store Inaction

• Developers with niche but popular apps report floods of copycats now appearing ahead of them in search, with Apple doing nothing despite reports.
• Trademark registration (federal vs cheaper state-level) is discussed as a potential lever to get platforms to act, though effectiveness is unclear.

Review Process: Strict but Ineffective

• Widely reported pattern: legitimate apps receive arbitrary or opaque rejections and long delays, while low-effort or scammy clones slide through.
• Several explanations are floated: extreme skew toward low-quality submissions, quota-driven reviewers, possible bribery, and incentives aligned with revenue (IAP-heavy “casino” apps).
• Many argue the system simultaneously delivers too many false positives (blocking good apps) and false negatives (letting in shovelware), undermining Apple/Google’s justification for their 30% cut.

Walled Gardens, Control, and Discoverability

• One framing: app stores act as collective bargaining agents for users; they get criticized whenever they fail to protect quality or exclude good apps.
• Others counter that most visible complaints come from developers, implying platforms are serving users “well enough.”
• Strong skepticism that Apple would allow alternative front-ends or curated indices precisely because discoverability is a key point of control and revenue.

Curation, Ranking, and Better Models

• Many see the Mac App Store as a “failed” or embarrassing marketplace: low trust, little serious software, dominated by clones. iOS is viewed as only marginally better.
• Steam, Linux distro repos, and (to some extent) SetApp are cited as superior curation models: better ranking, reputation, and stronger incentives for quality.
• Suggested mitigations: reputation signals (“by OpenAI” vs unknown), better search and filtering (e.g., CarPlay support), Hamming-distance constraints on app names, and stricter enforcement against near-duplicates.

Security Narrative and the Web Comparison

• Commenters argue the “walled garden = safety” story is overstated: fraudulent password managers, ChatGPT lookalikes, and subscription scams routinely pass review.
• The open web often surfaces the genuine products first, while official stores prominently feature clones and paid placements.
• Some conclude that real safety comes more from sandboxing and permissions than from store gatekeeping, and call for sideloading and third-party stores on mobile.

Shovelware as a Structural Outcome

• Several see current conditions (AI tools, low dev cost, “get into AI at any cost” hype) as inevitably driving massive amounts of low-quality apps.
• That, combined with weak curation, turns both mobile and desktop app stores into “flea markets” where finding trustworthy software is increasingly difficult.