5 ms·

Apple is even worse. There is a singular service, there’s, and using it costs $100/year. Rate doesn’t matter ... and Mozilla can run theirs for free. I’m just

by swiley 6y ago

Apple is even worse. There is a singular service, there’s, and using it costs $100/year. Rate doesn’t matter ... and Mozilla can run theirs for free. I’m just glad my pinephone shipped and everything on my phone actually makes sense now (even if I have to compile things and write a few config files.)

valuearb 6y ago
It’s one of the reasons a billion iOS devices have good battery life.
- swiley 6y ago
  An alternative is requiring developers to engage with the community and convince them there’s no ill intent. And where is the option for those of us who don’t mind less battery in exchange for actually getting prompt notifications for services we use?
  - valuearb 6y ago
    The option is called jail breaking. Apple has an obligation to its customers to make their phones work as well as possible. Customers complain all the time about mysterious battery draining behaviors, and blaming various apps. Having millions install some cool new notifications service without realizing it’s actually a battery draining service just multiplies those problems.
    - yepthatsreality 6y ago
      > Having millions install some cool new notifications service without realizing it’s actually a battery draining service just multiplies those problems. This is pure FUD reasoning though. You can’t say “no you can’t have that because it could possibly be bad trust me” without any evidence that it would be a major issue. The more locked down a phone is the more people need Apple/Google.
      - freehunter 6y ago
        It’s not FUD and it’s not without evidence. What you’re describing was the actual reality in handheld computing before iOS. Look at early Android or Windows Mobile or Palm or heck even your own modern-day laptop. Battery-draining background applications aren’t FUD and don’t require any additional evidence because that’s the reality on basically every platform except iOS and modern Android.
        yepthatsreality 6y ago
        But at the same time there would still be review processes that could detect such apps. This is just assurance on Apples part they don’t have to babysit devices, not some huge benefit to the consumer. There is a consumer benefit but a small one.
      - judge2020 6y ago
        In the past you could run any push service you wanted, and battery life was worse with many apps. There's also another current (/recent) example on this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24462028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24462028.
        yepthatsreality 6y ago
        So because early on there was bad software we have to take away the ability to make such software?
    - anthropodie 6y ago
      Sure. I would have rooted my phone 2 years ago but I have my employers apps on it which don't work on rooted phone. :/
  - chipotle_coyote 6y ago
    > An alternative is requiring developers to engage with the community and convince them there’s no ill intent. This is a pretty tough alternative. No developer is going to say "I have ill intent here"; are you confident you have the ability to make that decision on your own? I'm not confident I do. I can't look at the code of most of the stuff I run on my phone. Some people would say "then stick to all open source software," but I don't have the time or expertise to audit the code of all -- or even most -- of the applications I run. Maybe other people will, but there's no guarantee they'll find anything bad (whether malicious or just buggy) very quickly -- and we're talking about cloud stuff here, which means there's a server none of us can audit involved in the process. Apple and Google having "blessed" push notification systems is certainly a tradeoff on multiple levels, from it being a single point of failure to being another server you can't audit and a single company you have to trust to at least some limited degree. But having the notifications integrated at the OS level reduces the number of people and systems involved in delivering those notifications, at least theoretically reducing the number of bad actors -- and, as many people have observed here, also lets these notifications be optimized for battery life in a way that's probably not possible if you have dozens of apps running their own background processes rather than simply asking to be notified by the system one. The alternatives are a different set of tradeoffs. That doesn't necessarily make them worse, but it definitely doesn't automatically make them better. > And where is the option for those of us who don’t mind less battery in exchange for actually getting prompt notifications for services we use? The alternate scenarios give you less battery, but don't guarantee actually getting prompt notifications for services you use, do they? They just give you different points of failure. Actually, they might even give you the same points of failure. When a DoorDash notification shows up on my iPhone late -- or as it did the other day, inexplicably 20 minutes early, leaving me standing in Silicon Valley's smoke-filled air quizzically looking for my chicken order -- is that Apple's fault, or is it DoorDash's fault? After all, the notification isn't starting on Apple's server. If the problem is with DoorDash, which the early notification had to be, then if DoorDash could bypass Apple's notification system all that would give me is an incorrect notification delivered with fewer network hops.
    - swiley 6y ago
      As I said it works well on Linux based OSes. Most of the garbage people have on their phones (DoorDash included) is better as a web page.
  - valuearb 6y ago
    > And where is the option for those of us who don’t mind less battery in exchange for actually getting prompt notifications for services we use? You always have the option to build your own phone. With easily available components and open source software it’s never been easier. And with cheap and flexible Chinese manufacturing, Kickstarter and Patreon it’s never been easier to manufacture your own phone design. Otherwise, your demands don’t reflect the needs of the vast majority of Google and Apple customers. The world doesn’t revolve around your unique desires.
    - jlokier 6y ago
      > You always have the option to build your own phone. That sounds factually false to me. Seems to me that I can't do it. Others have tried, how's that going? For a start I don't think the components are easily available. Both software and hardware. > "With easily available components and open source software" For me the modern definition of a phone is "a device that can make voice calls, message people on their required messaging network, and give me access to my bank accounts". I don't think I can actually do that with easily available components and open source software right now. It would be interesting to be proved wrong.
      - valuearb 6y ago
        Here is someone who did it. https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ Steve Jobs couldn’t build a phone. But he could build a team that could build a phone. You don’t have the resources of Apple (he didn’t at the start either, just Woz), but you have Patreon and Kickstarter. The main difference between you and Steve Jobs is he didn’t waste his day complaining in the internet about problems, he actually did something to offer solutions for them.
        jlokier 6y ago
        The Pinephone is lovely, but it cannot provide what I defined as a modern phone, unfortunately. I cannot message people on their required messaging platforms, and I cannot access my bank account with it. That means if I used a Pinephone I would need to carry two phones. This is not someone "complaining" as though to do nothing. It is someone stating the current situation and what needs to be changed. I would dearly like to change this, but your suggestion implies that it's realistic and easy, which is far from the current truth. > Steve Jobs couldn’t build a phone. But he could build a team that could build a phone. You don’t have the resources of Apple (he didn’t at the start either). For the same, simple definition of a modern phone, another gigantic company, Microsoft, tried and failed. It really isn't easy.
away_throw 6y ago
Until the PinePhone gets 5Ghz, its unusable for me. I live in an apartment and 2.4Ghz has like 15% packet loss and only has 2Mbps downloads with stuttering and slow loads.
- banachtarski 6y ago
  On the flip side, even though I have a 5 GHz capable phone, I always connect to the 2.4 GHz band because the range is better.
- gitua 6y ago
  I think 5Ghz is the last concern given the primitive status of Linux phones which can barely make a phone call.
  - away_throw 6y ago
    True, it's definitely not a daily driver at the moment, but the software will mature. My friend has one with an ATT sim, and calls+SMS works just fine on postmarketOS. The UI is really sluggish though.
ogre_codes 6y ago
> Apple is even worse. There is a singular service, there’s, and using it costs $100/year. You say this like it's some egregious burden. Compared to the cost of building an app and shipping it $100/ year is a fraction of a drop in the bucket. It's less than 1 developer hour. If you are capable of building an app with push service, the cost is trivial. If you aren't capable, it's irrelevant.
- banachtarski 6y ago
  $100 is actually a really big deal in developing countries and lower-income areas. How many of us started working on software to experiment with for free growing up? Arbitrary cost barriers like this are honestly an impediment to learning, and in my opinion, even harmful to Apple in this case. Why wouldn't they want more people to learn iOS programming and Swift programming.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    The cost to learn to program on Apple's platforms is the cost of an iPad or Mac. The $99/ year is only required if you want to deploy an app to the App Store or use Apple's cloud services.
    - admax88q 6y ago
      Older versions of those can be picked up second hand for cheaper, or sometimes free if you repair somebody else's discarded device. Theres no market of second hand developer licenses.
    - dm33tri 6y ago
      You can use a mac from school or work and iPhones/iPads are as low as $300-$400. But paying $100 just for trying to publish an app is not worth it for many people. Android and Windows stores have lower and regionally adjusted prices.
    - creativeCak3 6y ago
      I will get downvoted for saying this, but I don't care: STOP defending Apple. The amount of egregious things Apple has done over the years is amazing. Not only do they charge developers for publishing apps EVERY year, but they also make up arbitrary rules in the name of "Privacy" or "Better user experience". Oh Please. You want to give people Privacy? Use open protocols for your shitty iCloud so that people KNOW just how much data you are are giving your Siri-shit voice assistant. Want better user Experience? Let me transfer music and ebooks to MY iPhone without having to use your joke of software called iTunes. And trust me, I used to be a big fan of theirs. But after they started glueing everything to their "computers", I had a wake-up call. The macbook used to be a great product, and then they started glueing everything to it and shoving the iCloud into it. Slowly, they killed their own product. So please, stop defending them. They are doing really shitty things that will just become stains in computing history.
gitua 6y ago
I'm really curious how Push Notification, App LifeCycle, Localisation Services, Background App/Services, etc. are going to be implemented on Linux phones. Is each app going to be killed when not in foreground ? Or are they all going to keep running ? Is there going to be special API for background download manager, notification listening, music playing, etc. or is each app going to keep running in background and do its own stuff like on Desktop ? For Google & Apple things are super easy : they do what they want. But For Linux Phones, people from KDE, Gnome, Wayland, Purism, etc. will have to agree on services & APIs which might take lots of time
- jlokier 6y ago
  It might work to generally limit CPU and network resources usable by processes not actively foregrounded in the GUI. Linux cgroups is good for this sort of thing. A bit like some browsers do to timers in non-foreground tabs.
  - gitua 6y ago
    It would simplify development quite a bit if this solution ends up being sufficient for battery life. No need to think about onCreate, onResume, onPause, onStop, onRestart , etc. like on Android. But RAM might also be a problem if the phone keeps everything in background & isn't allowed to kill any app when it needs to
- swiley 6y ago
  Here’s how I have mine set up: The phone is suspended when the power button is pressed. Reciving network traffic (ex responses to IDLE on an open IMAP connection) wakes it up and there’s a service that suspends it again fairly quickly if the power button hasn’t been pressed. Another service manages an RTC alarm so that programs expecting pushed data can reestablish sockets if they die (since that won’t necessarily wake the phone.) The only disadvantage to this scheme is that there are more keepalive messages sent (so you should limit the number of services expecting push messages to just a few.) Mine runs a normal X11 DE (fluxbox) so the apps run in the background just like they do on my laptop. If something wakes the phone up too often just kill it. I’m still working out the kinks but it seems to get decent battery life this way. No need for some special API.

by swiley 6y ago

valuearb 6y ago

It’s one of the reasons a billion iOS devices have good battery life.

swiley 6y ago
An alternative is requiring developers to engage with the community and convince them there’s no ill intent. And where is the option for those of us who don’t mind less battery in exchange for actually getting prompt notifications for services we use?
- valuearb 6y ago
  The option is called jail breaking. Apple has an obligation to its customers to make their phones work as well as possible. Customers complain all the time about mysterious battery draining behaviors, and blaming various apps. Having millions install some cool new notifications service without realizing it’s actually a battery draining service just multiplies those problems.
  - yepthatsreality 6y ago
    > Having millions install some cool new notifications service without realizing it’s actually a battery draining service just multiplies those problems. This is pure FUD reasoning though. You can’t say “no you can’t have that because it could possibly be bad trust me” without any evidence that it would be a major issue. The more locked down a phone is the more people need Apple/Google.
    - freehunter 6y ago
      It’s not FUD and it’s not without evidence. What you’re describing was the actual reality in handheld computing before iOS. Look at early Android or Windows Mobile or Palm or heck even your own modern-day laptop. Battery-draining background applications aren’t FUD and don’t require any additional evidence because that’s the reality on basically every platform except iOS and modern Android.
      - yepthatsreality 6y ago
        But at the same time there would still be review processes that could detect such apps. This is just assurance on Apples part they don’t have to babysit devices, not some huge benefit to the consumer. There is a consumer benefit but a small one.
    - judge2020 6y ago
      In the past you could run any push service you wanted, and battery life was worse with many apps. There's also another current (/recent) example on this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24462028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24462028.
      - yepthatsreality 6y ago
        So because early on there was bad software we have to take away the ability to make such software?
  - anthropodie 6y ago
    Sure. I would have rooted my phone 2 years ago but I have my employers apps on it which don't work on rooted phone. :/
- chipotle_coyote 6y ago
  > An alternative is requiring developers to engage with the community and convince them there’s no ill intent. This is a pretty tough alternative. No developer is going to say "I have ill intent here"; are you confident you have the ability to make that decision on your own? I'm not confident I do. I can't look at the code of most of the stuff I run on my phone. Some people would say "then stick to all open source software," but I don't have the time or expertise to audit the code of all -- or even most -- of the applications I run. Maybe other people will, but there's no guarantee they'll find anything bad (whether malicious or just buggy) very quickly -- and we're talking about cloud stuff here, which means there's a server none of us can audit involved in the process. Apple and Google having "blessed" push notification systems is certainly a tradeoff on multiple levels, from it being a single point of failure to being another server you can't audit and a single company you have to trust to at least some limited degree. But having the notifications integrated at the OS level reduces the number of people and systems involved in delivering those notifications, at least theoretically reducing the number of bad actors -- and, as many people have observed here, also lets these notifications be optimized for battery life in a way that's probably not possible if you have dozens of apps running their own background processes rather than simply asking to be notified by the system one. The alternatives are a different set of tradeoffs. That doesn't necessarily make them worse, but it definitely doesn't automatically make them better. > And where is the option for those of us who don’t mind less battery in exchange for actually getting prompt notifications for services we use? The alternate scenarios give you less battery, but don't guarantee actually getting prompt notifications for services you use, do they? They just give you different points of failure. Actually, they might even give you the same points of failure. When a DoorDash notification shows up on my iPhone late -- or as it did the other day, inexplicably 20 minutes early, leaving me standing in Silicon Valley's smoke-filled air quizzically looking for my chicken order -- is that Apple's fault, or is it DoorDash's fault? After all, the notification isn't starting on Apple's server. If the problem is with DoorDash, which the early notification had to be, then if DoorDash could bypass Apple's notification system all that would give me is an incorrect notification delivered with fewer network hops.
  - swiley 6y ago
    As I said it works well on Linux based OSes. Most of the garbage people have on their phones (DoorDash included) is better as a web page.
- valuearb 6y ago
  > And where is the option for those of us who don’t mind less battery in exchange for actually getting prompt notifications for services we use? You always have the option to build your own phone. With easily available components and open source software it’s never been easier. And with cheap and flexible Chinese manufacturing, Kickstarter and Patreon it’s never been easier to manufacture your own phone design. Otherwise, your demands don’t reflect the needs of the vast majority of Google and Apple customers. The world doesn’t revolve around your unique desires.
  - jlokier 6y ago
    > You always have the option to build your own phone. That sounds factually false to me. Seems to me that I can't do it. Others have tried, how's that going? For a start I don't think the components are easily available. Both software and hardware. > "With easily available components and open source software" For me the modern definition of a phone is "a device that can make voice calls, message people on their required messaging network, and give me access to my bank accounts". I don't think I can actually do that with easily available components and open source software right now. It would be interesting to be proved wrong.
    - valuearb 6y ago
      Here is someone who did it. https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ Steve Jobs couldn’t build a phone. But he could build a team that could build a phone. You don’t have the resources of Apple (he didn’t at the start either, just Woz), but you have Patreon and Kickstarter. The main difference between you and Steve Jobs is he didn’t waste his day complaining in the internet about problems, he actually did something to offer solutions for them.
      - jlokier 6y ago
        The Pinephone is lovely, but it cannot provide what I defined as a modern phone, unfortunately. I cannot message people on their required messaging platforms, and I cannot access my bank account with it. That means if I used a Pinephone I would need to carry two phones. This is not someone "complaining" as though to do nothing. It is someone stating the current situation and what needs to be changed. I would dearly like to change this, but your suggestion implies that it's realistic and easy, which is far from the current truth. > Steve Jobs couldn’t build a phone. But he could build a team that could build a phone. You don’t have the resources of Apple (he didn’t at the start either). For the same, simple definition of a modern phone, another gigantic company, Microsoft, tried and failed. It really isn't easy.

away_throw 6y ago

Until the PinePhone gets 5Ghz, its unusable for me. I live in an apartment and 2.4Ghz has like 15% packet loss and only has 2Mbps downloads with stuttering and slow loads.

banachtarski 6y ago
On the flip side, even though I have a 5 GHz capable phone, I always connect to the 2.4 GHz band because the range is better.
gitua 6y ago
I think 5Ghz is the last concern given the primitive status of Linux phones which can barely make a phone call.
- away_throw 6y ago
  True, it's definitely not a daily driver at the moment, but the software will mature. My friend has one with an ATT sim, and calls+SMS works just fine on postmarketOS. The UI is really sluggish though.

ogre_codes 6y ago

> Apple is even worse. There is a singular service, there’s, and using it costs $100/year. You say this like it's some egregious burden. Compared to the cost of building an app and shipping it $100/ year is a fraction of a drop in the bucket. It's less than 1 developer hour. If you are capable of building an app with push service, the cost is trivial. If you aren't capable, it's irrelevant.

banachtarski 6y ago
$100 is actually a really big deal in developing countries and lower-income areas. How many of us started working on software to experiment with for free growing up? Arbitrary cost barriers like this are honestly an impediment to learning, and in my opinion, even harmful to Apple in this case. Why wouldn't they want more people to learn iOS programming and Swift programming.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  The cost to learn to program on Apple's platforms is the cost of an iPad or Mac. The $99/ year is only required if you want to deploy an app to the App Store or use Apple's cloud services.
  - admax88q 6y ago
    Older versions of those can be picked up second hand for cheaper, or sometimes free if you repair somebody else's discarded device. Theres no market of second hand developer licenses.
  - dm33tri 6y ago
    You can use a mac from school or work and iPhones/iPads are as low as $300-$400. But paying $100 just for trying to publish an app is not worth it for many people. Android and Windows stores have lower and regionally adjusted prices.
  - creativeCak3 6y ago
    I will get downvoted for saying this, but I don't care: STOP defending Apple. The amount of egregious things Apple has done over the years is amazing. Not only do they charge developers for publishing apps EVERY year, but they also make up arbitrary rules in the name of "Privacy" or "Better user experience". Oh Please. You want to give people Privacy? Use open protocols for your shitty iCloud so that people KNOW just how much data you are are giving your Siri-shit voice assistant. Want better user Experience? Let me transfer music and ebooks to MY iPhone without having to use your joke of software called iTunes. And trust me, I used to be a big fan of theirs. But after they started glueing everything to their "computers", I had a wake-up call. The macbook used to be a great product, and then they started glueing everything to it and shoving the iCloud into it. Slowly, they killed their own product. So please, stop defending them. They are doing really shitty things that will just become stains in computing history.

gitua 6y ago

I'm really curious how Push Notification, App LifeCycle, Localisation Services, Background App/Services, etc. are going to be implemented on Linux phones. Is each app going to be killed when not in foreground ? Or are they all going to keep running ? Is there going to be special API for background download manager, notification listening, music playing, etc. or is each app going to keep running in background and do its own stuff like on Desktop ? For Google & Apple things are super easy : they do what they want. But For Linux Phones, people from KDE, Gnome, Wayland, Purism, etc. will have to agree on services & APIs which might take lots of time

jlokier 6y ago
It might work to generally limit CPU and network resources usable by processes not actively foregrounded in the GUI. Linux cgroups is good for this sort of thing. A bit like some browsers do to timers in non-foreground tabs.
- gitua 6y ago
  It would simplify development quite a bit if this solution ends up being sufficient for battery life. No need to think about onCreate, onResume, onPause, onStop, onRestart , etc. like on Android. But RAM might also be a problem if the phone keeps everything in background & isn't allowed to kill any app when it needs to
swiley 6y ago
Here’s how I have mine set up: The phone is suspended when the power button is pressed. Reciving network traffic (ex responses to IDLE on an open IMAP connection) wakes it up and there’s a service that suspends it again fairly quickly if the power button hasn’t been pressed. Another service manages an RTC alarm so that programs expecting pushed data can reestablish sockets if they die (since that won’t necessarily wake the phone.) The only disadvantage to this scheme is that there are more keepalive messages sent (so you should limit the number of services expecting push messages to just a few.) Mine runs a normal X11 DE (fluxbox) so the apps run in the background just like they do on my laptop. If something wakes the phone up too often just kill it. I’m still working out the kinks but it seems to get decent battery life this way. No need for some special API.