4 ms·

This seems like an absolutely bizarre take on the situation. You don't really think Apple added those EULA terms for MacStadium now right? They were clearly add

This seems like an absolutely bizarre take on the situation. You don't really think Apple added those EULA terms for MacStadium now right? They were clearly added for AWS! MacStadium just happens to be happy that there's crystal-clear red lines. These rules are 100% down to Apple, absolutely nothing to do with AWS and MacStadium in terms of decision-making. Apple don't want the perceived value of their machines to become lower, want to make sure there's no possibility of performance issues due to multiple tenancy, and want to make sure this doesn't become a way for people to have a personal Mac without having a Mac. Maybe in another year or two, assuming nothing came out of this which Apple didn't like, they might loosen the rules slightly.

saagarjha 6y ago
The terms seem to be a perfect fit for MacStadium and a poor fit for everyone else, including AWS. Do you think AWS wants to bill by the second…with 24 hours up front? Does this match their business model at all? It's really not Apple's business to try to protect people from "performance issues due to multiple tenancy". People who buy these things already know how this works.
- BillinghamJ 6y ago
  No I'm sure AWS don't want it either. And it absolutely is 100% typical of Apple to do this kind of thing. They don't want third party companies to provide offerings which might cause them problems or degrade their brand/perception. I'm not at all saying these terms were added to benefit AWS. More that they were a condition of Apple doing this first official cloud partnership.
  - skohan 6y ago
    It's also 100% in line with Apple's recent trends of being hostile to developers. It's absolutely absurd to have to rent an server for 24 hours to do a single build. It's incredibly wasteful to have this much hardware sitting around and doing nothing.
    - Blahah 6y ago
      Is there anything to stop someone renting the servers and running a build service on them, thus subdividing the use of the resource?
      - em500 6y ago
        Just the EULA. Whether that holds any weight with you is up to yourself to decide. But AWS and MacStadium are going to make you click-agree to Apple's EULA before granting access.
    - billiam 6y ago
      Recent trends? Apple has been periodically screwing developers since always. Ultimately Apple just sees developers as a necessary evil to sell their products, but making life easy for them is not a priority.
- addicted 6y ago
  Or maybe MacStadium’s model was based on the completely predictable direction and steps Apple would take when it came to licensing such activity. For example, it wasnt hard to predict that a company which basically gives away its OS for free, and nearly makes all its money selling the hardware to run the OS would start with licensing terms that led to more sales of macs.
cmiles74 6y ago
I have to disagree with this idea that Apple Computer is concerned with performance on hardware that's being shared through a service like AWS. If Apple has any concrete concerns, it's that developers would prefer to pay Amazon for the time they need on a Mac rather than purchase an entire Mac for themselves. It's an anti-developer move. This idea that Apple is worried about an EC2 instance replacing a personal Mac is way, way, out there. What is much more likely is that a developer buys a lower cost, not Apple laptop and uses that to connect to a Mac on EC2 for the few tasks that require a Mac. Again, it's an move _against_ developers, it's not designed to make the lives of developers any easier.

saagarjha 6y ago

The terms seem to be a perfect fit for MacStadium and a poor fit for everyone else, including AWS. Do you think AWS wants to bill by the second…with 24 hours up front? Does this match their business model at all? It's really not Apple's business to try to protect people from "performance issues due to multiple tenancy". People who buy these things already know how this works.

BillinghamJ 6y ago
No I'm sure AWS don't want it either. And it absolutely is 100% typical of Apple to do this kind of thing. They don't want third party companies to provide offerings which might cause them problems or degrade their brand/perception. I'm not at all saying these terms were added to benefit AWS. More that they were a condition of Apple doing this first official cloud partnership.
- skohan 6y ago
  It's also 100% in line with Apple's recent trends of being hostile to developers. It's absolutely absurd to have to rent an server for 24 hours to do a single build. It's incredibly wasteful to have this much hardware sitting around and doing nothing.
  - Blahah 6y ago
    Is there anything to stop someone renting the servers and running a build service on them, thus subdividing the use of the resource?
    - em500 6y ago
      Just the EULA. Whether that holds any weight with you is up to yourself to decide. But AWS and MacStadium are going to make you click-agree to Apple's EULA before granting access.
  - billiam 6y ago
    Recent trends? Apple has been periodically screwing developers since always. Ultimately Apple just sees developers as a necessary evil to sell their products, but making life easy for them is not a priority.
addicted 6y ago
Or maybe MacStadium’s model was based on the completely predictable direction and steps Apple would take when it came to licensing such activity. For example, it wasnt hard to predict that a company which basically gives away its OS for free, and nearly makes all its money selling the hardware to run the OS would start with licensing terms that led to more sales of macs.

cmiles74 6y ago

I have to disagree with this idea that Apple Computer is concerned with performance on hardware that's being shared through a service like AWS. If Apple has any concrete concerns, it's that developers would prefer to pay Amazon for the time they need on a Mac rather than purchase an entire Mac for themselves. It's an anti-developer move. This idea that Apple is worried about an EC2 instance replacing a personal Mac is way, way, out there. What is much more likely is that a developer buys a lower cost, not Apple laptop and uses that to connect to a Mac on EC2 for the few tasks that require a Mac. Again, it's an move _against_ developers, it's not designed to make the lives of developers any easier.