5 ms·

> Would I be correct saying that you're happy because in one stroke Apple has moved you from grey area to explicitly permitted, and part of your competition fro

> Would I be correct saying that you're happy because in one stroke Apple has moved you from grey area to explicitly permitted, and part of your competition from grey area to explicitly forbidden? I don't know how any competition would be negatively impacted by Apple implementing these terms, unless the competition was already selling services that were on a short-term basis (below 24 hours). And to circle back around, this EULA enables MacStadium's hardware hosting competition to enter the market... thus comes Amazon into the playing field. I just don't see how having to compete with Amazon is, all of a sudden, a better deal for MacStadium. If anything, it just highlights the volatile nature of running a business in the Apple ecosystem. > For the record in no way I think that Apple took this decision to favor you or anyone else except themselves. It just seems that you won a regulatory lottery. "Congratulations, you're a winner... your prize is to compete with Amazon!" Some would certainly wear it with a badge of honor!

Alex3917 6y ago
Why wouldn't Apple just let people rent out computers for any amount of time, as long as they don't contain music or movies? I can understand why Apple would wan't someone to pay $3.99 to rent a movie for 48 hours, and then sub-rent that movie a couple dozen times. But why do they care about someone running CI?
- coldtea 6y ago
  Because tens of thousands of devs working on other platforms would be able to rent a Mac for half an hour, build their cross-platform framework code as an XCode project, and then submit to the App Store, without ever touching a Mac, testing on a Mac, and so on. At least this puts a barrier to entry.
  - kgantchev 6y ago
    This one!
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
lultimouomo 6y ago
> I don't know how any competition would be negatively impacted by Apple implementing these terms, unless the competition was already selling services that were on a short-term basis (below 24 hours). Almosto all of MacStadium post is about those competitors, did we read something different? And Amazon would be much more of a competition were they allowed to rent by the minute, it's their selling point!
sokoloff 6y ago
> I don't know how any competition would be negatively impacted by Apple implementing these terms, unless the competition was already selling services that were on a short-term basis (below 24 hours). Macstadium competes against other short-term rental companies but also against real Macs, Hackintoshes on physical machines, Hackintoshes on virtual machines (inc EC2), and non-consumption. Hacks on VMs are a pretty direct competitor I’d think.
- kgantchev 6y ago
  > Macstadium competes against other short-term rental companies but also against real Macs, Hackintoshes on physical machines, Hackintoshes on virtual machines (inc EC2), and non-consumption. MacStadium isn't doing short-term rentals not because it can't but because the EULA doesn't allow it. Anybody doing short-term rentals is doing it on Mac hardware so they can just as easily sell long-term rentals. Aside from MacStadium being a major player in this field, I see absolutely nothing that favors them compared to their competition. In fact, it seems to have created Amazon as a competitor. And the Hackintosh thing is the reason a Mac hosting companies exist in the first place. If Hackintoshes were allowed, there would be no companies offering Mac hosted hardware. I don't see how that's related to this particular situation tho. Apple created the need for Mac hosted hardware so blaming Mac hardware hosting companies for this is a bit backward. > Hacks on VMs are a pretty direct competitor I’d think. The VMs have to run on Mac hardware as well.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    Condition: Person X has a need to run macOS for 3 hours for whatever reason. They have a lot of options, including the ones I listed. Various options have different drawbacks, including EULA violations, but all represent viable alternatives for some (therefore competition) to Macstadium.
    - kgantchev 6y ago
      It represents an opportunity to MacStadium as well, since they too would be able to sell the hardware by the hour. Currently, the only reason they can't is due to the EULA. There is no other reason why a mac hardware hosting company couldn't sell hourly access to a Mac machine.

Alex3917 6y ago

Why wouldn't Apple just let people rent out computers for any amount of time, as long as they don't contain music or movies? I can understand why Apple would wan't someone to pay $3.99 to rent a movie for 48 hours, and then sub-rent that movie a couple dozen times. But why do they care about someone running CI?

coldtea 6y ago
Because tens of thousands of devs working on other platforms would be able to rent a Mac for half an hour, build their cross-platform framework code as an XCode project, and then submit to the App Store, without ever touching a Mac, testing on a Mac, and so on. At least this puts a barrier to entry.
- kgantchev 6y ago
  This one!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

lultimouomo 6y ago

> I don't know how any competition would be negatively impacted by Apple implementing these terms, unless the competition was already selling services that were on a short-term basis (below 24 hours). Almosto all of MacStadium post is about those competitors, did we read something different? And Amazon would be much more of a competition were they allowed to rent by the minute, it's their selling point!

sokoloff 6y ago

> I don't know how any competition would be negatively impacted by Apple implementing these terms, unless the competition was already selling services that were on a short-term basis (below 24 hours). Macstadium competes against other short-term rental companies but also against real Macs, Hackintoshes on physical machines, Hackintoshes on virtual machines (inc EC2), and non-consumption. Hacks on VMs are a pretty direct competitor I’d think.

kgantchev 6y ago
> Macstadium competes against other short-term rental companies but also against real Macs, Hackintoshes on physical machines, Hackintoshes on virtual machines (inc EC2), and non-consumption. MacStadium isn't doing short-term rentals not because it can't but because the EULA doesn't allow it. Anybody doing short-term rentals is doing it on Mac hardware so they can just as easily sell long-term rentals. Aside from MacStadium being a major player in this field, I see absolutely nothing that favors them compared to their competition. In fact, it seems to have created Amazon as a competitor. And the Hackintosh thing is the reason a Mac hosting companies exist in the first place. If Hackintoshes were allowed, there would be no companies offering Mac hosted hardware. I don't see how that's related to this particular situation tho. Apple created the need for Mac hosted hardware so blaming Mac hardware hosting companies for this is a bit backward. > Hacks on VMs are a pretty direct competitor I’d think. The VMs have to run on Mac hardware as well.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  Condition: Person X has a need to run macOS for 3 hours for whatever reason. They have a lot of options, including the ones I listed. Various options have different drawbacks, including EULA violations, but all represent viable alternatives for some (therefore competition) to Macstadium.
  - kgantchev 6y ago
    It represents an opportunity to MacStadium as well, since they too would be able to sell the hardware by the hour. Currently, the only reason they can't is due to the EULA. There is no other reason why a mac hardware hosting company couldn't sell hourly access to a Mac machine.