7 ms·

Apple's in a tight spot here - either they leave things as they are and piss off developers (and, by fiat, piss off users), or they have to start forcing users

by ender7 15y ago

Apple's in a tight spot here - either they leave things as they are and piss off developers (and, by fiat, piss off users), or they have to start forcing users to more proactively manage their remaining space. One can probably easily imagine an interface for showing the user how much data a particular app is using and allow them to nuke the temporary stuff. It might even look beautiful. It might even be fun to use. But it's going to introduce a lot of hand-wringing and micro-managing and lots of mental overhead that Apple really, really wants to avoid.

thehigherlife 15y ago
iOS 5 now lets you see per app space usage. (it's under Settings > General > Usage) I don't see anyway to delete that temp data, however, only the app itself (for non-apple apps).
- mrcharles 15y ago
  That's only the data that will be backed up to iCloud though, so it probably doesn't include cache/tmp.
  - 77ko 15y ago
    It does
  - freedompeace 15y ago
    It does - my Downloads app is reported as using 10 GB.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
sudoman 15y ago
This general problem is a symptom of a major issue regarding the use of software that does not respect the freedom of its users. Every non-apple developer and user is required to bend to the will of the programmers who develop the proprietary iOS. Any negative choices or limitations imposed by Apple Inc. are virtually uncircumventable. On the other hand, if users and developers in a community are free to view, modify and share the source code of the operating system and programs they are using, then that creates a dynamic where software cannot remain defective by design, something which cannot be said about Apple's hardware or software. If we were talking about free (as in speech) software, users would have control of their data, and their choice of how to manage it; not some distant programmers working for a corporation's bottom line.
- marchdown 15y ago
  For the vast majority of developers of iOS apps the specifics of how their data is stored and backed up do not matter. If they were not forced by Apple to adopt this set of constraints they would make decisions on a whim, it would lead to less freedom for user, because where there is uniformity, there is a power to abstract, there is a freedom to not micromanage. Circumventing design decicions is hard. Learning the specifics of particular design is hard practically in the same way. Hacking in an intentionally prohibitive environment is not much different from hacking in an overtly permissive environment — there's a pile of poorly undocumented design decisions which you have to grock before you get anywhere in this system. So the actual difference it political. I won't argue that preventing little Joe to write the coolest Doom clone ever by requiring all software to be cryptographically signed before running it on a particular game console is somehow more evil than forcing him to spend years learning the ropes and working late hours in QA. But I believe that imposing certain constrains on people willing to build on your platform is a good thing, because the resulting uniformity gives the platform more leverage. Whethere the constraints are technical or political /in origin/ is irrelevant.
  - scrod 15y ago
    > there is a power to abstract, there is a freedom to not micromanage. Oh, so is that like having freedom from porn now?
    - randallsquared 15y ago
      is that like having freedom from porn now? Well, it is a lot like freedom from worry about what your 10-year-old is doing with the iPhone you bought them. As long as someone offers devices that give you the abilities you want, why begrudge people who want something different?
  - vacri 15y ago
    So let's all wear the same clothes, eat the same foods, engage in the same pastimes, work the same hours, walk at the same speeds, drive the same car. Then the only abstraction will be in our dreams - the only place we will be free! Our dreams will then be the blessed relief that we will always look forward to as our own little free moment. Point is, such didactic statements are stupid, as is the whole 'less choice is actually more freedom' mantra. Put it this way. Say the government mandated one phone. One car. One style of house. One fashion outfit. You don't need any more than that. You're freed from having to micromanage your stuff. Sure, you can wear your outfit any way you want, and get your one car in whatever colour, but hey, uniformity breeds freedom from the enduser, right? Because 'micromanagement' is bad, right?

by ender7 15y ago

thehigherlife 15y ago

iOS 5 now lets you see per app space usage. (it's under Settings > General > Usage) I don't see anyway to delete that temp data, however, only the app itself (for non-apple apps).

mrcharles 15y ago
That's only the data that will be backed up to iCloud though, so it probably doesn't include cache/tmp.
- 77ko 15y ago
  It does
- freedompeace 15y ago
  It does - my Downloads app is reported as using 10 GB.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

sudoman 15y ago

This general problem is a symptom of a major issue regarding the use of software that does not respect the freedom of its users. Every non-apple developer and user is required to bend to the will of the programmers who develop the proprietary iOS. Any negative choices or limitations imposed by Apple Inc. are virtually uncircumventable. On the other hand, if users and developers in a community are free to view, modify and share the source code of the operating system and programs they are using, then that creates a dynamic where software cannot remain defective by design, something which cannot be said about Apple's hardware or software. If we were talking about free (as in speech) software, users would have control of their data, and their choice of how to manage it; not some distant programmers working for a corporation's bottom line.

marchdown 15y ago
For the vast majority of developers of iOS apps the specifics of how their data is stored and backed up do not matter. If they were not forced by Apple to adopt this set of constraints they would make decisions on a whim, it would lead to less freedom for user, because where there is uniformity, there is a power to abstract, there is a freedom to not micromanage. Circumventing design decicions is hard. Learning the specifics of particular design is hard practically in the same way. Hacking in an intentionally prohibitive environment is not much different from hacking in an overtly permissive environment — there's a pile of poorly undocumented design decisions which you have to grock before you get anywhere in this system. So the actual difference it political. I won't argue that preventing little Joe to write the coolest Doom clone ever by requiring all software to be cryptographically signed before running it on a particular game console is somehow more evil than forcing him to spend years learning the ropes and working late hours in QA. But I believe that imposing certain constrains on people willing to build on your platform is a good thing, because the resulting uniformity gives the platform more leverage. Whethere the constraints are technical or political /in origin/ is irrelevant.
- scrod 15y ago
  > there is a power to abstract, there is a freedom to not micromanage. Oh, so is that like having freedom from porn now?
  - randallsquared 15y ago
    is that like having freedom from porn now? Well, it is a lot like freedom from worry about what your 10-year-old is doing with the iPhone you bought them. As long as someone offers devices that give you the abilities you want, why begrudge people who want something different?
- vacri 15y ago
  So let's all wear the same clothes, eat the same foods, engage in the same pastimes, work the same hours, walk at the same speeds, drive the same car. Then the only abstraction will be in our dreams - the only place we will be free! Our dreams will then be the blessed relief that we will always look forward to as our own little free moment. Point is, such didactic statements are stupid, as is the whole 'less choice is actually more freedom' mantra. Put it this way. Say the government mandated one phone. One car. One style of house. One fashion outfit. You don't need any more than that. You're freed from having to micromanage your stuff. Sure, you can wear your outfit any way you want, and get your one car in whatever colour, but hey, uniformity breeds freedom from the enduser, right? Because 'micromanagement' is bad, right?