5 ms·

> without an indefinite expenditure of costly developer effort that just isn't economical in supporting a use case... How much would it cost? $1B US? Okay. A

by bb88 4y ago

> without an indefinite expenditure of costly developer effort that just isn't economical in supporting a use case... How much would it cost? $1B US? Okay. Apple reported a net income of $99.9 Billion dollars from $350B of revenue. That seems like a good use of $1B to keep electronics waste down and improve resale value. That, number btw is 1000 developers at a cost of $1M apiece per year. Honestly I don't think it would cost a $1B. I think the true cost is in loss of revenue from forced upgrades -- which might be $100B of Apple's revenue. My circa 2016 Dell XPS 15 still runs pretty good with Windows 10. Not sure why MS forces me to upgrade my hardware to go to Windows 11.

golergka 4y ago
> How much would it cost? $1B US? Okay. For a game developer that barely raised $1m for the first title?
- throwanem 4y ago
  The assumption appears to be that all development of iOS apps is ultimately funded by Apple, or that Apple could somehow make all apps on its platform magically work equally well on all devices. But I admit I'm just guessing here: "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such [an analysis]."
throwanem 4y ago
Apple's financials aren't relevant here. Every app developer faces this tradeoff.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  If they actually care about the experience they should be relevant. Think of an analogue to how nvidia sends development help to companies that are making games. Your "confusion of ideas" comment elsewhere is pointed the wrong way.
  - throwanem 4y ago
    No, it isn't. You are demanding of App Store reviewers, and thus implicitly of app developers who have to satisfy review to publish, an equal level of concern with, and effort to support, the experience of the half a percent or so of users still on 4.7"-class devices, as with that of the 99.5% or so on everything else. This would require significant extra work in just about every app, 2x as much in some, probably averaging around 1.5x as much in most. That is not a reasonable expectation. I've been in that half a percent myself, and I realize those with an attachment to remaining in that cohort will not find such an argument convincing. But I'm also, in retrospect, not really sorry that the last of the five 1st gen SEs I'd been carefully maintaining - four of which I'd bought used, three of which I'd replaced screens and batteries on - landed on its corner when I dropped it a year and a half ago, wrecking the sleep/wake button integral to the mainboard and well beyond any soldering skill I can acquire, and thus effectively requiring a complete replacement that I decided was finally no longer worth it. The 12 mini turned out not to be meaningfully larger or less wieldy than the 1st gen SE had been, and it's a lot more pleasant to use. There's value in not being actively, constantly frustrated by the experience of using my phone - especially since I do that every day for work now, too. We aren't going to agree on this, I think, and that's fine with me. But I am going to say that I no longer have the sympathy for your perspective that I would have a couple of years ago. It's a perspective I shared for a long time, and one I put more effort into than most. I'm glad I did, not least because learning to fix phones has been useful. But I'm also glad for what I've learned since then, even though it's why I don't share that perspective any more.
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      > This would require significant extra work in just about every app, 2x as much in some, probably averaging around 1.5x as much in most. That is not a reasonable expectation. This is not a reasonable estimate of the work needed. Also I was thinking more of "don't waste tons of memory, making it unable to run on devices with less", which could just be a mandatory rule for everyone's benefit.
      - throwanem 4y ago
freeone3000 4y ago
The reason for the breaking change was supposedly for TPM 2.0, to have a fully-attested chain from UEFI load to user login. This was lessened to a lower TPM version later, thus rendering the entire requirement moot.
courgette 4y ago
Exactly, the prices are just numbers. We could decide that electronic waste is too expensive to be carried this way.
- downrightmike 4y ago
  Apple is requiring that recyclers shred perfectly fine M! laptops because they lock out the logic chips. E-Waste is cheap if it means you keep supply out of the secondary markets.
  - Godel_unicode 4y ago
    The stolen ones, sure. The legitimate ones are trivially easy to resell.
  - courgette 4y ago
    I mean the real price. In term of carbon emission and damage to our surroundings. Not some dollars or yen value.
downrightmike 4y ago
recyclers are literally having to shred M1 laptops because apple locks out the logic chips. They _deliberately_ will not do that until the government makes them. My next iphone will be usb c, I can wait until then, so they better hurry if they want sales.
- msh 4y ago
  Only because the owners did not unlock them when they gave them up for recycling.

by bb88 4y ago

golergka 4y ago

> How much would it cost? $1B US? Okay. For a game developer that barely raised $1m for the first title?

throwanem 4y ago
The assumption appears to be that all development of iOS apps is ultimately funded by Apple, or that Apple could somehow make all apps on its platform magically work equally well on all devices. But I admit I'm just guessing here: "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such [an analysis]."

throwanem 4y ago

Apple's financials aren't relevant here. Every app developer faces this tradeoff.

Dylan16807 4y ago
If they actually care about the experience they should be relevant. Think of an analogue to how nvidia sends development help to companies that are making games. Your "confusion of ideas" comment elsewhere is pointed the wrong way.
- throwanem 4y ago
  No, it isn't. You are demanding of App Store reviewers, and thus implicitly of app developers who have to satisfy review to publish, an equal level of concern with, and effort to support, the experience of the half a percent or so of users still on 4.7"-class devices, as with that of the 99.5% or so on everything else. This would require significant extra work in just about every app, 2x as much in some, probably averaging around 1.5x as much in most. That is not a reasonable expectation. I've been in that half a percent myself, and I realize those with an attachment to remaining in that cohort will not find such an argument convincing. But I'm also, in retrospect, not really sorry that the last of the five 1st gen SEs I'd been carefully maintaining - four of which I'd bought used, three of which I'd replaced screens and batteries on - landed on its corner when I dropped it a year and a half ago, wrecking the sleep/wake button integral to the mainboard and well beyond any soldering skill I can acquire, and thus effectively requiring a complete replacement that I decided was finally no longer worth it. The 12 mini turned out not to be meaningfully larger or less wieldy than the 1st gen SE had been, and it's a lot more pleasant to use. There's value in not being actively, constantly frustrated by the experience of using my phone - especially since I do that every day for work now, too. We aren't going to agree on this, I think, and that's fine with me. But I am going to say that I no longer have the sympathy for your perspective that I would have a couple of years ago. It's a perspective I shared for a long time, and one I put more effort into than most. I'm glad I did, not least because learning to fix phones has been useful. But I'm also glad for what I've learned since then, even though it's why I don't share that perspective any more.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    > This would require significant extra work in just about every app, 2x as much in some, probably averaging around 1.5x as much in most. That is not a reasonable expectation. This is not a reasonable estimate of the work needed. Also I was thinking more of "don't waste tons of memory, making it unable to run on devices with less", which could just be a mandatory rule for everyone's benefit.
    - throwanem 4y ago

freeone3000 4y ago

The reason for the breaking change was supposedly for TPM 2.0, to have a fully-attested chain from UEFI load to user login. This was lessened to a lower TPM version later, thus rendering the entire requirement moot.

courgette 4y ago

Exactly, the prices are just numbers. We could decide that electronic waste is too expensive to be carried this way.

downrightmike 4y ago
Apple is requiring that recyclers shred perfectly fine M! laptops because they lock out the logic chips. E-Waste is cheap if it means you keep supply out of the secondary markets.
- Godel_unicode 4y ago
  The stolen ones, sure. The legitimate ones are trivially easy to resell.
- courgette 4y ago
  I mean the real price. In term of carbon emission and damage to our surroundings. Not some dollars or yen value.

downrightmike 4y ago

recyclers are literally having to shred M1 laptops because apple locks out the logic chips. They _deliberately_ will not do that until the government makes them. My next iphone will be usb c, I can wait until then, so they better hurry if they want sales.

msh 4y ago
Only because the owners did not unlock them when they gave them up for recycling.