5 ms·

Just because you can't run whatever software you like on it, does not make it non-general purpose CPU.

by Aloha 3y ago

nixpulvis 3y ago
True. But it does make it functionally a non-general purpose CPU. I suppose you can load your own programs if you have a dev account or jailbreak right?
- whiddershins 3y ago
  Yes. And a dev account is like $100/year. It’s bad that they can gatekeep like this, I agree. I should just be able to put whatever on the hardware I buy. But the expense in practical terms, immediate pragmatic terms, is negligible compared to what it unlocks.
  - nixpulvis 3y ago
    I disagree. $100/yr to put what might be a very simple little toy application is not worth it. Sure, that toy might inspire more, and it could even lead to a promising career, but it’s a stretch to argue it was worth it when it could just as easily never be utilized. The promise of general purpose computing and open source as well is that it empowers all kinds of users. Oh how badly I want to tweak little things about my iPhone, but can’t because the software is locked down.
    - whiddershins 3y ago
      Compared to the cost and power of any of the hardware and software we are talking about it is insignificant. If you want to do toy programming on a budget there are a million arduino-like things out there. I recently saw calculations on the price of say, just iOS alone. It being equivalent to multiple Manhattan projects. Regardless of how accurate that estimate is, the general point remains. Do I think Apple should make developing for non-distribution on the iPhone free? Yes. Do I think there is an argument that is almost a moral obligation? Possibly. But what you get for like 30 cents a day with a developer account is mind boggling. I mean, that was the initial point wasn’t it? These are insanely capable and meticulously engineered pieces of technology. Edit: I can even argue it is an ethical obligation that Apple should allow all users to install non App Store apps if they explicitly so choose. And I have argued that in the past. But I separate this from the evaluation of the value proposition offered by an Apple Developer account.
      - nixpulvis 3y ago
        What you are missing is that basically everyone needs a phone, not everyone needs an arduino. There is a fundamental difference between even 30¢ and free. Make developing free and suddenly you’ll have more developers. Now it’s a whole other discussion of if that’s a good thing or not. But I personally like to believe that everyone should be able to develop as a hobbyist. The commercialization of software is often at odd with it’s users. Not so much when people are doing things for themselves and for fun. Just my 2¢
  - kaba0 3y ago
    You don’t need a dev account, but unfortunately do need a mac. The limitation is that you will have to revalidate weekly (which can be automated).
- bpye 3y ago
  Unless it’s changed again you don’t need a dev account to deploy apps to iOS - but it is somewhat limited. You can have at most 3, the signing lasts for just a week and IIRC the entitlements you can use are limited as well?
gary_0 3y ago
My definition of "general purpose" is that that you can "run whatever software you like on it". If you can't run whatever on it, that restricts the CPU to a "specific purpose", no?
- throwaway2990 3y ago
  if I write a bit of software and target ARM64 and it cannot run on x86. Does that mean that x86 has a specific purpose now and is no longer a general purpose CPU?
  - gary_0 3y ago
    That's not the same thing. An instruction set is an inherent aspect of a CPU; you can't have a CPU without one. Also, you can emulate or translate instruction sets between general-purpose CPUs, or in most cases just recompile the higher-level source code. The underlying logic will be executed regardless.
    - throwaway2990 3y ago
      Oh so you’re saying the iPhone cpu is a general purpose cpu then. Just need to translate the instructions. Ok.
    - inkyoto 3y ago
      > […] An instruction set is an inherent aspect of a CPU; you can't have a CPU without one. Oh, yes, you can. The following examples of – Transport triggered architecture – Dataflow architecture – Optical and quantum computing represent viable, general purpose (not general availability), albeit experimental, CPU's without instruction sets. That is, none of them have anything similar to «movq $1, %r0» or «add.w %r2, %r0, %r1». FPGA's are another and a more conventional example of a general purpose (even if specialised) CPU without an instruction set.
    - kaba0 3y ago
      Tada, there is ish, so you can run whatever on an iphone emulated by an x86 layer! That is, you have a general purpose CPU. Sure, apple suck at sideloading, hopefully the EU ruling will make it a possibility, but then say that instead.

Just because you can't run whatever software you like on it, does not make it non-general purpose CPU.

by Aloha 3y ago

Just because you can't run whatever software you like on it, does not make it non-general purpose CPU.

True. But it does make it functionally a non-general purpose CPU. I suppose you can load your own programs if you have a dev account or jailbreak right?

whiddershins 3y ago
Yes. And a dev account is like $100/year. It’s bad that they can gatekeep like this, I agree. I should just be able to put whatever on the hardware I buy. But the expense in practical terms, immediate pragmatic terms, is negligible compared to what it unlocks.
- nixpulvis 3y ago
  I disagree. $100/yr to put what might be a very simple little toy application is not worth it. Sure, that toy might inspire more, and it could even lead to a promising career, but it’s a stretch to argue it was worth it when it could just as easily never be utilized. The promise of general purpose computing and open source as well is that it empowers all kinds of users. Oh how badly I want to tweak little things about my iPhone, but can’t because the software is locked down.
  - whiddershins 3y ago
    Compared to the cost and power of any of the hardware and software we are talking about it is insignificant. If you want to do toy programming on a budget there are a million arduino-like things out there. I recently saw calculations on the price of say, just iOS alone. It being equivalent to multiple Manhattan projects. Regardless of how accurate that estimate is, the general point remains. Do I think Apple should make developing for non-distribution on the iPhone free? Yes. Do I think there is an argument that is almost a moral obligation? Possibly. But what you get for like 30 cents a day with a developer account is mind boggling. I mean, that was the initial point wasn’t it? These are insanely capable and meticulously engineered pieces of technology. Edit: I can even argue it is an ethical obligation that Apple should allow all users to install non App Store apps if they explicitly so choose. And I have argued that in the past. But I separate this from the evaluation of the value proposition offered by an Apple Developer account.
    - nixpulvis 3y ago
      What you are missing is that basically everyone needs a phone, not everyone needs an arduino. There is a fundamental difference between even 30¢ and free. Make developing free and suddenly you’ll have more developers. Now it’s a whole other discussion of if that’s a good thing or not. But I personally like to believe that everyone should be able to develop as a hobbyist. The commercialization of software is often at odd with it’s users. Not so much when people are doing things for themselves and for fun. Just my 2¢
- kaba0 3y ago
  You don’t need a dev account, but unfortunately do need a mac. The limitation is that you will have to revalidate weekly (which can be automated).
bpye 3y ago
Unless it’s changed again you don’t need a dev account to deploy apps to iOS - but it is somewhat limited. You can have at most 3, the signing lasts for just a week and IIRC the entitlements you can use are limited as well?

gary_0 3y ago

My definition of "general purpose" is that that you can "run whatever software you like on it". If you can't run whatever on it, that restricts the CPU to a "specific purpose", no?

throwaway2990 3y ago
if I write a bit of software and target ARM64 and it cannot run on x86. Does that mean that x86 has a specific purpose now and is no longer a general purpose CPU?
- gary_0 3y ago
  That's not the same thing. An instruction set is an inherent aspect of a CPU; you can't have a CPU without one. Also, you can emulate or translate instruction sets between general-purpose CPUs, or in most cases just recompile the higher-level source code. The underlying logic will be executed regardless.
  - throwaway2990 3y ago
    Oh so you’re saying the iPhone cpu is a general purpose cpu then. Just need to translate the instructions. Ok.
  - inkyoto 3y ago
    > […] An instruction set is an inherent aspect of a CPU; you can't have a CPU without one. Oh, yes, you can. The following examples of – Transport triggered architecture – Dataflow architecture – Optical and quantum computing represent viable, general purpose (not general availability), albeit experimental, CPU's without instruction sets. That is, none of them have anything similar to «movq $1, %r0» or «add.w %r2, %r0, %r1». FPGA's are another and a more conventional example of a general purpose (even if specialised) CPU without an instruction set.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    Tada, there is ish, so you can run whatever on an iphone emulated by an x86 layer! That is, you have a general purpose CPU. Sure, apple suck at sideloading, hopefully the EU ruling will make it a possibility, but then say that instead.