3 ms·

Of course it does. With a given number of resources, more options needs to be supported means less resource spend on each one.

by yftsui 3y ago

afavour 3y ago
Apple is more than able to increase resources to accommodate.
- aurareturn 3y ago
  Yes, someone would have to pay for that engineering resource to make the support. I don’t want to pay for it because I prefer iCloud backup already. The core issue here is whether governments should control how iOS is designed and which part of iOS. Furthermore, it can be argued that forcing iOS to be more like Android decreases competition. If you want a more open platform, just get an Android phone.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    > The core issue here is whether governments should control how iOS is designed and which part of iOS. That's Apple's core issue, maybe. Now, look at it from the perspective of a sovereign market. Their core issue (a-la United States v. Microsoft Corp.) is how much they are willing to allow while admitting market access. In Microsoft's case, their manipulation of technical capabilities was considered illegal monopoly action. Apple is treading on the exact same ground with Safari and going even further in the case of the App Store - corrective litigation was an inevitability. Apple ultimately doesn't have to abide by the EU's decisions if they don't intend to intend to access their markets. Governments[0] already[1] control[2] so much[3] of iOS[4] though[5] that it's kinda a moot point =) > Furthermore, it can be argued that forcing iOS to be more like Android decreases competition. It can be argued that competition with Android is not what iCloud, Safari and App Store regulation is about. It's certainly not mentioned anywhere in the DMA or Japan's equivalent legislation. [0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-... [1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Prism_slide_5.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Prism_sl... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/02/us/politics/nso-contract-us-spy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/02/us/politics/nso-contract-... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes [4] https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 [5] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/1/22361762/iphone-russia-startup-local-apps-yandex-mail-ru-law https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/1/22361762/iphone-russia-sta...
- al_borland 3y ago
  All of this comes at the expense of focus on the things that really matter.
  - afavour 3y ago
    It really doesn’t. It comes at the expense of a rounding error in Apple’s annual profits.
- shreyansh_k 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - afavour 3y ago
    > No offence, but, I mean, you do not have the authority to decide how another company/person gets to spend their focus I'm sorry but it's difficult to take this perspective seriously. It ought to be very obvious that in the context of a Hacker News comment I am not claiming authority to decide what Apple does. I am merely stating that if Apple decided to support third party backup solutions they have more than enough spare money to increase resources rather than, as the OP suggested would be necessary, divert resources away from something else. The OP's "with a given number of resources" qualifier is incorrect because that number isn't actually constant. The lengths some folks go to on Hacker News to defend Apple absolutely astounds me. They're a multinational corporate, they don't care about any of us here. Stating the simple fact that Apple has the ability to increase their resources is not somehow offensive.
    - shreyansh_k 3y ago
      Statements such as "Stating the simple fact that Apple has the ability to increase their resources is not somehow offensive." is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Plenty of people (and their companies) die trying to "increase their resources". Apple is no different or special from any of the other companies participating in the economy. I'm not an Apple fanboy but even I do see the point that statements such as "enough spare money" generally do not get anywhere simply because they patronise their targets and imply that somehow someone being rich makes it morally correct to grift them or break them. It is agreeable that Apple doesn't care about any of us here. It's simply due to the fact that our relationship with any company is purely transactional. No one shouldn't be burdened with the responsibility of something they can't control, thus, no one should hold other in responsibility of something they have don't have authority over.
      - afavour 3y ago
        “Other companies have failed in the past so we shouldn’t assert anything about a public company’s finances” is just silly. I’m not making a legally binding statement in a court filing or something. We might as well just shut down Hacker News entirely if we aren’t able to talk freely. > imply that somehow someone being rich makes it morally correct to grift them or break them. I can’t help but feel like you’re injecting an unrelated personal view into the discussion here. Apple is not a person, personifying a company muddies the waters, not clear them.
_aavaa_ 3y ago
It’s a bucket for bits. The iPhone does the diffing for the backup and encryption and then sends the data to the server. How many resources are needed to implement an if-statement for picking which address to upload to?

Of course it does. With a given number of resources, more options needs to be supported means less resource spend on each one.

by yftsui 3y ago

Of course it does. With a given number of resources, more options needs to be supported means less resource spend on each one.

afavour 3y ago

Apple is more than able to increase resources to accommodate.

aurareturn 3y ago
Yes, someone would have to pay for that engineering resource to make the support. I don’t want to pay for it because I prefer iCloud backup already. The core issue here is whether governments should control how iOS is designed and which part of iOS. Furthermore, it can be argued that forcing iOS to be more like Android decreases competition. If you want a more open platform, just get an Android phone.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > The core issue here is whether governments should control how iOS is designed and which part of iOS. That's Apple's core issue, maybe. Now, look at it from the perspective of a sovereign market. Their core issue (a-la United States v. Microsoft Corp.) is how much they are willing to allow while admitting market access. In Microsoft's case, their manipulation of technical capabilities was considered illegal monopoly action. Apple is treading on the exact same ground with Safari and going even further in the case of the App Store - corrective litigation was an inevitability. Apple ultimately doesn't have to abide by the EU's decisions if they don't intend to intend to access their markets. Governments[0] already[1] control[2] so much[3] of iOS[4] though[5] that it's kinda a moot point =) > Furthermore, it can be argued that forcing iOS to be more like Android decreases competition. It can be argued that competition with Android is not what iCloud, Safari and App Store regulation is about. It's certainly not mentioned anywhere in the DMA or Japan's equivalent legislation. [0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-... [1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Prism_slide_5.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Prism_sl... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/02/us/politics/nso-contract-us-spy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/02/us/politics/nso-contract-... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes [4] https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 [5] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/1/22361762/iphone-russia-startup-local-apps-yandex-mail-ru-law https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/1/22361762/iphone-russia-sta...
al_borland 3y ago
All of this comes at the expense of focus on the things that really matter.
- afavour 3y ago
  It really doesn’t. It comes at the expense of a rounding error in Apple’s annual profits.
shreyansh_k 3y ago
[flagged]
- afavour 3y ago
  > No offence, but, I mean, you do not have the authority to decide how another company/person gets to spend their focus I'm sorry but it's difficult to take this perspective seriously. It ought to be very obvious that in the context of a Hacker News comment I am not claiming authority to decide what Apple does. I am merely stating that if Apple decided to support third party backup solutions they have more than enough spare money to increase resources rather than, as the OP suggested would be necessary, divert resources away from something else. The OP's "with a given number of resources" qualifier is incorrect because that number isn't actually constant. The lengths some folks go to on Hacker News to defend Apple absolutely astounds me. They're a multinational corporate, they don't care about any of us here. Stating the simple fact that Apple has the ability to increase their resources is not somehow offensive.
  - shreyansh_k 3y ago
    Statements such as "Stating the simple fact that Apple has the ability to increase their resources is not somehow offensive." is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Plenty of people (and their companies) die trying to "increase their resources". Apple is no different or special from any of the other companies participating in the economy. I'm not an Apple fanboy but even I do see the point that statements such as "enough spare money" generally do not get anywhere simply because they patronise their targets and imply that somehow someone being rich makes it morally correct to grift them or break them. It is agreeable that Apple doesn't care about any of us here. It's simply due to the fact that our relationship with any company is purely transactional. No one shouldn't be burdened with the responsibility of something they can't control, thus, no one should hold other in responsibility of something they have don't have authority over.
    - afavour 3y ago
      “Other companies have failed in the past so we shouldn’t assert anything about a public company’s finances” is just silly. I’m not making a legally binding statement in a court filing or something. We might as well just shut down Hacker News entirely if we aren’t able to talk freely. > imply that somehow someone being rich makes it morally correct to grift them or break them. I can’t help but feel like you’re injecting an unrelated personal view into the discussion here. Apple is not a person, personifying a company muddies the waters, not clear them.

_aavaa_ 3y ago

It’s a bucket for bits. The iPhone does the diffing for the backup and encryption and then sends the data to the server. How many resources are needed to implement an if-statement for picking which address to upload to?