Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

cringely.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#131

Post by CJefferson »

JayWilmont wrote: post #92
CJefferson wrote: post #82

Interestingly, for me the iCloud is the last straw to make me leave Mac. I recently bought an Android phone, and I've found that Apple really hates co-operating with anything which isn't another Apple product. I could get a new iPhone, but I don't want to tie myself so I forever after have to buy mini macs, macbooks, iphones and ipads if I want to be able to get at my existing data. Google is much better in this resp…

In the keynote they mentioned photos being kept updated on a Windows machine as well. iCloud subtracts zero functionality from any device (though it does change MobileMe, that doesn't seem to be your issue). Once a document is on your machine, you can turn off iCloud and that document will persist on your computer/iPhone/whatever unmolested just like it did pre-iCloud. What about iCloud (which you can turn off if you…

Experience tells me that Apple will integrate iCloud deeply into all their Mac OS X applications, and many 3rd party apps will use iCloud by default, and not offer alternative options (such as Dropbox).

Will I be able to write apps for Android which can access data stored in the iCloud? I will be very, very surprised if we can. Similar to how it is very difficult, verging on impossible, to sync my Android phone with iTunes.

Apple clearly do not want their systems to integrate nicely with others, except where they feel they really have to. The iTunes / Blackberry problems from a few years ago proved to me that Apple will do anything it takes to stop interoperability, except where they want it.

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#132

Post by CJefferson »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #94
num1 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is actually moving in the direction of less lock-in as far as the consumer goes. Do you expect that any non-Apple device will be able to use iCloud? Vendor Lock-in is what's important here, and it's definitely been made stronger by this move. Once all your data is in the cloud, do you want to go through all the effort of moving it to a different cloud (if you even can!) or do you want to cough up a few extra…

Do you expect that any non-Apple device will be able to use iCloud? Given that Apple is supporting Windows for Photo Stream and iTunes Match at least, I would say the answer is closer to yes than you are intimating here.

Do you think any Android phone, or Windows mobile, will be able to use iCloud?

Apple support Windows because there would be an uproar if Windows users bought iPods and iPhones and couldn't use them. They do the bare minimum they have to however.

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#133

Post by CJefferson »

flatulent1 wrote: post #77
microtonal wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. To make your point more explicit: My girlfriend has my old iPhone 3G. Given that iCloud will not be supported on the 3G, she will have to buy a new phone once the MobileMe subscription runs out, to continue to use the handy synchronization features of MobileMe. Now, it's just calendars and contacts, but as documents, "App state", etc. moves into iCloud, people will feel necessary to update to the latest devic…

MobileMe accounts are being extended to a year from now for free, before the service is shut off. If the phone no longer meets her needs at that time, she can sell it to help fund a new one (or perhaps you will have yet another leftover from another upgrade of yours). Even an old iPhone can still be used as an iPod, to play games on, and for some WiFi net activities. Old Apple phones have better resale value than any…

We couldn't possibly help those users, because the MobileMe is built deeply into the system apps. On Android (and I don't want to sound like a fanboy too much here, although I'm sure I do), we could drop in a replacement calendar and email app to replace the system ones. On iPhone, that's a no go.

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#134

Post by mark_l_watson »

"""And what happens once all our data is in that iCloud, is there any easy way to get it back out? Nope. It’s in there forever and we are captive customers — trapped more completely than Microsoft ever imagined."""

I don't agree with this: Google certainly makes it really easy to get data out of Google Docs, GMail, etc. Isn't it reasonable to also expect Apple to provide local backup facilities?

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#135

Post by mark_l_watson »

Torn wrote: post #124
loso wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Windows 7 and I am happy with it. There are a lot of people in tech who are happy with it. I have switched platforms several times over the years but I always end up back at Windows. People who use Windows are only using it because they are "comfortable" is a very big assumption.

I triple-boot my macbook pro at the moment, and am happier with Win 7 over OSX for my personal needs. More stuff just works with it. For development I'll take Ubuntu over messing around with macports, any day. I only really use OSX for iTunes, as I don't want all the bloat that comes with it on my Windows installation.

I understand. I used to dual-book my MacBooks because I like the keyboard and trackpad better. I stopped dual booting when Homebrew got good enough for installing lots of open source software on OS X. Also, I have enough Linux servers at hand, that I just use SSH, Emacs, etc. and can really do what I need on Linux from the command line.

Except for rarely booting my Windows 7 laptop, life is simpler using my Mac just with OS X and relying on Linux servers.

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#136

Post by RexRollman »

loso wrote: post #48
coliveira wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between happy and comfortable. Most people using Windows are just comfortable enough not to make the effort to move to another platform. A lot of tech people are just like that (the ones that are not passionate about new Apple machines). On the other hand, these are the people that have less weight on the decisions of new users...

I use Windows 7 and I am happy with it. There are a lot of people in tech who are happy with it. I have switched platforms several times over the years but I always end up back at Windows. People who use Windows are only using it because they are "comfortable" is a very big assumption.

I currently own a PC running Windows 7 and I really enjoy using it. For the most part, Mac OS X and Windows computers can both perform the same tasks, so it really comes down to user preference.

Having used both Windows and Mac OS X, it is funny the little things you miss from one or the other. For example, on Mac OS X, I really missed Foobar2000 (I simply detest iTunes) and Exact Audio Copy. On Windows, I lament that there doesn't seem to be any equivalent to Filemaker's Bento.

In the end, I feel that we need to stop acting like for Windows or Mac OS X to succeed, someone has to fail. There are enough users in this world for both of them (as well as Linux and BSD).

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#137

Post by chrisjsmith »

RexRollman wrote: post #136
loso wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Windows 7 and I am happy with it. There are a lot of people in tech who are happy with it. I have switched platforms several times over the years but I always end up back at Windows. People who use Windows are only using it because they are "comfortable" is a very big assumption.

I currently own a PC running Windows 7 and I really enjoy using it. For the most part, Mac OS X and Windows computers can both perform the same tasks, so it really comes down to user preference. Having used both Windows and Mac OS X, it is funny the little things you miss from one or the other. For example, on Mac OS X, I really missed Foobar2000 (I simply detest iTunes) and Exact Audio Copy. On Windows, I lament tha…

Your last paragraph outlines everything perfectly. It's nice to see a comment along the lines of "the world is big enough for all of us".

Regarding Bento, Visual Studio Lightswitch might just cut it when it goes RTM: http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us/lightswitch

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#138

Post by tobylane »

CJefferson wrote: post #82

Interestingly, for me the iCloud is the last straw to make me leave Mac. I recently bought an Android phone, and I've found that Apple really hates co-operating with anything which isn't another Apple product. I could get a new iPhone, but I don't want to tie myself so I forever after have to buy mini macs, macbooks, iphones and ipads if I want to be able to get at my existing data. Google is much better in this resp…

Apple want you to buy their hardware, Google want you to see their ads. No wonder Google lets you see your data on any device you want.

Re: iCloud’s Real Purpose is to Kill Windows

#139

Post by __david__ »

pyre wrote: post #115
__david__ wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in particular, hardlinks to directories. That is why it is so fast (and also why it only works on HFS).

Why are hard-links to directories that much faster? It seems like creating a bunch of actual directories with hard-linked files in them is a trivial difference. They still need to scan the files to figure out what has changed, and that's where the really time sink is, no?

Well, consider the case when nothing has changed. All they do is hard link the top level directory and they are done.

  2011-06-12 -> 2011-06-13
On my Linux machine when I do rsync backups it has to create a new inode for each file in the new directory whether or not it has changed. Even on a moderately sized directory tree this can take an hour or more (you can benchmark yourself with "cp -al". Try copying your whole disk just for fun). Time machine completes a cycle in 10 minutes or so and that includes the new data copying.

For small amounts of files I agree with you that the hard linked directories would make a trivial difference. Keep in mind that by default Time Machine backs up /usr, /Applications and /System along with your user data which is quite a lot of files in the end.

That's all just creating the new backup's directory tree. The new data copying itself is fast because Time Machine uses the FSEvents API (which is like inotify but more suitable for backing up) so that it knows exactly what it has to back up beforehand (no scanning). If your computer crashes or you switch disks or otherwise screw up your FSEvents DB then it does have to scan the whole disk looking for changes and that can take hours.

So technically it is fast because it uses FSEvents and also because it can hard link directories. If either of those things are missing then the process would be significantly slower.

Post reply on HN