401–410 of 511 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weird limitation. Hopefully Apple updates this.
They do this very intentionally. If they wanted to be available on AWS they'd allow OSX to run in a VM which they don't.
And under the new EULA they don't allow renting a VM, only a device in its entirety
An interesting offering from Amazon that is crippled by Apple and MacStadium, who deserve to be raked over the coals for their recent EULA changes. Just read the post on MacStadium's blog: https://blog.macstadium.com/blog/developers-big-sur-and-vind... Under the new agreement, you must: * Rent to only one organization * Rent for 24 hours at the minimum * Use it for some set of "approved" development work …among other…
That post exudes happiness at the guidelines, like an oil company that just got a regulation passed banning solar energy. I understand the happiness at finally getting validation that Apple is alright with this business model, but that's separate from exuding happiness at the terms of that validation.
So could I spin one up for 24 hours, then simply power it off and pay by the second thereafter (every time I turn it back on)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is not true at all. Anti monopoly regulations, for example, exist for the sole purpose of privileging new entrants over incumbents. The actions against Microsoft, or the breaking up of AT&T certainly did not help the incumbents. The intended purpose is to help the new entrants, but I don't see Microsoft or AT&T losing anything or their smaller competitors gaining anything after the regulatory action against th…
I don't see ... AT&T losing anything AT&T lost big. It ended up going bankrupt. The "AT&T" you know today is not the same company. It is Southwestern Bell, which bought the AT&T brand in the bankruptcy fire sale and renamed itself. It did so because AT&T was a more valuable brand than Southwestern Bell. Looks like it worked.
So basically SBC was one of many companies spun off from AT&T, then it bought up several of the other Baby Bell companies spun off, too. Really, it was AT&T buying AT&T.
It worked on paper, but the victor was still from the same tree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those numbers actually make the AWS instances a shoo-in for my current development purposes. The cost of housing and managing a unit of hardware is nonzero. Actuals vary wildly by location, purposes, and sector; but if everyone can get their heads out of the hobbyist-tinkerer mindset for a moment and consider that lifetime TCO is a real and meaningful consideration for businesses, then the component that isn't buying…
I'm no expert, but I'm stunned that it costs more than $10,000 a year to connect a single computer to a corporate network such that AWS Macs become cost competitive. I've never worked in a big enterprise organization but I just can't wrap my head around the inefficiency required to make that math work.
Otherwise I agree. 24 hour minimum removes immediate scaling as an option, and for anyone who already has their own infrastructure the cost is prohibitively high. My hope would be that with time, at the very least the 24 hour minimum would eventually be removed, and ideally the price will come down too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> aside from being a developer for Apple's platforms who occasionally looks around for CI services So, you give him all this shit and you're not even using his service? > There's still a huge hole for a service that lets you rent a Mac for the a couple minutes so you can build your Xcode project. It's not your fault that doesn't exist, it's Apple's. If we're talking for CI of builds, sure. But in that case, one would…
I like you and I think your posts are generally high quality, so I am going to say that an elitist "screw people who cant afford an overpriced mac" is not a good thing imo. Will we get some lower quality apps, sure, do those already exist? yeah. It just sounds like gatekeeping for not much benefit.
"The instances are launched as EC2 Dedicated Hosts with a minimum tenancy of 24 hours" These are just rentable Mac Minis, not VMs. This will have only one use case and that's for build servers. Unless anyone has scalable AppleScript jobs to run?
It's difficult for me to believe that a hyper-scaled cloud deployment like AWS will rent individual mac minis to people. It sounds like a business idea I would have and then come to realize how labor intensive and inefficient the entire thing was.
At the same time, I wonder why there is not a well developed, well documented cross-compiling toolchain available for (whatever you are doing with a mac build server) ? Why not use your local (laptop) mac to do the dirty work and then run a (very complicated) cross compiling chain on a much cheaper, non mac, cloud instance ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is not true at all. Anti monopoly regulations, for example, exist for the sole purpose of privileging new entrants over incumbents. The actions against Microsoft, or the breaking up of AT&T certainly did not help the incumbents. The intended purpose is to help the new entrants, but I don't see Microsoft or AT&T losing anything or their smaller competitors gaining anything after the regulatory action against th…
I don't see ... AT&T losing anything AT&T lost big. It ended up going bankrupt. The "AT&T" you know today is not the same company. It is Southwestern Bell, which bought the AT&T brand in the bankruptcy fire sale and renamed itself. It did so because AT&T was a more valuable brand than Southwestern Bell. Looks like it worked.
> It is Southwestern Bell, which bought the AT&T brand in the bankruptcy fire sale and renamed itself.
Southwestern Bell was the same subsidiary that broke off from AT&T Corporation. AT&T Inc was the merger of the companies that were originally broken up from AT&T Corporation. Here is the org chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T#Chart_of_AT&T_Baby_Bell...
AT&T became even bigger after the breakup: https://www.businessinsider.com/att-breakup-1982-directv-bel...
You think that AT&T Corporation going broke and selling to a company that originated from the AT&T Corporation, which later renamed itself to AT&T Inc is a good example of a government-imposed corporate breakup?! It literally divested from those companies only to have most of them merge under the same name again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are web apps crippled on iOS?
Safari support (and even chrome, FF on macs) is horrible. They've become the new IE in terms of typical web programming that works everywhere except that platform. In the past year, every browser-based support issue we've had to deal with across multiple projects is due to Safari not handling things the way the rest of the browsers do. Worse, there's issues that are specific to Apple devices (iPad rendering of certai…
In my mind, despite this Apple is successful because they make fantastic hardware. If Apple didn’t have the fastest chips and stellar cameras, they wouldn’t be successful. Developers jump through so many hoops because the customers are there.