441–450 of 511 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can also run a MacOS VM in VirtualBox on Ubuntu. No Apple hardware needed. https://github.com/myspaghetti/macos-virtualbox
You will get your Apple Developer account terminated if they ever find out. Live by the walled garden die by the walled garden
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get an old old old Mac pro from ages ago. Upgrade its motherboard. Then upgrade its RAM. Then upgrade its hard drive. Then upgrade its power supply. It will still be an "Apple-branded computer" because of its case. It will just have received a bunch of upgrades. Big "haha" to them. (Or if you're actually a corporation just buy a Mac.)
That sounds like a waste of time and money.
IMO their price gouging is ethically much worse than someone making a hackintosh and using it to enrich the MacOS software ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple’s licensing terms for macOS permit only the licensing of one unit of Apple macOS running on one unit of Apple hardware to one customer for a minimum term of one day. There is no option to purchase a virtual-machine or other shared-instance license when macOS is involved. (Nitpicky points: I believe the customer can do whatever they want with their licensed cloud Mac hardware, such as dual-boot different release…
More days or less customers is also ok.
Amazon lists the price of mac1 instances (running on rack-mounted Intel Mac Minis) at $1.083 per hour, $9,487 per year. You have to pay for 24 hours up front, after which they bill by the second. https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/dedicated-hosts/pricing/ They don't yet display any reservation pricing for mac1 instances, but they do offer a "savings plan." https://aws.amazon.com/savingsplans/pricing/ If you pay for three yea…
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…
> Since my duty cycle for a Mac Mini is rather less than 20%, the economics even of on-demand instances immediately make sense MacStadium's prices are "rather less than 20%" of AWS's prices. To make sense, AWS would have to be comparable to MacStadium's pricing. And don't forget the 24-hour minimum. If your duty cycle for a Mac Mini is only 20% per day every weekday, well, you can't rent a Mac Mini for less than a 24…
Also, I'm more likely to transition to this because I'm familiar with AWS, I didn't know MacStadium existed before this thread.
If that's their target market (and not someone who wants a scalable Mac build farm available 24/7 and doesn't care about costs), then it makes sense - I pay a lot less than the price of a Mini to rent it 4 days a year, if Amazon can find 90 other people who want to do the same, all of us are better off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Microsoft didn't lose anything. > 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…
Quite a few observers, including people internal to Microsoft, felt it cost the company significant momentum at the time, and confidence after.
Before the court case, Microsoft was a brutal competitor (remember the Simpsons episode?). Not so much after.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah for that bullshit price you might as well buy the hardware if you need any serious use of it
Jeff is not the richest man on earth for no reasons. Us humans are lazy. Who wants to manage hardware or walk to the store when you can click on the cloud ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don’t understand how you are confused. If I need to check if my app works on m1, I can now spend $24 to do that instead of $650 or whatever it retails for.
Amazon lists the price of mac1 instances (running on rack-mounted Intel Mac Minis) at $1.083 per hour, $9,487 per year. You have to pay for 24 hours up front, after which they bill by the second. https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/dedicated-hosts/pricing/ They don't yet display any reservation pricing for mac1 instances, but they do offer a "savings plan." https://aws.amazon.com/savingsplans/pricing/ If you pay for three yea…
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…
...however is the AWS price including a lot of value the Mac mini colo price doesn't? I believe the AWS price is dramatically higher unless you can batch the 20% duty cycle into full days (AWS is following Apple's EULA and only billing in 24 consecutive hour chunks).
I'm not a "I can build in the garage cheaper", I'm a "we use to build servers that way, run them ourselves (and steal meeting rooms form ourselves and put extra cooling in), and then I went off to do other things for 20 years and now I work at a huge company where we build our own cloud stuff...but if I were at a less huge company how would this stuff actually work out?" kind of person (i.e. I know the _theory_ of renting other people's servers, but the finer points of actually evaluating it are not currently in my grasp).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Since my duty cycle for a Mac Mini is rather less than 20%, the economics even of on-demand instances immediately make sense, Are you factoring in the 24 hour minimum AWS charges for a Mac Mini?
If you are comparing buying the device + the other costs of running the device vs renting from aws, then the 24h upfront is not an issue. You could even consider renting for a year or more.
On my team, we just have a Mac Mini sitting under someone's desk to do stuff that requires a Mac. It gets used for about 1 hour every day for a daily build. For us, AWS's offering doesn't make financial sense.
Even if we were to switch to only doing a weekly build, it wouldn't be worth it, as that would still cost around $1,250/year.