Hacker News Reader

Comment by potatolicious | Hacker News Reader

Didn't downvote you - but generally complaining about downvotes is unclassy. I'll venture a guess and say that you might've been downvoted because "loosen the grips on that background services stuff" sounds a bit flippant - the restrictions exist for very good reason.

That said, there is probably a good case for the case of background uploads to be added to the existing backgrounding framework as an additional use case, with its own set of governing rules (another user brought up: Wi-Fi only, while charging, while battery is high, while reception is good, etc).

The solution to inconvenient background syncing IMO isn't opening the floodgates to everyone running their own daemons and sucking down battery power like it's their last day on Earth. It's a valuable use case, but not a good reason to "loosen the grips" so to speak.

View on HN

RE: down vote. Point taken. I'll calm down.

RE: Background services. It's a pocket computer. I want my devices to do more for me. When I set them down, I want them to continue to work for me so I can be productive. Just because something runs in the background doesn't automatically make it a battery suck nor does it make it a security risk.

> RE: Background services. It's a pocket computer.

It's not (per Apple). It's an appliance, and they use that as guidance in the decisions they make. It may be capable of acting like a computer, technically it obviously IS a computer, but Apple treats it as an appliance.

Not so black and white, really. Remember the recent Phil Schiller (I think) quote discussing how Apple sees their devices as a continuum, with more and more functionality going to more mobile, more personal computers? They see the Watch as replacing some amount of iPhone functionality, iPhone being able to do much of what iPad can, iPad largely replacing a laptop, and a laptop almost entirely obviating the desktop? So, in a sense, Apple does view the iPhone as a small and somewhat limited but very real "pocket laptop."

I think the relevant distinction between iOS and OS X is that, with iOS, there is sort of an understanding that the user is granted less direct control, in exchange for a near-guarantee that they won’t have to worry about certain things (like malware, or to a certain extent, battery life) anymore.

True. The iPhone is very appliance like. The iPad is clearly capable of much more, but in many ways is limited by iOS, even if solely when it comes to the interface.

But it's pretty clear to me that that Apple is not selling the iPhone as a general purpose computer, and that's fine with me.

They advertise the virtually comprehensive nature of the App Store. To a non-programmer, what’s the difference between a general-purpose computer and one that features apps?

Is there any source where Apple mentioned it as appliance?

I doubt it. That's my impression as an iPhone/iPad user of many years. Apple seems to make choices that ensure basic functions work reliably and without wasting resources (like battery) as opposed to a more computer like approach of giving more integration points and configuration options.

Android has allowed things (widgets, alternate keyboards, different launchers/lock screens, background processes) that expose more power but rely on the 3rd party developer to ensure the experience still works well without wasting resources or crashing.

Apple only provides such things after careful study and lockdown (such as keyboards). Much more careful, much more sealed up unmodifiable box.

So its a computer then. I am not sure of the Apple careful approach. I am using latest OS on my old Mac book pro. Each new release has made it slower, draning more battery.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com