Good. It’s always insane to me that they get 1% of the iPhone CPU cost of ~$68 or something there around.
There was a lawsuit in 2020 or 2021 where some evidence was unsealed showing ARM gets 1% of the CPU cost. I can’t recall how that CPU cost was calculated - but I believe that was a part of their deal through the early 30’s. That’s less than a dollar per iPhone.
Not that I wouldn't want Apple to pay ARM more, but,
a) Apple is getting really good at switching CPU architectures when needed.
b) Don't they already have a forever licence to the ARM ISA (since the 90s/Newton) as well as a substantial in-house design team? I guess the renegotiations are about future/roadmapped ARM archictural enhancements.
It would be sad if there was a substantial fork of the arm64 ISA.
Apple doesn't have a "forever" license. They have an architectural license, similar to a small number of other Arm architectural licensees, with certain contractual payment terms, lengths, restrictions, and timelines for extension, etc. The idea that Apple has a special, perpetual free license to Arm ISA/technology as a result of their involvement in its founding is a myth.
Yeah it’s like people don’t understand the concept of value addition. An ARM CPU by itself is worth less than what it is with the software, app ecosystem, dual sided market place Apple has built. While I think a 30% mark up is a tad expensive, it’s not hugely out of line with what retail store fronts generally charge to begin with. You can argue that virtual store fronts don’t have the same overheads, but you’ve still got some physical servers to maintain and engineers to pay to keep it running daily vs a physical store front doesn’t have those challenges and expenses.
Physical storefronts “merely” have to pay for rent and employees at every location, and they have to worry about things like shrinkage (theft, essentially). Not to mention the vast differences in economies of scale.
> but you’ve still got some physical servers to maintain and engineers to pay to keep it running daily vs a physical store front doesn’t have those challenges and expenses.
are there any estimates on how much apple is costed in server costs because of apple app store and if there are, can that be considered with the 30% that they are leeching and compare the two of them and compare that estimate with the retail example you brought.
So there are 2 million apps in app store. Assume average to be 100 MB so that is 2 million * 100 /(1024* 1024) = 190.734863 TB using $0.015 / GB-month Cf r2 with 0 egress costs I get the price as 2929.6128$ per month or 3 Grand/month ie. 36 Grand an year
Heck, consider the average app size to be FOUR times the cost. Then you get the salary of 1 apple engineer and that's STILL less than the average salary of 1 apple engineer.
And we are forgetting the 99$ something which apple app devs have to pay iirc at sometimes. I am an android guy and actually android has similar number of apps so the estimate is same actually.
But I would assume that the engineers aren't the bottleneck either. I assume that both apple/android stores aren't so complex to build to deserve 30% of transaction.
Some might be interesting about the malware/static-analysis but there was this hn post made recently about instagram blackhole which uncovered an malicious apple app which was available in app store so :/
The only reason one might think so is maybe considering the development cost of apple but I think that is an hardware decision and when we buy apple devices, it should be used to recoup the costs not trying to cash cow either. Its a trillion $ company trying to extract 3$ from a 10$ transaction you might do to anybody's patreon from the app :/ Yeah.
TLDR: No. I don't think a 30% transaction is justified.
The easier way is to compare other app stores and whether they charge similar or different. If a less overhead business model worked, you’d see them doing otherwise. Yet from Android to the Sony PlayStation store to almost every other store, the 30% cut seems about standard. Indeed, Apple actually only takes 15% for small businesses and 30% is for businesses that see a huge amount of revenue from Apple’s sales channel.
Also a huge thing you’re completely discounting is all the resources spent building App Store APIs and infrastructure (from code signing to end to end things like on demand resources). Saying it should only cost them to run 36 grand and one engineer is laughable - if that were true Apple would do that and further increase their profit margin. But they have teams behind this for a reason
Fantasy price for your personal usage or the personal usage of most average consumers/ software engineers, sure. It bears repeating: you're not the target audience.
They've been in the display game a long time. For people that need the product capabilities for their specific job, like color grading, they seem to price them quite well, given everywhere I used to see $30,000-$50,000 reference monitors, I see Studio Displays now.
React is just an abstraction of a State -> View function.
While not universally applicable, it's very convenient during development to focus on State without thinking about View, or focus on View without thinking about State.
The concept itself has nothing to do with the actual renderer: HTML, TUI, or whatever. You can render your state to a text file if you want to.
So the flickering is caused either by a faulty renderer, or by using a render target (terminal) that is incompatible with the UI behavior (frequent partial re-renders, outputting a lot of text etc.)
Thats the problem. Some developers want to avoid learning another programming language and use one for everything (including their technologies.)
Using TS, React here doesn’t make sense for stability in the long term. As you can see, even when they replaced Ink and built their own, the problem still exists.
There are other alternatives that are better than whatever Anthropic did such as Bubbletea (Go) or Ratatui (Rust) which both are better suited for this.
Maybe they were thinking more about job security with TypeScript over technical correctness and a robust implementation architecture and this shows the lack of it.
I’m a fan of Bubbletea, but it is significantly less ergonomic than React. Although I’d argue that if that starts to matter significantly, your TUI is probably too cluttered anyway and you should pare it down.
Correct. If you try to create a coding agent using the raw Codex or Claude code API and you build your own “write tool”, and don’t give the model their “native patch tool”, 70%+ of the time it’s write/ patch fails because it tries to do the operation using the write/ patch tool it was trained on.
I came across this the other day. If you go to the photos tab on the @grom account, it’s an endless stream of women in bikinis or in explicit poses.
Apparently all anyone has to do is reply to any photo anyone posted of themselves, is something like “@grok put her in a bikini” — or more obscene demands, and it just spits out the image. It’s kind of disturbing how simple it is
It is rampant, even for minors. A huge number of middle and high school girls are getting harassed by classmates with nonconsenting porn made of them. The AI tools are nonconsenting porn machines as one of their primary use cases.
Just googling around, it's worse than I could have imagined. For a few bucks/image you can make your own videos with pre-baked prompts or even custom prompts.
At a few bucks/image they must be making bank. This is probably a huge industry.
Almost everywhere that accepts user generated content has T&C along the lines of "you grant us a perpetual license to use, store, transform, and share whatever you post" just so make sure nobody sues for the normal boring use of showing it to other people.
Google or any open source map product. And actually, if we use the SCOTUS approved DOJ v MSFT consent decree as precedent, any app that can't use this private API component would be an impacted party.
I'm an antitrust nerd - 20+ years since I made my first PACER account as a teenager to get documents from interesting cases..
95% of what people call "anticompetitive" or "monopolistic" has no legal bearing. People don't know the legal definition of those words and bandy them about based on vibes.
This however, is a very very clear case of violations of precedent. If we look at Microsoft's final judgement https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/final-judgment-133 see F(1)(a), H(2)(b), while these stipulations haven't been applied to Apple, if I were in a market dominant position, I'd be super careful about capricious restrictions like the example undocumented API, and behavior that mimics patterns of activity that were seen as actionably sanctionable to similar market dominant forces
I wasn’t previously aware of Ukrainians flying drones directly into helicopter’s rotors, but that does make sense.
I obviously know very little about battlefield armaments so forgive the potentially stupid question - but have drones made combat helicopters obsolete?
Helicopters are vulnerable to small quadcopter drones when landing and taking off. This limits some traditional uses of helicopters (anything that involves landing in enemy territory becomes much more risky) but still leaves others (shooting missiles at surface targets).
Helicopters are very effective at shooting down large fixed-wing drones.
Helicopters are very effective at sinking drone boats without air defenses, but are in turn very vulnerable to drone boats equipped with SAMs.
That's like asking if bullets made infantry obsolete. As long as there is a role for attack helicopter on the battlefield, then it is not obsolete, just more vulnerable during its missions.
The takeaway is the next Democrat president should just declare a public transit emergency and start building while the courts squabble. Same for housing reform. Same for climate change and shutting down coal power plants—once you shut it down and take out the turbines, it doesn’t matter what the courts say.
There was a lawsuit in 2020 or 2021 where some evidence was unsealed showing ARM gets 1% of the CPU cost. I can’t recall how that CPU cost was calculated - but I believe that was a part of their deal through the early 30’s. That’s less than a dollar per iPhone.