By the way, Amazon Drive is canceling support for Synology NAS synchronization in November. Looks like I'll be moving to BackBlaze too (and canceling my Amazon extra storage subscription for video). Amazon's own synchronization tools are poorly suited for image database backup.
Select Canon cameras can now auto-backup to Google Photos
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
It's on AWS.
Till now. Look at the ToS about what you are entitled with when they lose your files.
No. Apple hates anybody making money on iOS without paying them. Look at the fight with Epic. Apple does sell ads directly.
And how does it? By analyzing each image and extracting information to feed consumer profiles whose use is then sold to advertiser.
I wonder how many iPhone and iPad users would rather use a Google product there rather than Apple’s own.
I pay Apple for backing up my iPhone to iCloud. Google is the most useful site for me out there and I use it many times daily so I put up with their tracking me.
Apple denied KNOWLEDGE, they did not deny INVOLVEMENT, essentially a GLOMAR...but they're in the Snowden-leaked documents as involved.
I am not sure. I do have a 6D (cr2) and M50 (cr3) but I always import them as DNG in Lightroom. Amazon Photos give you unlimited photo storage, and I use DNG because it saves LR edits in file without the need for an XMP sidecar file.
I found out that Lightroom edits are saved to the catalogue (not directly to the file), and I need to do “Update DNG metadata and preview” to save the edits to the DNG files. I then unpause the “sync” on Amazon Photos to have the files uploaded with the edits. If I kept sync always on, it will upload the files
100% correct but that doesn't stop me from NOT having a f***book account! No doubt I'll still have a ghost account though, no one caring is my first line of defense
No. Apple hates anybody making money on iOS without paying them. Look at the fight with Epic. Apple does sell ads directly.
[/QUOTE]
Apple spends billions on the App Store. Two thirds of the apps are free. Apple gets nothing there except the $99 a year developer account. You can have as many free apps out there as you want for that amount. Apple give apps away for f4ree in promotions and pays the developers but takes no cut. They do all the accounting work, they do advertising. And it’s their platform.
Google charges the same 30%. Off loading apps is something only a tiny number of people do. Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony also charge 30%.
what was your point there?
[/QUOTE]
Apple spends billions on the App Store. Two thirds of the apps are free. Apple gets nothing there except the $99 a year developer account. You can have as many free apps out there as you want for that amount. Apple give apps away for f4ree in promotions and pays the developers but takes no cut. They do all the accounting work, they do advertising. And it’s their platform.
Google charges the same 30%. Off loading apps is something only a tiny number of people do. Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony also charge 30%.
what was your point there?
Not to defend or accuse Apple of anything. But isn't the issue people are discussing less about taking a cut for the price of an app (Something Apple is directly involved in due to distributing it) but also taking the cut for purchases and subscriptions made through the app?
Yes, but for subscriptions the cut decreases over time. While I think the 30% cut is a bit much, considering the size of the app store, it is on par with Google, Microsoft and Sony.
I suspect that the app store will still be profitable for able with a 10% cut, but I don't know what incentive Apple has to lower it. I wouldn't be suprised if the current conflict with Epic makes them dig in their heels even more.
Amazon doesn't support yet .CR3, but I bet they will eventually for the time being I convert to DNG and call it a day. I have a unraid server with 40 TB + amazon cloud + 1tb in lightroom cloud for WIP and a gnarbox for good measure while taking photos
We need people of your mindset in charge of pandemic planning etc, and that is not a joke.
Does the DNG converter still strip most of the 'maker notes' section of the EXIF info? Not a big deal if all you ever use for processing is Adobe products, since they ignore most 'maker notes' info anyway, but if you change your mind in the future, that's info that would not be recoverable.
Well I believe in redundancy I was even thinking of deploying a sinology in my office to mirror my unraid photo folder only (two local different locations and one in the cloud)
Two thirds of the apps in the. App store are free, and Apple gets nothing from them, but still has to spend the money to support them. A large number have subs, or sell upgrades or other bits. If Apple has an app that gets downloaded 20 million times, and gets nothing for that, why shouldn’t they get a cut of the sub? It’s 30% the first year, and 15% after that. That’s not so bad.
estimates are that Apple just makes about five cents profit on each dollar sold. That includes the average of everything. That’s not exactly profiteering. Epic, for example, is estimated to make over a 60% profit on Fortnite. Every other online store from Apple to Sony charges 30%, not just the first year, but forever. Is that better?
I remember reading, many decades ago, that people were surveyed...what would they consider a fair profit for a company? And five percent was the typical answer. Another question was what they thought companies typically made, and the typical answer was in the 20-30 percent range.
It turns out most companies, including many who have been accused of gouging and profiteering, make well UNDER 5 percent; they'd love to have such a good year as to make what the average consumer thinks is a fair profit.
As I said, not making any statement about Apple here. I just wanted to point out that you can offer a free App and still be affected by Apples regulations. I had taken your point about the number of free Apps as implying that only the costs of an App itself is relevant to the discussion. Sorry.
As we're talking about a corporate lawsuit here, I won't bother giving an opinion on Apples business practices. We'll be informed whether this is a legit legal issue or not eventually.
Denying knowledge implied denying involvement. Think about what you just said. They involved themselves in a program they didn't know anything about.