[0] https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx...
They're omitting the detail that ISPs are violating the spec.
If you set your DNS TTL to 3600 seconds, a caching resolver should store both that and when they received the response. Then, when another client requests the same name in 30 seconds, it should pull the result out of the cache and send it to the client with a TTL of 3570 seconds. This way, once 3600 second pass from the authoritative query, all the cached data is expired everywhere. If you know you're about to make a change you can lower the TTL to 300 seconds an hour before you make the change, after which the change should only take 5 minutes to propagate.
Some ISPs ignore the TTL and tell all their clients that they can cache the result for 72 hours so the clients don't make as many queries to their DNS servers. If you find your ISP doing this, stop using their DNS servers (or stop using that ISP) because it can obviously cause you problems whenever anyone changes a DNS entry and your ISP is handing out a stale one for you to cache for days. Maybe just never use your ISP's DNS servers in general.
Establishing popularity at a point in time requires a window of time.
If I had to guess, they pick a window of a few days because if you did it every minute or even every hour, there might be wild fluctuation in the long tail of apps, depending on whether 8 or 0 people happened to download it in that time.
You could fix this by making window size inversely proportional to short-term popularity and running every 15 min, but that's just more effort to reason about and code and debug. It seems like something they absolutely should do, but I can see why it would be pushed down the backlog.
All of their services that are network heavy (TV, iCloud, Apple Music, News, Safari Sync) are so slow and do huge full reloads of every bit of state, so you just constantly see loading spinners, or worse in iCloud, you see nothing and eventually it will pop all the new stuff in to view, with no way to force a refresh.
I get that CAP theorem exists, but other providers at least seems to understand opportunistic sync and do a job of making it work for the user, but Apple seems to think that inconsistent views over data can't be helped and that every user should understand eventual consistency.
Their SDKs for syncing data to iCloud have long been a joke in the developer community and I think there have been 3 attempts at getting CoreData -> iCloud working, with the last iteration NSPersistentCloudKitContainer often being used as the [butt of jokes, a case study on poor networking talent at Apple] among iOS developers.
It won't show in search results, no matter how many pages you scroll through.
Agreed that an official app is needed, clearly.
> 2. Doesn't actually seem to solve the problem
For now. Eventually it'll get sorted.
> 3. Puts to shame all the touted benefits of a "walled garden/closed ecosystem".
Despite having the same experience, I disagree with your conclusion.
It has nothing do with the "walled garden" and everything to do with Apple and OpenAI not paying attention to a rapidly emerging use case. The problem arose because OpenAI did not prioritize the initiative to make their own early enough, allowing hundreds of other developers to fill the void and muddy the waters, while Apple allowed these copycats into the App Store without really considering the customer experience.
And what is Apple supposed to do in this case? Block independent devs from submitting valid apps? Then they’d be blamed for supporting big corp and monopolistic practices. Damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
“It,” here, refers to this one specific instance, and not the overall issue. Copycats have been a serious problem for as long as I can remember. Apple seems to deal with them only once they attract publicity.
See also
https://daringfireball.net/2022/01/apple_app_store_world_rip...
> as I write this, the #3, #7, #14, and #15 word games in the iOS App Store are shameless Wordle clones stealing the name “Wordle”
* Apple is positioning their tight control over the appstore, including high fees to developers and restricted choice to consumers, as providing benefits of a curated & safe experience
* Do we feel that dozens of apps overlaying OpenAI ChatGPT, with various degrees of honesty and deception and monetization methods and privacy policies, are in-line with stated goals of the appstore, and with desires and best interests of the end-users?
My personal impression is "No". This is not to say I want the app store controlled more tightly - on the contrary; I am saying that I am not receiving benefits of the "walled garden / ecosystem" (and this is hardly the first example since iPhone was forced upon me by my employer:), i.e. I do not feel materially safer on AppleStore than I do on Google Play store; but I do feel materially obstructed/impacted when I want to install something that Apple for whatever reason does not.
Or in other words, without claiming anybody did anything particularly wrong here, if you're GOING to allow dozens of apps pretending to be the hottest new thing on the market on the app store, then just get out of my way and let me install what I want without pretense of curation and safety.
Let’s not pretend that it’s hurting the little developer.
It came out in the Epic trial that 80%+ of App Store revenue comes from in app purchases of play to win games.
The biggest players that aren’t games like Netflix, Spotify and other “reader apps” [sic] have forced you to do subscriptions outside of the app store for years.
Then other apps are physical goods where you don’t have to use in app purchases and they can use Apple Pay (regular credit card processing fees).
To Apple, the benefit is enormous. What happens when garbage apps get better ranking? Companies pay for that sponsored position. Once they do, Apple then starts ranking them better and gets to claim they "monitor quality" when it was never about quality on the App Store.
Not that HN wants to admit it when gpt4all gpt4free etc comes up
Or how about search a pdf on my phone? Really? I can’t? Huh… so random…
Open it in iBooks, which also runs ocr on the pdf, and hit the magnifying glass.
* Let me put the icon where I want it. seriously. if my OCD wants this icon on bottom right of my screen, let me!
* Let me have an icon in multiple places. if my OCD wants this app in both "Media" and "Entertainment" folder, let me!
* Allow me to put stuff onto the phone. Via USB. Like every other god damn device in the world.
* Allow me to take stuff off my phone. Via USB. Like very other freakin' device in the world.
(my wife knows the exact shriek that comes out of my home office every ~6months when I try to take all my photos off my iPhone or put some videos onto it for travel. I've given up every time. My co-workers who love iPhone always have a wonderful system that sounds like "Email it to yourself then FTP it to your dropbox account and then download it in the browser and then..... - I assume that's how XKCD got the idea https://xkcd.com/763/)
* Downloading and opening files is an incredible hit and miss of what happens where and how.
* 3.5mm. And yes I blame Apple for starting the trend :)
I have a list somewhere I wrote down when people ask me why my phone is called "iHateApple". I'll see if I can dig it up :)
You need to use iTunes. There’s a file transfer tab somewhere. Or wait, it’s Finder now. They took the syncing out of iTunes. It’s also not called iTunes anymore I just realized. Ok, I’m old. :p
It’s the right call to make.
It keeps logging me out, the copying UX is subpar… And god forbid I lock my phone while I'm getting a completion back. It stops mid sentence and there is no way to continue with it. Which (locking one's phone for a bit while interacting with it) is a very valid use case if you are doing stuff with your hands and want to put the phone in your pocket for a bit.
I'm looking forward to the app.
But I see that perhaps the parent didn't mean to say that the web version can do everything the app does, so I have edited my comment to be less confrontational. Thanks.
"Perfectly Fine" on the other hand, the key word is "fine". It is "eh. It mostly does the job. I cannot begrudge it too much. I have bigger things to rant about. It's perfectly fine."
"Fine" is like "Nice". It's fine. It's nice. Note quite "Good", let alone "Amazing". But it's fine. Perfectly so :)
(I empathize with all of your pain points, particularly the stopping of generation if my screen locks. I have employer-mandated iPhone which has draconian locking policies which are pretty close to average time of query generation. I wonder if app will have the same issue?)
(I’m not a native speaker.)
I best equated it to "usable" since I agree it's "not quite good".
Apple store search is a broken horrific joke.
I imagine this is their MVP, and they're going to iterate and start adding more iOS specific stuff. It'd be nice to be able to hook it into Siri natively (since we can't just rip out Siri and replace it with ChatGPT).
Noted the name of the app ("Openai ChatGP") and the description ("The official app by OpenAI")
I opened App Store on my iPhone and typed the name of the app, verbatim.
The official/correct app was not in the first 20 entries (which is as far as I was willing to scroll).
Which, to me:
1. Shows why an official app is needed even though the web version works perfectly fine on iPhone and is probably easier
2. Doesn't actually seem to solve the problem
3. Puts to shame all the touted benefits of a "walled garden/closed ecosystem".