It's impossible to transfer Photos library to Vision Pro without iCloud 🤯

[ChromeCloud]

It's honestly less about the money than it is getting stuck in this perpetual dependent relationship. People like to buy products and use them without a marriage contract.

There's nothing perpetual about it. You can unsubscribe at any time and your Vision Pro will keep working just fine.

Yes, without iCloud you're going to lose the ability to sync your pictures across multiple devices, but a P2P sync option would be a big usability compromise compared to iCloud anyway.

In essence, by not supporting P2P sync, Apple is taking away from the user the least convenient and more cumbersome option to sync pictures across multiple devices.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

There's nothing perpetual about it. You can unsubscribe at any time and your Vision Pro will keep working just fine.

Yes, without iCloud you're going to lose the ability to sync your pictures across multiple devices, but a P2P sync option would be a big usability compromise compared to iCloud anyway.

In essence, by not supporting P2P sync, Apple is taking away from the user the least convenient and more cumbersome option to sync pictures across multiple devices.

No iCloud is a big usability compromise to p2p sync.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

There's nothing perpetual about it. You can unsubscribe at any time and your Vision Pro will keep working just fine.

Yes, without iCloud you're going to lose the ability to sync your pictures across multiple devices, but a P2P sync option would be a big usability compromise compared to iCloud anyway.

In essence, by not supporting P2P sync, Apple is taking away from the user the least convenient and more cumbersome option to sync pictures across multiple devices.

Even if what you say is true, it is also a valid way of moving files/pictures back-and-forth between every apple device up until the *checks notes* most expensive base apple product in quite a while.

It should have "the least convenient and more cumbersome option" as a valid option.

 

[ChromeCloud]

No iCloud is a big usability compromise to p2p sync.

I'm sorry but your statement doesn't make any sense.

On one side (iCloud) you have pictures syncing on all your devices in the background, without ever even thinking about it.

On the other side (P2P) you have to make sure you connect your devices to one another at regular intervals and each single device is only as up to date as the last time it was connected to your other devices to sync.

iCloud > P2P by a big margin when it comes down to ease of use.

 

[dotnet]

It should have "the least convenient and more cumbersome option" as a valid option.

I’ll say! And for $3500 Apple should have invented and thrown in an even more inconvenient and cumbersome option. Sheesh!

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

I'm sorry but your statement doesn't make any sense.

On one side (iCloud) you have pictures syncing on all your devices in the background, without ever even thinking about it.

On the other side (P2P) you have to make sure you connect your devices to one another at regular intervals and each single device is only as up to date as the last time it was connected to your other devices to sync.

iCloud > P2P by a big margin when it comes down to ease of use.

I’m sorry but your statement doesn’t make any sense.

Regular intervals…yea I’m at my computer for hours each day, not a challenge.

Also I have over 15tb of photo data, icloud literally can’t handle that, so as a threshold, it is useless and actually introduces data loss because what can be maintained versus what cannot requires 2 libraries now for photos. Which will forever be out of sync and increases chances of data loss or confusion on what exists in which library. Also the speed of sync via iCloud is pathetic compared to direct connection when I’m syncing big 4k videos.

That iCloud works for you and others is just great. I’m truly happy for you. What I’m not happy with is a) your abject intolerance for a view different from your own, and b) you telling me what you think I should think.

 

[hans1972]

St. Jude has just nominated this thread as his favourite thread for all of 2024.

 

[hans1972]

It's not - See above at Post #45

Apple wants every one of their customers to eventually "need" a subscription from them (perhaps several).

This is the end game of the "Services" push

Oh, the humanity!

A company wishing to sell you products and services...

 

[hans1972]

Poor design is typical for Apple. Here is another example: NBA App for Apple TV. On all other media streamers one can sign up with their nba.com ID and watch NBA League Path games for months. On Apple TV, your options are: subscribe to League Path via Apple or sign up in the app using your Apple device (Apple TV does not count) or sign up with your nba.com ID every day. Is not it idiotic?

So who designed the NBA app?
I'm pretty sure it wasn't Apple.

 

[hans1972]

Exactly. The iPad was originally designed as a consumption device between Mac and iPhone, and has seen incremental updates over the years, but the software hasn't changed to mirror the hardware. They've left it in limbo with a half-baked OS that'll never have the same level of commitment for development as macOS.

If they want to replace all devices with the Vision Pro (as one user suggested was Apple's plan) they've definitely chosen the wrong base OS to work with.

There are more developers who know how to program for iOS and iPadOS than macOS.

 

[hans1972]

I've come to think of Mac OS as being for people who want to manage their own data. Apple's mobile device OS's are designed for people who don't want to manage their own data or for people who don't know what data is.

"Rob the average man of his file system, and you rob him of his happiness in the same stroke"
-The Wild Duck by Henrik Ibsen, Norwegian playwright

He also wrote another play, An enemy of the people, in which Dr Stockman, a cloud specialist, moves to a Norwegian village, trying to get people to move away from ropes and cables, but the villagers will have none of it.

If iTunes was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me.

 

[hans1972]

All apologies. It works on the iPhone and iPad and even still on old iPods. They can offer the feature easily.

While we are all speculating on reasons. Evil. For our pleasure. Or anything else may also be reasonable speculation, I think it's important to consider a pause.

I wouldn't be surprised if the product management who approved and disapproved the features, wasn't even aware you could do it with iPhone/iPad and a Mac.

I'm pretty sure they'll not implement this feature and will just say you'll have to rely on the Files app.

 

[Antoniosmalakia]

There are more developers who know how to program for iOS and iPadOS than macOS.

Okay. I mean the same level of commitment from developers that make fully fledged industry standard software!

 

[hans1972]

The future for most people isn’t paying more to sync data from an ssd you already own to another ssd you just bought.

The future is people who don't understand what a file system is.

Even engineering students are baffled by file systems

 

[falainber]

So who designed the NBA app?
I'm pretty sure it wasn't Apple.

The same app behaves differently on all other streamers so I assume that it is Apple that dictates authentication mechanism which, on Apple TV, includes Apple specific methods - like logging in from Apple device. This could not have been done without Apple.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

I wouldn't be surprised if the product management who approved and disapproved the features, wasn't even aware you could do it with iPhone/iPad and a Mac.

I'm pretty sure they'll not implement this feature and will just say you'll have to rely on the Files app.

Your first statement is unsubstantiated and highly unlikely. The OS teams know darn well about such basic feature sets.

Or will you similarly state they dont know you can rearrange app icons on the iPhone and iPad?

As such, your second argument is diminished in mere proximity to the first.

 

[GMShadow]

Apple is pitching this as a Pro device. That implies corporate use. Many corporations choose, or are legally required, to keep their data off the open internet.

No, it does not. Pro in Apple context just means 'better than the base model'.

It seems like Apple does not want to see the vision pro with a bunch of dongles and external storage devices dangling from it. It's going to be all wireless, like the iPad in the beginning.

But I wanted to strap a 22TB external disk to my side like a fanny pack! And plug in a flash drive!

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

No, it does not. Pro in Apple context just means 'better than the base model'.



But I wanted to strap a 22TB external disk to my side like a fanny pack! And plug in a flash drive!

Now say the same thing with regard to the iPhone and iPad… oh that’s right, people can figure out how to use those things conveniently for themselves. Like photographers moving mass data on shoots and plugging in cameras and equipment on site.

 

[GMShadow]

Now say the same thing with regard to the iPhone and iPad… oh that’s right, people can figure out how to use those things conveniently for themselves. Like photographers moving mass data on shoots and plugging in cameras and equipment on site.

That use case is a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the iPhone/iPad market.

Vision Pro is a first generation product running 1.0.2 that starts at $3500. It is not (yet) intended to be a mass market product covering every single edge case in the way the iPhone is.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

That use case is a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the iPhone/iPad market.

Vision Pro is a first generation product running 1.0.2 that starts at $3500. It is not (yet) intended to be a mass market product covering every single edge case in the way the iPhone is.

Thanks, because tyranny of the majority is all that counts and matters. And we know when VisiCalc came out and it was a minority use, it had no value because of that.

Also your argument continues to have difficulty with logical follow through. If it's not yet a mass market tool, then all the more reason to appeal to pros that can push adoption to the moo part of the market.

 

[tornadowrangler]

It seems like Apple does not want to see the vision pro with a bunch of dongles and external storage devices dangling from it. It's going to be all wireless, like the iPad in the beginning.

It has a battery pack literally dangling from it.

Manual syncing would not require wires. It can be done over wifi.

 

[tornadowrangler]

No, it does not. Pro in Apple context just means 'better than the base model'.

What base model?

 

[subjonas]

I don't think Apple will ever implement something like that on visionOS.

The use case for syncing pictures between devices through a P2P connection (either with an USB-C cable or wirelessly) is too narrow and becomes more cumbersome as the number of devices you want to keep in sync grows.

I think Apple still supports it on the iPhone and the iPad for legacy reasons but I wouldn't be surprised if they got rid of it in the near future.

iCloud is the way. Sorry.

I'm sorry but your statement doesn't make any sense.

On one side (iCloud) you have pictures syncing on all your devices in the background, without ever even thinking about it.

On the other side (P2P) you have to make sure you connect your devices to one another at regular intervals and each single device is only as up to date as the last time it was connected to your other devices to sync.

iCloud > P2P by a big margin when it comes down to ease of use.

Local syncing to Mac is not any more cumbersome than syncing to iCloud no matter how many devices you have. My desktop Mac is the hub and always on, just like an iCloud server, and all my devices automatically sync with it wirelessly when charging at home. I never think about it.
The only trade off is it doesn’t sync when I’m not at home. To me that’s very unimportant compared to what I get in return: versioned backups of all my data via Time Machine, and I don’t have to depend on or entrust another company with any of my personal or work data. Subscription fee is negligible.
And when needing to transfer large amounts of data quickly and reliably, nothing beats wire.

edit- Recently there was some security issue that caused Apple to require a passcode for each wireless sync for iPhone, which adds a bit of cumbersome-ness, but I’m hoping that’s a temporary situation. It might even be fixed already, not sure as I’m on an older iOS at the moment.

 

[subjonas]

It seems like Apple does not want to see the vision pro with a bunch of dongles and external storage devices dangling from it. It's going to be all wireless, like the iPad in the beginning.

If there were any wired connection on the VP, I would think it would be through the port on the external battery.

 

[PBG4 Dude]

If there were any wired connection on the VP, I would think it would be through the port on the external battery.

Yeah I wonder if there is a data connection that occurs if you plug the battery’s charging cable into a Mac, even if it is undocumented. There has to be a way to check.