← Back to context

Comment by CaptainOfCoit

3 months ago

Yeah, if it was cross-platform maybe more people would be curious about it, but something that can only run on ~10% of the hardware people have doesn't make it very attractive to even begin to spend time on Apple-exclusive stuff.

But you can have an apple device deployed in your stack to handle the OCR, right? I get on-device is a hardware limitation for many, but if you have an apple device in your stack, can’t you leverage this?

  • Yeah, but handling macOS is a infrastructure-capacity sucks, Apple really doesn't want you to so tooling is almost none existing. I've setup CI/CD stacks before that needed macOS builders and it's always the most cumbersome machines to manage as infrastructure.

10% of hardware is an insanely vast amount, no?

  • Well, it's 90% less than what everyone else uses, so even if the total number is big, relatively it has a small user-base.

    • I don’t think 10% of anything would be considered relatively small even if we talk about 10 items: literally there’s only 10 items and this 1 has the rare quality of being among 10. Let alone billions of devices. Unless you want to reduce it to tautology, and instead of answering “why it’s not benchmarked” just go for “10 is smaller than 90, so I’m right”.

      My point is, I don’t think any comparative benchmark would ever exclude something based on “oh it’s just 10%, who cares.” I think the issue is more that Apple Vision Framework is not well known as an OCR option, but maybe it’s starting to change.

      And another part of the irony is that Apple’s framework probably gets way more real world usage in practice than most of the tools in that benchmark.

      2 replies →