4 ms·

Highly unlikely, I don't think Apple has ever released multiple branches of updates for any device. The closest is perhaps iOS 6.1.6, a fix for the fatal "gotof

by 0x0 9y ago

Highly unlikely, I don't think Apple has ever released multiple branches of updates for any device. The closest is perhaps iOS 6.1.6, a fix for the fatal "gotofail" SSL vulnerability, which was pushed out to devices stuck on iOS 6.x, but if your device was eligible for iOS7 then iOS7(.0.6) was what you would get. That's also the only time I can remember security updates being pushed after a device model being end-of-life'd.

walterbell 9y ago
Have they previously had an app transition like 32-bit / 64-bit, where some users cannot upgrade?
- 0x0 9y ago
  Nope, so this is going to be interesting to watch. Personally I was hoping that they would offer an optional download of 32bit support libraries to let iOS11 users run important existing legacy apps and access their documents, but they seem to push hard on making developers get in line and update their apps. Which is unhelpful for the cases where the developers no longer have any interest in their apps or even exist (bankrupt, disbanded, in some cases deceased)
  - Razengan 9y ago
    If the developer is bankrupt, disbanded or deceased then the app generally can not remain published for longer than a year at most anyway. If the developer does not have any interest in updating their own app, do I as a user care about their apps?
    - kranner 9y ago
      > If the developer does not have any interest in updating their own app, do I as a user care about their apps? A developer's primary interest in their app is to earn an income. A user's interest is in using the app for whatever functionality it provided. There's no symmetry here.
      - Razengan 9y ago
        If the developer doesn’t want to update their apps to fully support my device, then I would look for an alternative. There are almost 0 cases where I would withhold an OS update in order to keep using an specific app, let alone change my device, and I’m completely on Apple’s side for finally killing 32-bit.
  - MBCook 9y ago
    What was the point of that be? The apps aren’t going to be updated if they haven’t in the last four years. Keeping all that stuff around is also support burden for Apple. If they only supported it on the 7 and below then it might be confusing to users why some people get to use older apps and others don’t. On the other hand if they wanted to support it on the 8 and X then they would have to have an entire processor emulator that would only exist to support apps that hadn’t been updated in years. Don’t forget that Apple keeps tons of usage statistics from people who are willing to give them. Chances are they know pretty exactly what percent of people use 32 bit apps with any regularity and how much total time to use them for. If they were willing to make these decisions my guess is those numbers are very low. People here on HN are concerned about it and there have been some articles on websites about it but I’m willing to bet that this whole thing is almost a non-issue.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    What legacy apps worth keeping “documents” for - I’m assuming non game apps — would be worth supporting? The chances are even if they did provide support for 32 bit abandoned apps, they would break sooner or later with a future OS upgrade. Besides are you planning on keeping the same IOS device forever? The newest processors are 64 bit only. I doubt that Apple will ever release a new device that will support 32 bit devices - except for maybe a new iPod Touch or iPhone SE.
  - kevinchen 9y ago
    It's not just a matter of the space on disk to hold 32-bit libraries. They must also be loaded into memory if there are 32-bit processes running. This degrades performance system-wide, not just for the abandonware apps.
    - 0x0 9y ago
      What good is RAM for if not running the applications a user needs to run? If the user is not currently running a 32bit app, drop the libraries from RAM. That is such a non-argument. The amount of space and time needed to load and unload 32bit support libraries is probably 1% of the space and time used every time a user loads a game, or the facebook app, for example.
      - coldtea 9y ago
        >What good is RAM for if not running the applications a user needs to run? What good is degraded performance because some BS game/app who on top of it is abandoned from its developer for years, and it will stop working anyway sooner or later, needs 32-bit mode? Especially when you can find 200 replacement that work fine in 64-bit and are upgraded regularly.
        0x0 9y ago
        Where do I find 200 replacement apps for a car unlocking app? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15302231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15302231
        tinus_hn 9y ago
        If your car can only be unlocked by your phone you made a mistake when buying it. Just like if it features proprietary chargers. These things just don't last.
        0x0 9y ago
        I see. Is buying an iphone or an ipad a mistake as well? They require proprietary lightning cables to charge.
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >Which is unhelpful for the cases where the developers no longer have any interest in their apps or even exist (bankrupt, disbanded, in some cases deceased) If they are "bankrupt, disbanded, in some cases deceased" then maybe insisting on using those apps are not the best course for the user either...
    - pjc50 9y ago
      As I commented last time on the subject: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15285252 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15285252 Sometimes the apps are the only way to access something else, in this case a car remote unlock. Sometimes someone has paid actual money for an app, more than the $1 baseline; some music apps are in triple figures.
      - bostand 9y ago
        This is a valid concern, I don't understand why you are getting downvoted.
- MBCook 9y ago
  Not on iOS although it has happened on the Macintosh twice.
  - mkj 9y ago
    I thought they kept doing security updates for 32 bit macs for a little while?
    - MBCook 9y ago
      They did, and they’ve been doing that on iOS. The first 64-bit devices came out for years ago. I was actually thinking of when they left 68K and PowerPC though. I had PowerPC apps that worked through Rosetta for a while and then that was removed when Apple decided it was “time“.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
raverbashing 9y ago
Versions older than the latest macOS get updates all the time, I don't see why this wouldn't be the case here
- 0x0 9y ago
  Historically, this has only happened once on iOS, as far as I know. It'd be great if you were right.
  - raverbashing 9y ago
    Yes, it seems Apple only gives version number updates to the latest version of iOS https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222 Not sure if they can/do update independent components though

by 0x0 9y ago

walterbell 9y ago

Have they previously had an app transition like 32-bit / 64-bit, where some users cannot upgrade?

0x0 9y ago
Nope, so this is going to be interesting to watch. Personally I was hoping that they would offer an optional download of 32bit support libraries to let iOS11 users run important existing legacy apps and access their documents, but they seem to push hard on making developers get in line and update their apps. Which is unhelpful for the cases where the developers no longer have any interest in their apps or even exist (bankrupt, disbanded, in some cases deceased)
- Razengan 9y ago
  If the developer is bankrupt, disbanded or deceased then the app generally can not remain published for longer than a year at most anyway. If the developer does not have any interest in updating their own app, do I as a user care about their apps?
  - kranner 9y ago
    > If the developer does not have any interest in updating their own app, do I as a user care about their apps? A developer's primary interest in their app is to earn an income. A user's interest is in using the app for whatever functionality it provided. There's no symmetry here.
    - Razengan 9y ago
      If the developer doesn’t want to update their apps to fully support my device, then I would look for an alternative. There are almost 0 cases where I would withhold an OS update in order to keep using an specific app, let alone change my device, and I’m completely on Apple’s side for finally killing 32-bit.
- MBCook 9y ago
  What was the point of that be? The apps aren’t going to be updated if they haven’t in the last four years. Keeping all that stuff around is also support burden for Apple. If they only supported it on the 7 and below then it might be confusing to users why some people get to use older apps and others don’t. On the other hand if they wanted to support it on the 8 and X then they would have to have an entire processor emulator that would only exist to support apps that hadn’t been updated in years. Don’t forget that Apple keeps tons of usage statistics from people who are willing to give them. Chances are they know pretty exactly what percent of people use 32 bit apps with any regularity and how much total time to use them for. If they were willing to make these decisions my guess is those numbers are very low. People here on HN are concerned about it and there have been some articles on websites about it but I’m willing to bet that this whole thing is almost a non-issue.
- scarface74 9y ago
  What legacy apps worth keeping “documents” for - I’m assuming non game apps — would be worth supporting? The chances are even if they did provide support for 32 bit abandoned apps, they would break sooner or later with a future OS upgrade. Besides are you planning on keeping the same IOS device forever? The newest processors are 64 bit only. I doubt that Apple will ever release a new device that will support 32 bit devices - except for maybe a new iPod Touch or iPhone SE.
- kevinchen 9y ago
  It's not just a matter of the space on disk to hold 32-bit libraries. They must also be loaded into memory if there are 32-bit processes running. This degrades performance system-wide, not just for the abandonware apps.
  - 0x0 9y ago
    What good is RAM for if not running the applications a user needs to run? If the user is not currently running a 32bit app, drop the libraries from RAM. That is such a non-argument. The amount of space and time needed to load and unload 32bit support libraries is probably 1% of the space and time used every time a user loads a game, or the facebook app, for example.
    - coldtea 9y ago
      >What good is RAM for if not running the applications a user needs to run? What good is degraded performance because some BS game/app who on top of it is abandoned from its developer for years, and it will stop working anyway sooner or later, needs 32-bit mode? Especially when you can find 200 replacement that work fine in 64-bit and are upgraded regularly.
      - 0x0 9y ago
        Where do I find 200 replacement apps for a car unlocking app? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15302231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15302231
        tinus_hn 9y ago
        If your car can only be unlocked by your phone you made a mistake when buying it. Just like if it features proprietary chargers. These things just don't last.
        0x0 9y ago
        I see. Is buying an iphone or an ipad a mistake as well? They require proprietary lightning cables to charge.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Which is unhelpful for the cases where the developers no longer have any interest in their apps or even exist (bankrupt, disbanded, in some cases deceased) If they are "bankrupt, disbanded, in some cases deceased" then maybe insisting on using those apps are not the best course for the user either...
  - pjc50 9y ago
    As I commented last time on the subject: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15285252 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15285252 Sometimes the apps are the only way to access something else, in this case a car remote unlock. Sometimes someone has paid actual money for an app, more than the $1 baseline; some music apps are in triple figures.
    - bostand 9y ago
      This is a valid concern, I don't understand why you are getting downvoted.
MBCook 9y ago
Not on iOS although it has happened on the Macintosh twice.
- mkj 9y ago
  I thought they kept doing security updates for 32 bit macs for a little while?
  - MBCook 9y ago
    They did, and they’ve been doing that on iOS. The first 64-bit devices came out for years ago. I was actually thinking of when they left 68K and PowerPC though. I had PowerPC apps that worked through Rosetta for a while and then that was removed when Apple decided it was “time“.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

raverbashing 9y ago

Versions older than the latest macOS get updates all the time, I don't see why this wouldn't be the case here

0x0 9y ago
Historically, this has only happened once on iOS, as far as I know. It'd be great if you were right.
- raverbashing 9y ago
  Yes, it seems Apple only gives version number updates to the latest version of iOS https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222 Not sure if they can/do update independent components though