4 ms·

Ubuntu, a free, open source OS, maintains and backports security patches for n-2, n-1, and n LTS releases. LineageOS, a free, volunteer-run open source mobile

Ubuntu, a free, open source OS, maintains and backports security patches for n-2, n-1, and n LTS releases. LineageOS, a free, volunteer-run open source mobile OS, maintains and backports security patches for n-2, n-1, and n Android versions for phones. Red Hat, the maker of RHEL, a paid, open-source OS — and its free, open-source duplicate CentOS — maintains and backports security patches for 10 years. Microsoft Windows 10, a paid, closed-source OS pushed aggressively by Microsoft to the point of being sued, bundles feature and security updates on users like every real-world installation is for beta-testing. The LTSB branch is not available/accessible to individual users, and it looks like that will also start bundling feature updates with security updates. Apple's iOS, a paid, closed-source, locked-to-hardware OS that supports devices sold in the past three years bundles feature and security updates and aggressively pushes updates on people's devices. There is no LTS branch of iOS.

Operyl 9y ago
I'd argue that these operating systems are much, much simpler than the entire stack that is iOS and its built in applications and services.
- pritambaral 9y ago
  I strongly disagree — not that that would be sufficient excuse. It's not like the kernel and drivers are spread across disparate layers of the iOS stack. It's not like iOS doesn't have libraries and system services and thus has to duplicate code across disparate layers of the iOS stack. It's not like Apple can't or doesn't have special code accessible only to Apple's apps and iOS internals. As of right now, there are only a handful of hardware configurations iOS has to support, and a single software configuration. Compared to the tens of different hardware and software configurations LineageOS has to support, or the hundreds of different hardware and software configurations Ubuntu and Red Hat have to support, or the thousands of different configurations Microsoft has to support, Apple's job here is a lot easier.
- sametmax 9y ago
  Given that mac oses have only to support their hardware and that they limit what the user can do, not, not at all. The gnu/linux stack is richer and more complex.
gehsty 9y ago
I think this is a case of Apple applying the logic that 95% (more likely 99.99%) of users are better off not having to make the decision of what version of their os they should they install. Compared to other companies Apple does an amazing job of supporting older hardware. I feel like it’s a double edged sword, if Apple devices didn’t get updates people would complain, Apple updates older devices and people complain. I think the route they have chosen is the best for most normal none techie consumers.

Operyl 9y ago

I'd argue that these operating systems are much, much simpler than the entire stack that is iOS and its built in applications and services.

pritambaral 9y ago
I strongly disagree — not that that would be sufficient excuse. It's not like the kernel and drivers are spread across disparate layers of the iOS stack. It's not like iOS doesn't have libraries and system services and thus has to duplicate code across disparate layers of the iOS stack. It's not like Apple can't or doesn't have special code accessible only to Apple's apps and iOS internals. As of right now, there are only a handful of hardware configurations iOS has to support, and a single software configuration. Compared to the tens of different hardware and software configurations LineageOS has to support, or the hundreds of different hardware and software configurations Ubuntu and Red Hat have to support, or the thousands of different configurations Microsoft has to support, Apple's job here is a lot easier.
sametmax 9y ago
Given that mac oses have only to support their hardware and that they limit what the user can do, not, not at all. The gnu/linux stack is richer and more complex.

gehsty 9y ago

I think this is a case of Apple applying the logic that 95% (more likely 99.99%) of users are better off not having to make the decision of what version of their os they should they install. Compared to other companies Apple does an amazing job of supporting older hardware. I feel like it’s a double edged sword, if Apple devices didn’t get updates people would complain, Apple updates older devices and people complain. I think the route they have chosen is the best for most normal none techie consumers.