51–60 of 82 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure it has zero to do with 64-bit processors. iOS7 is still going to be running on old 32-bit chips.
Yes, which is precisely why you need 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries. Problem is that the current SDK can only generate 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries for iOS7 alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's less that and more that there is now a significant-enough installed base that can't upgrade to the latest OS. There's now a lot of older iPhones and iPods Touch out there that will never get 7. Knowing that, developers will become increasingly reluctant to leave those customers behind -- and so will keep building for 6 and earlier, and won't use the new 7-only stuff. This way, devs can immediately go to 7, knowi…
It's probably significant that the 3GS is not getting iOS 7. The original iPhone was fairly underpowered, and the iPhone 3G changed essentially nothing besides the case and the addition of 3G cellular data. The 3GS was the first real upgrade, the first iPhone with a decent camera, a decent amount of RAM, and a decent CPU. It ended up as the longest-lived iPhone model yet, starting out as the high-end model in 2009, t…
Anecdotally, I rarely see a 3GS any more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably significant that the 3GS is not getting iOS 7. The original iPhone was fairly underpowered, and the iPhone 3G changed essentially nothing besides the case and the addition of 3G cellular data. The 3GS was the first real upgrade, the first iPhone with a decent camera, a decent amount of RAM, and a decent CPU. It ended up as the longest-lived iPhone model yet, starting out as the high-end model in 2009, t…
I'd say it's more likely to be iPod touches - only the newer touches are getting ios 7 and there's no contracts (and hence no "cheap" upgrades). Plus It's also quite likely to belong to a child. Anecdotally, I rarely see a 3GS any more.
It's a wonderful half-measure, but also serves to highlight a problem with cloud-based installs that I'm not optimistic will ever go away. When software was distributed physically, the consumer always had the freedom to use any version of an application they liked. Want to run a lightweight version of Word because you don't need all the latest features, or maybe you just hate the new UI? No problem. Did you like some…
What if your backend APIs have changed and you never expected to support that older version? I can see a lot of the older apps not working at all in that case.
You'd need to handle it in either case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure it has zero to do with 64-bit processors. iOS7 is still going to be running on old 32-bit chips.
Yes, which is precisely why you need 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries. Problem is that the current SDK can only generate 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries for iOS7 alone.
I don't recall OSX refusing to run 32-bit binaries when it allowed 64bit computing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, which is precisely why you need 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries. Problem is that the current SDK can only generate 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries for iOS7 alone.
Yes, which is precisely why you need 64-bit/32-bit fat binaries. I don't recall OSX refusing to run 32-bit binaries when it allowed 64bit computing.
year-2024 Banana statement to its customers: "As a sign of the commitment of the Banana Inc. to its customers freedom in a uOS App Store near you, the uOS no longer controls where are you going, and gives you complete permission to go to the grocery store or to play with your kids.. talk badly or curse Banana Inc. is expressely forbiden of course, as usual, and you will receive an instant eletro-shock (from the spy a…
this news to be on the front page of HN like if it was a good thing, its just ludicrous..
if you have a pocket relation with apple thats understandable and forgivable.. but the ones that accept this kind of policies by only one company, because they are attached to the "brand" in somehow? its beyond sanity
There are bad implications to us all, if this model make its way into others companies and take over our culture, you could even say bye-bye to your beloved startup culture or the ability to launch the technologies that eventually will make a good thing to us all, and have people using it..
oh, they put money on your pocket? but whats is the real price that everybody else will have to pay for it?
you consume it? then its like that thing you like and make you happy, lets say a chocolate.. but or do employ slave labours, or have bad environment implications.. if you have conscious, you will always fell bad to feel good about it..
It's a wonderful half-measure, but also serves to highlight a problem with cloud-based installs that I'm not optimistic will ever go away. When software was distributed physically, the consumer always had the freedom to use any version of an application they liked. Want to run a lightweight version of Word because you don't need all the latest features, or maybe you just hate the new UI? No problem. Did you like some…
Did somebody say Internet Explorer 6?
Now, being serious, I agree that the customers should be the ones to decide, BUT they must be conscious of the implications (lack of support, security issues, bugs that got fixed in a recent version, etc.).
The next step is allow us to do maintenance upgrades to legacy versions. In many situations it is easier to maintain a legacy app, with a separate iOS7 code base. Unfortunately there is no way to do this without creating duplicate apps in the store. The alternative is a single code base that is very difficult to reason about the behavior due to tons of feature/version checking.
Just to highlight the problem... i can't download a game on an iphone from [Adult Swim] because it requires a front facing camera!
I've been playing the same game on the new ipad with the front facing camera for 2 months. Never found anything that use the camera. go figure.
The next step is allow us to do maintenance upgrades to legacy versions. In many situations it is easier to maintain a legacy app, with a separate iOS7 code base. Unfortunately there is no way to do this without creating duplicate apps in the store. The alternative is a single code base that is very difficult to reason about the behavior due to tons of feature/version checking.
For that the only solution is what already happens in android. You see lots of apps that have 20 versions for each device/OS version. Just to highlight the problem... i can't download a game on an iphone from [Adult Swim] because it requires a front facing camera! I've been playing the same game on the new ipad with the front facing camera for 2 months. Never found anything that use the camera. go figure.