Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iOS 6.1.2 to Address Exchange and Passcode Bugs Reportedly Coming Early Next Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well that was just a design flaw so with that they had to know and just didn't care. I honestly think they are just getting lazy and arrogant that from how dominate and controlling of the market they used to be and how other options are out there that they need to reevaluate that mentality.
----------
Well when you add a larger screen and lte but only increase the battery slightly what else do you expect? hopefully apple will quit trying to make the phone paper thin and put a larger battery in so it lasts like the iphones of old that used to have great battery life.
----------
I think unless there are some more serious bugs with 6.1.1 any other updates would just be more minor 6.x.x updates or just wait until IOS 7.
I actually have fantastic battery life, espcially on LTE, it lasts longer on LTE then my old Galaxy S3. I get about 8 hours on wifi straight usage brightness on 75%
iOS 6.1.2 to Address Exchange and Passcode Bugs Reportedly Coming Early Next Week
It's a good thing they're working on this, if there are bugs coming early next week...
It's a good thing they're working on this, if there are bugs coming early next week...
Many people in this forum have very good battery life on their iPhone 5. What are you talking about?
That BS explanation would be great if you live in the same vacuum Apple executives live in.
Unfortunately, we live out here. In the real world.
There are 4" phones that last much longer than an iphone 5 with Android. And 4 inches is still a very small screen.
Not to mention the bigger screens from Samsung that dwarf the iphone and the battery lasts more than twice as long.
Then you'll say the phones are bigger so the batteries are bigger. But even if apple came out with a 5" phone, we will be back right here with people complaining that the battery life sucks.
----------
My wife's sister just bought one. I think she charges it 3 times a day. All her and her friends talk about is ways to save battery. They had a theory that closing all the apps running all the time will significantly increase battery life, so you see all of them closing apps all day like maniacs, but they still have to charge it several times a day.
Maybe you're on WiFi all day or don't do much browsing and data intensive work, but iphone sucks on battery life.
There are guys with 4" Androids that go for days on 1 charge.
Last edited:
Perhaps the bigger question about the Exchange bug, is what changed between versions? One way you get to a stable Application is by making good use of modular code, and having a robust API structure, internally and externally.
This exchange bug appears to be in the core calendar application, specifically when handling calendar meeting requests and updates (something that has never really worked well, but lets not get started on that with Apple and Exchange). What did they really need to change about this functionality between iOS 5 and 6? Communications should logically be handled by a different module, display as well. I can't think of a very good reason they would need to change anything about the handling of this if it was working from the prior release. That doesn't mean they didn't need to.
These bugs just make me question how Apple is actually designing this system. Most mature software is a fusion of very old code - stable and tested that has been there since the beginning of the Application (or even from something else!) - and new code and new modules that either completely replaced most interface and logic functions. If iOS is to be considered stable and mature (and at version 6 I should hope it's approaching that), then bugs like this make me wonder just what they are changing and how well they modularized various functions in the first place. I have a hard time thinking that their exchange calendaring code has changed that much since, what, iOS4?
Perhaps it's time for Apple to make all of if's "built in" apps, actual apps, or at least treat them as such. At the very least it would force them to creat a standard API interface - even if it wasn't exposed for other developers - as well as enable them to issue updates only for the apps in question.
This exchange bug appears to be in the core calendar application, specifically when handling calendar meeting requests and updates (something that has never really worked well, but lets not get started on that with Apple and Exchange). What did they really need to change about this functionality between iOS 5 and 6? Communications should logically be handled by a different module, display as well. I can't think of a very good reason they would need to change anything about the handling of this if it was working from the prior release. That doesn't mean they didn't need to.
These bugs just make me question how Apple is actually designing this system. Most mature software is a fusion of very old code - stable and tested that has been there since the beginning of the Application (or even from something else!) - and new code and new modules that either completely replaced most interface and logic functions. If iOS is to be considered stable and mature (and at version 6 I should hope it's approaching that), then bugs like this make me wonder just what they are changing and how well they modularized various functions in the first place. I have a hard time thinking that their exchange calendaring code has changed that much since, what, iOS4?
Perhaps it's time for Apple to make all of if's "built in" apps, actual apps, or at least treat them as such. At the very least it would force them to creat a standard API interface - even if it wasn't exposed for other developers - as well as enable them to issue updates only for the apps in question.
I'm on the iOS 6.1.1 beta 1. So I guess when the new beta is released it's going to be called iOS 6.1.3?
You completely missed my point. Go back and read my comment again. You're not going to have great battery life when you only uped the battery by a few mah compared to your other phones that did not include lte connectivity and a larger screen. I never said 4" was a large screen. And the only android device I had that lasted longer than the iphone was the razr maxx which had a huge battery in it. People aren't lasting all day with any phone other than maybe the maxx or note android devices because they have a huge battery in it. And I am a pretty heavy user and my battery lasts all day on my iphone 5. It never did that with my s3, so either 1. your sister really doesn't have an iphone or 2. you are just over exxagerating about needing to charge it multiple times.
Last edited:
they should already be fixing these problems....but instead it's all talk because they didn't really fix many long term problems.
From an engineering perspective, I am astounded that the lock screen user space application does not panic the kernel if it terminates with an exception.
Had they designed it architecturally correctly, with the presence of this very bug, it would have been a curious "my phone resets when i do this" issue and not one with the obvious security implications of the phone unlocking itself...
Had they designed it architecturally correctly, with the presence of this very bug, it would have been a curious "my phone resets when i do this" issue and not one with the obvious security implications of the phone unlocking itself...
Yes, definitely. You make sure that you have the concept of critical user space processes implemented and then consider the abnormal termination of one as being an unforeseen and unexpected critical compromise of the environment and force a reboot.
Not quick enough. I spent HOURS troubleshooting a mailbox that was FULL of duplicated meetings last week. Turns out he had actually hit the 30GB quota on his dumpster. Microsoft had to step in and bump the quota and complete the removal of the remaining 60,000 meetings. (We're on Office 365 so some things we don't have the ability to do a lot of actions in the managed environment).
Mine does not. It shoots up to max volume- the opposite behavior it use have before iOS 6.
I see people complaining over and over (which is perfectly ok) yet they are the very same people here in the product launch days.. If you guys hate iOS and the battery life and the issues related to iDevices that much, why do you keep buying them?
I think I just figured out Apple's new strategy for fighting jailbreaks
1) Find out that iOS has a jailbreak hole, with a jailbreak likely to come out when you release the next version of iOS.
2) Introduce some annoying, but not show-stopper bugs on purpose.
3) Release bugged version of iOS (6.1)
4) Jailbreak comes out. Analyze jailbreak, find the holes.
5) Patch the holes and fix the annoying bugs (6.1.2)
Make the jailbroken OS version suck so people won't want to stay on it. Clever!
1) Find out that iOS has a jailbreak hole, with a jailbreak likely to come out when you release the next version of iOS.
2) Introduce some annoying, but not show-stopper bugs on purpose.
3) Release bugged version of iOS (6.1)
4) Jailbreak comes out. Analyze jailbreak, find the holes.
5) Patch the holes and fix the annoying bugs (6.1.2)
Make the jailbroken OS version suck so people won't want to stay on it. Clever!
Except it doesn't seem like they've been doing that at all. 6.1.1 and now 6.1.2 that has just been released both appear to leave the jailbreak exploits (as well as even some other publicized and acknowledged ones) alone.
I guess I was wrong! I'm glad, too; it's nice to see Apple isn't playing these games.
I think having to touch or update any OS component is a HUGE DEAL in the development process, requiring tons of unit testing and painful checking for regressions. Since the jailbreak hole is not remotely exploitable and doesn't really pose a threat unless you want to jailbreak your own device, it might not be high on Apple's priority list.
I do expect it to go away soon, though, either because they fix the hole, or the OS architecture changes enough to break it. This JB depends on a lot of things going wrong (right?) together in order to work.