Apple Faces User Backlash After Dropping Support for iPhone 7 From iOS 16

[AlexMac89]

No, obviously not.

But I bet you if Tesla released some sort of major new feature and stated that only cars manufactured in 2020 or later would receive it, they would receive a ton of complaints.

This is the worst example ever. Tesla DOES do this on a regular basis in a variety of ways, and it drives people crazy. You can have “ordered” a vehicle, had months of delays to ship, to find out random mid cycle upgrades removed things like passenger lumbar support and other random things by the time yours was built. The many different versions of hardware that power “self driving” run different levels of software. And they aren’t all upgradable to the same level.

New technology marches forward. For how long are you supposed to support old devices, and how much in resources should you have to spend to pare back software that doesn’t run well on older devices? Removing features and scaling back overhead for older devices isn’t just a flick of a switch.

 

[lartola]

Apple could vary the OS update guarantee by phone model if they want to e.g., 4 or 5 years for some (like the SE) and longer for others. All I was suggesting is that they put it in writing, similar to what other companies do, and similar to how warranties are done. It could avoid, or at least reduce, backlash regarding ending OS support earlier than some may have expected. It's really going to be most relevant to the resale market anyway as most new iPhone buyers sell/trade their phone before 5 years.

We can summarize it in one word: transparency. If they explained their decisions they wouldn’t face as much backlash. Most of it is because no one knows why they do what they do due to their excessive secrecy.

 

[kc9hzn]

Well Apple didn't release iOS13 for the 6+, due to it having less than 2GB of RAM...but iOS13 introduced features (like Dark Mode, Custom Fonts & new Emojis-to name a few) that don't consume more RAM and could have worked on the 6+. I understand that Apple has to draw the line somewhere on when to give up on certain hardware. I'm fine with that.

I see what you’re saying, I think, and you’re not arguing that Apple should keep on flogging dead horses. I’d just suggest that, while these features may not strictly require more RAM, maintaining support for the hardware with less than the cutoff of RAM requires significant effort almost as much as backporting the features to the previous iOS release would (which some people here seem to be advocating for).

Really, though, it’s my impression that it’s a fairly small, but really LOUD, minority that are the main ones complaining. And some of it is people using this thread and the iPhone 7 to complain about the Macs Ventura drops support for who really don’t actually care about the iPhone 7 losing support but use it as a tool for bashing Apple for dropping Macs they consider pretty recent. (Mind you, Apple dropped quite a few Macs with Lion [anything without a 64 bit Intel processor] and then with Mountain Lion [anything that couldn’t boot into k64]. Some of those Macs were at least a year or two newer than 2016 Macs are today. I should know, I had a five year old MacBook at the time that Mountain Lion dropped.)

 

[lartola]

New technology marches forward. For how long are you supposed to support old devices, and how much in resources should you have to spend to pare back software that doesn’t run well on older devices? Removing features and scaling back overhead for older devices isn’t just a flick of a switch.

They could be more transparent and explain their reasoning. We’re not stupid, we can understand if they explain. But no, they have to be secretive and what they do is just because they say so. Authoritary and secretive they are. Too much.

 

[darngooddesign]

They could be more transparent and explain their reasoning. We’re not stupid, we can understand if they explain. But no, they have to be secretive and what they do is just because they say so. Authoritary and secretive they are. Too much.

Nah, people will still act like they were targeted by a nefarious plot.

In fact, if Apple said "we guarantee software updates for five years" people would just shout, "IT'S PROOF OF PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE!"

There is nothing Apple can do that wont generate backlash.

 

[kc9hzn]

Apple could vary the OS update guarantee by phone model if they want to e.g., 4 or 5 years for some (like the SE) and longer for others. All I was suggesting is that they put it in writing, similar to what other companies do, and similar to how warranties are done. It could avoid, or at least reduce, backlash regarding ending OS support earlier than some may have expected. It's really going to be most relevant to the resale market anyway as most new iPhone buyers sell/trade their phone before 5 years.

I think I see where you’re coming from. I do have to say, though, if you’re buying on the second hand market, you have to know, to some extent, that the device you’re buying is going to have a shorter support life. I knew that when I bought my iPhone 5s and iPhone 6s in the resell market. I had a bit of a guess as to how long the phones would be supported for (though, in the case of the 6s, Apple supported it for far longer than I would have expected them to, at least a year or two, so I would have been thrown by that). And you could probably argue that Apple owes less to the second hand market than they do to the first sell market, especially when you consider that Apple today puts out phones at most price points that have the latest processor hardware and should retain support for as long as the flagship phone does. Is there an ewaste argument for buying second hand? Of course. But is there a price argument? There probably is, but it’s considerably weaker than it used to be.

 

[bubbahotep68]

Again, while frustrating, the inability to upgrade to iOS 16 does not mean your iPhone 7 will stop powering on and be useless when iOS 16 launches. It is still a great phone with great functionality and a great OS.

 

[AlexMac89]

They could be more transparent and explain their reasoning. We’re not stupid, we can understand if they explain. But no, they have to be secretive and what they do is just because they say so. Authoritary and secretive they are. Too much.

I’ve seen this mentioned several times. And someone else said it best. The entitlement, especially around technology, is staggering.

a) what entitles you to an explanation? I know this is a tech forum, but this idea that a company owes you an explanation for every move it makes it laughable.

b) “authoritary (which I’m assuming you meant “authoritarian”) and secretive they are” Ok, so we have fallen back on buzz words and FUD.

A company does not have to, nor should, report the reasoning behind every decision they make. Those on twitter being loud and “demanding answers” should absolutely not get what they want. Let’s further teach loudmouth whiners if they scream loud enough, companies will spend time and money providing data the customer is not even entitled to.

 

[haiggart]

I understand scrapping the 6s but the 7 is still a very capable phone.

Just like last year, when they scrapped the 5s and 6 at the same time?

 

[kc9hzn]

a) what entitles you to an explanation? I know this is a tech forum, but this idea that a company owes you an explanation for every move it makes it laughable.

And, of course, I’ve seen it plenty of times when a company or individual does give an explanation where people say “nu-uh, [this other, more nefarious] thing is the real reason” or “nu-uh, you could totally [do X on Y hardware, usually without evidence]”.

 

[lartola]

a) what entitles you to an explanation?

That I’m a paying customer. I pay for their products, I pay for their services, they live out of my money. Yet I have to let them treat me like an idiot and accept that things are as they are just because they say so? no way

 

[lartola]

And, of course, I’ve seen it plenty of times when a company or individual does give an explanation where people say “nu-uh, [this other, more nefarious] thing is the real reason” or “nu-uh, you could totally [do X on Y hardware, usually without evidence]”.

Still it’s better to explain than not to. Secrecy leaves a lot more room for abuse.

 

[haiggart]

Android isn’t exactly a high bar comparison. If Apple actually cares about sustainability they should be supporting older hardware.

You mean, the iPhone 7 hasn't had received continuously improved software for 6 years, and will just stop working when iOS 16 is launched?

 

[jav6454]

Nah, people will still act like they were targeted by a nefarious plot.

In fact, if Apple said "we guarantee software updates for five years" people would just shout, "IT'S PROOF OF PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE!"

There is nothing Apple can do that wont generate backlash.

People know their devices will be obsolete eventually. Why do you think there is no backlash on the 6S? It was bound to happen. But the 7 is a year too early. It's processor is still powerful enough to cycle thru iOS 16's features. Perhaps not the main ones, but some of the supplementary ones.

 

[bushman4]

Battery Life on 7 wasn’t great and what ever would work on iOS16 would make it worse. That might Be the reason

 

[darngooddesign]

People know their devices will be obsolete eventually. Why do you think there is no backlash on the 6S? It was bound to happen. But the 7 is a year too early. It's processor is still powerful enough to cycle thru iOS 16's features. Perhaps not the main ones, but some of the supplementary ones.

There is an incorrect perception that cut off is done by number of years, when in reality its due to whether the iPhone has the correct hardware to support OS features, and the 7 doesn't have the Neural Engine processor required to support 16's lock screen changes. Should Apple intentionally gimp their OS just to support a six year old phone?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Why would anyone buy a 2 year old phone, new?

You mean like buying a new MacBook Air M1 right now?

 

[BittenAnkles]

It’s weird to see hundreds of comments from consumers telling other consumers they should be happy their phone got even ~4+ years of support and take what they were given, rather than supporting the idea that maybe it’s time to start thinking about longer support windows.

Apple is the industry leader, sure. But let’s push for 10+ year support windows. Obsoleting perfectly good hardware isn’t good for anyone in the long run, even if it makes business sense right now.

Frankly, this matters even more on the Mac side where some of the Intel hardware being obsoleted this year is not that old at all.

For the millionth time in this thread, no one is obsoleting anything. The phone will still run iOS 15 with no issue for the foreseeable future. It will probably get security updates as well.

I would say Apply does have a nearly 10-year support window for a lot of products. That doesn't mean they get mainline software updates and all the latest features, but the machines/devices are supported. Security updates will continue for a while and you can get hardware service for a long time to come. You can get a screen replacement for an a iPhone 5c in to an Apple store today! I got a hard drive repair on a 2013 iMac earlier this year. Narrowly defining "support" as getting the latest software update is short-sighted.

 

[kc9hzn]

People know their devices will be obsolete eventually. Why do you think there is no backlash on the 6S? It was bound to happen. But the 7 is a year too early. It's processor is still powerful enough to cycle thru iOS 16's features. Perhaps not the main ones, but some of the supplementary ones.

Actually, the norm is only to get three to four major updates post release, and the iPhone 7 got 5. The iPhone 6s actually managed to get 6, which meant it had the longest supported life of any iPhone.

Edit: Granted, the list is a little skewed based on how quickly Apple killed early iPhone releases (two or three years post release), and I haven’t calculated the iPad’s or iPod touch’s lifespans. But it seems like the iPhone 6s had an unusually long life.

 

[Musocat]

Jeez, it's not like their iPhone 7s will suddenly stop working fercryinoutloud.

 

[imola.zhp]

Planned Obsolescence 101

 

[turbineseaplane]

I suspect they dropped support because of the headline feature (new Lock Screen) probably needing the neural processor from the A11 and newer chips (to get that blurred background right)

How about just "don't offer that" on the devices that can't do it?

I personally don't give a single toss about some silly "intelligent blurred background"... the amount of time they even spent talking about that shows me how very very very little they even had to offer this year.

That's a horrendous reason to knock out a whole set of otherwise totally usable devices

 

[lartola]

There is nothing Apple can do that wont generate backlash.

Not entirely true. People aren’t stupid. Look, no one is compaining about the iphone 6s not getting iOS 16. Just about the iphone 7 because Apple did it a tad too early; if they gave a good explanation it might even kill the backlash.

 

[darngooddesign]

Whoever bought an iPhone 7 in 2019 bought a newly made three year old phone.

 

[AlexMac89]

That I’m a paying customer. I pay for their products, I pay for their services, they live out of my money. Yet I have to let them treat me like an idiot and accept that things are as they are just because they say so? no way

Did you not receive the product you paid for? Are the services that they have provided (for money) not as advertised? If you are just unsatisfied with what they provide, can you not cancel?

You are being “treated as an idiot” because Apple has a vision and direction for their ecosystem (that they don’t always publicly share) and you have willingly chosen to purchase said items? Maybe spend your money elsewhere?

Sounds like you and your expectations for a company with a known history of secrecy and unwillingness to divulge more than required, are the issue. The world is not going to bend around you and your singular (or even collective) opinion(s).