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.
Apple Says Third-Party Apps Can Take Full Advantage of ProMotion With Plist Entry, Core Animation Bug Fix Coming [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ProMotion being advertised as 120 Hz across the board and not working properly in one family of devices is a major difference. That would be like TrueTone only working at high brightness levels in one device and working all the time in another.
What family of devices doesn’t it work in? It works fine in both, just with different frequency ranges (minimum of 10Hz on iphone and 25hz on ipads), and iphone apps that use non-standard controls have to opt in.
Exactly. That’s why I thought from the beginning that the idea that third party apps wouldn’t be able to fully utilize it on the iPhone wasn’t true.
Ok, according to this logic, apple better remove settings app or at least drastically cut down available options, and promote “apple approved” wifi, Bluetooth, wallpaper, sound, safari setting, Home Screen layout, App Store configurations, hell, even apps that are allowed to be installed. Just turn it into a full blown apple managed device. That would be amazing for everybody and such “complains” would just go away forever.
<snipped presumed hyperbole>
iPhone doesn't require apps to support landscape mode, nor does it require them to support portrait mode. To force apps to do this would break them. Apps have to opt-in to the different display orientations using a configuration key, same as this. Likewise, when apple added HDR support, they gated Cocoa support for HDR behind a configuration key, as it changes the color space math and can lead to issues in some code.
Apps do not necessarily have to be compiled with iPad support. To get iPad support, they need to opt in using a configuration key, same as this.
Doubling the frame rate of animations is likely to break them, or to create additional CPU utilization. Apps have to opt in.
If apple mandated iPad support for apps, maybe they wouldn't have needed to add an opt-in here. But the reality is there are a lot more iPhone apps than iPad apps. Presumably the option wasn't added "for fun", but because a substantial number of popular apps without iPad versions (say, Instagram) had bad behavior on new phones.
This doesn't mean they don't potentially announce a future version will mandate 120Hz on iPhone. But that usually is a timeline of months to require a new build, and often always see some small set of popular apps decide they would rather fall off the store than create and release new builds.
That’s the thing, 120hz still works in 3rd party apps when scrolling so really it’s not a massive deal. You can still feel it
So because they didn’t publish exact details then it’s ok to report things that aren’t true without reaching out to apple for clarification. If you look at the two articles published here they were separated by one article iirc. Bush league.
It referenced a tweet that makes it pretty clear he’s assuming that Apple had a justification for it. In any case, if you release public APIs, like the iOS SDK, it is generally expected that you document them thoroughly and update your documentation as you make changes to avoid confusion. Apple made changes and failed to document them (or release/publicize the updated documentation) until it caused confusion. That is Apple’s fault, not developers’ for being confused as to why their apps weren’t allowed to run at up to 120 Hz refresh rates.
If this wasn’t publicized as quickly and fiercely as it was, lord knows when or if Apple would’ve gotten around to publishing the updated docs. One hand doesn’t seem to know what the other’s doing around there.
You’re full of bleep. I never mentioned developers, I mentioned MacRumors who have the contacts and workforce to fact check before printing bs like they did.
Apples best interest is to have every developer capable of using it, use it. That doesn’t mean they are immune from making a mistake but there was a bug that was in the process of being fixed. Hardly a case of ‘ lord knows how long it would have taken’. Complete nonsense.
This story arose from a developer who was confused about his app being unable to run some animations at up to 120 Hz and speculating about the cause on Twitter. At no point did they print BS; they said that apps were unable to run some animations at up to 120 Hz (objectively true at the time) and that a developer had speculated it was for battery life reasons (also objectively true). The missing detail was that Apple had implemented but not documented a way to bypass that limitation, which is Apple’s own damn fault. I don’t recall whether MacRumors mentioned having reached out to Apple in either story, but they didn’t publish anything false. If nothing else, users were wondering why some animations on their shiny new iPhone were janky compared to others.
If there’s a bug you’re aware of but haven’t fixed yet, you list it as a known issue in public documentation. The issue was, once again, that Apple didn’t release public documentation on time.
Yeah, there was no bug re: 120Hz, so… (and the documentation was already published, it just wasn’t linked from anyplace it was easy to find)
You are being obtuse. I dont care who statred the conversation I was talking about Mac rumors, a d you know it.
There was, and still is, and Apple even acknowledges as much: "There is also a bug that is affecting some animations built using Core Animation that Apple says will be fixed in an upcoming software update."
Hard to say. The thread is from Sep 24; the Wayback Machine has it archived on Sep 25. So either it was already published and virtually no one knew about it, or it wasn't published.
The documentation is also a bit obtuse on what is and what isn't supported. The original question was whether UIView.animateWithDuration supports 120 Hz, and the docs don't really explicitly say one way or another.
There's also a tweet from Sep 14 that links another recent API, which is ostensibly for 120 Hz support but to this day isn't documented ("No overview available.").
So while I continue to think a mountain is made out of a molehill, and the people who think Apple tried to screw someone over or is trying to have the 120 Hz feature all to themselves are bonkers, I also think Apple hasn't so far done a great job documenting this.
I don't know for sure. It might have been fixed in 15.0.1, or maybe it's fixed in the 15.1 betas.
The coreanimstion bug is not limited to 120hz. It causes improper animations at all refresh rates.
MacRumors started these articles based on tweets from a developer and reported on the information available at the time, wise one.
Except when you are solely going by what someone tweets and don't contact apple for a comment then it's not professional to post that nonsense, dumb one.