Does Apple force devs to support old hardware?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Piggie, Jan 2, 2011.

  1. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #1
    Or is this totally up to the developer?

    When Apple up the spec on their hardware, do they request that the app will still run ok on the previous models?

    For example, say the current iPad has 256MB RAM, and you write a game.

    Are you allowed to use the full 512MB of RAM and state that this is required for your game to run?

    I guess I'm worried that software will be held back for fear of upsetting people with previous gen hardware.

    Personally when a new model is launched I want Dev's to go all out to use every part of the new hardware that available to them, and not in any way restrict a new title from being as good as it can be so that it still runs on old hardware.
     
  2. Uchiha1911 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    #2
    This is completely up to the developer. Not doing so, however, brings forth less revenue for the developer.
     
  3. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #3
    Developers can specify which hardware and iOS versions an app needs to run. If your device doesn't meet the requirements, the app won't install.
     
  4. el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #4
    I believe I have seen some games that are 3GS plus required, not to mention some are iOS 4 which isn't supported in the earlier models. I suspect developers will implement the same thing they do in PC games, quality settings. Those that are iOS 4 are only as such because it uses iOS 4 features, as iOS gets more spit and polish several versions will run the same software (think Windows 2000/XP, Vista/7, the latest versions of OSX, mature OSes tend to be legacy supporting for two or three major releases.), so then, you just select the quality or hardware settings that make it run best on your device. Apple doesn't require it, but as someone said not supporting older hardware is a revenue killer, but so is not taking advantage of newer hardware. The only way to do both is to build both into one package.

    -John
     
  5. ssdeg7 macrumors 6502a

    ssdeg7

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    #5
    It's give and take, if they support more devices then more revenue for them, if not then they'll have to stick with the available market.

    Nevertheless some apps like Angry Birds take advantage of iOS 4.0 for those who have it but those on iOS 3.0 can still use it and the game is the same except for some small changes.
     
  6. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #6
    Personally, and this is just a very person thing. I hate backwards compatibility.

    On most devices, it generally holds software back, and it's not till you make a totally new device that you have programmers writing fully for the new spec.

    I know that's not the done thing these days though.

    I'm just wondering re my original question about the app store.

    At the moment, you have iPhone or iPad apps and that's it.

    Are you going to have iPhone, iPad1, iPad2, iPad3 areas?

    What if you don't read the fine print and buy an iPad3 game for your iPad1 ?
     
  7. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #7
    Really? Not everyone can afford the latest hw revision. Do you buy the latest mbp at each revision? latest iphones? I mean you have to have some support for recent hw or you will drive customers to other platforms:cool:
     
  8. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #8
    No. You don't have iPhone original, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 areas.

    Should've read the description I suppose. It happens to people all the time.
     
  9. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #9
    It's because I come from the time when you had the C64, the Atari, the Amiga, the ST, the MSX, the Acorn Archimedes etc etc.

    Every new generation of hardware was the biggest leap that technology could manage at the time, and things were run by the tech guys who pushed technical limits to the extreme and not managers that pushed business plans to maximise profits.

    Some things, what I would call utilities/applications I would expect could run on modest MK1 hardware as they have light needs for power. Games on the other hand generally uses every tiny bit of power that that's possible to squeeze out of any device.

    The best games actually force the hardware forward.
     
  10. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #10
    And only die-hard hobbyists bought and used those computers!
     
  11. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #11
    The Vic20, C64, Atari, Amiga, ST, Acorn, MSX etc etc were only bought by die hard enthusiasts?

    Well give me a die hard enthusiast any time then. Without those we'd have nothing.
     
  12. jdusoccer12 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    #12
    If you go on the App Store on the device I don't think it will show games that your device doesn't support because I have tried to find games on my 1st Gen iPod Touch that I had on my iPhone 4 and they were no where to be found.
     
  13. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #13
    Thanks for that info, whilst a little confusing if you don't know why you can't find it, it's good to know it's hard for you to buy something that won't work, or will work very badly on your older equipment.
     
  14. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #14
    True, hard-core enthusiasts advance tech by pushing them to the limits. But not everyone is going to be a tech nerd, and iOS devices are targeted to the general user. If you can't accept that, you're just going to frustrate yourself.
     
  15. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #15
    Yeah, but the people who build them (like the 360 and PS3) can push the hardware as hard as they like.

    It does not mean the users have to be tech nerds to enjoy what the tech nerds have done
     
  16. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #16
    I'm not familiar with the gaming machines, so not sure exactly what you mean by "push hardware as hard as they like." But I do know that iOS devices are supposed to be genral purpose devices, not dedicated gaming consoles. Is it possible that makes a difference in how these platforms are configured hardware-wise, and how developers approach programming for these platforms?
     
  17. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    Cabin by a lake
    #17
    I know, can you believe anyone saying that? Those, plus the TRS-80, Color Computer, etc, were the first mass market computers that even casual consumers bought.

    (The Apple II was way too expensive for most people. That's why computers priced at less than half its cost totally outsold it.)

    This is correct. On both the Apple and Android stores, a device is only shown apps that it can use, assuming the developer set flags correctly.
     
  18. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #18
    Well, I certainly don't know anyone who owned any of the machines mentioned. I remember there was an Apple II computer in my high school's computer lab. But the main computers they used were PETs. I made it through college without owning a computer, I used an electric typewrieter to write my papers. Yes, those computers were the first step toward mass market, but that market size was still tiny compared to what it is today. And I'd think the people who bought them were considerably more tech-savvy than today's average computer consumer.
     
  19. el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #19
    No kidding, find your average Best Buy computer shopper, stick them in front of an Apple ][, or any of the aforementioned systems, and see what happens. Stick the same person in front of a never before seen Mac or even Windows machine, and compare the results. We've come a long way in stability, self-maintenance and user friendliness, and as such it has ushered in an era of personal computing. Just because something has been invented, doesn't mean it's being used! Look at Tablet computing, Microsoft implemented support with Windows XP, but it took the iPad to be widely used. Or how about the Automobile, folks where fartin' around with those things in the mid-to-late 1800's, but it wasn't until the 1920's that folks really had cars, and even then it was one-per-family most of the time, not like today where many many households have a car for every licensed driver.

    Also, no backwards compatibility STOPPED with those machines. Like I said before, it's no longer machine-to-machine but several editions of an OS at a time. I can run modern PC games on both my laptop (2GB of RAM, Dual Core Athlon @1.8GHz, AMD X1250), or my Desktop (AMD Phenom II X4 @ 4GHz, 4GBDDR3, Radeon HD5870). Guess which experience is better! lol. But, the fact remains, that both machines MAGNITUDES away from each other in performance and ability (much more different than say, an iPhone 3G, and 3GS or even a 2G and 4), but they can run the same software. Both run Windows 7, and both can run 95% of Windows Software out right now. Granted, most PC games will require my laptop to have the graphics settings set to minimum, but the fact remains they can be played, and productivity software of course, works just fine. I think we will see the same with the iOS market, as developers struggle to find the best of both worlds to market to ALL device holder. Unlike the $300 iPhone, folks are developing for $500+ devices, especially considering most went for the 32GB, and the 3G is ever increasing in popularity, upgrading isn't going to happen as much. It can't, and WON'T stay in a scenario where old hardware is abandoned every 12 months, NOR will there be long periods of a lack of utilization for the new devices.

    -John
     
  20. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #20
    Perhaps this explains why computing speed is moving forward like a geriatric slug these days.

    Unlike years ago, when you started with a clean piece of paper for your new machine and could make it the bast it could be. Now you can only tweak it a little here and there, but not change it to the extent that the older software won't run.
     
  21. el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #21
    You make a good point, and I see where your coming from, but as I am of average income, I can't really get too excited about the prospect of needing bleeding edge hardware to use the latest software.

    My "sig rig", the rig I built in my signature, can max out almost any PC game title as of late, but there are some it cannot, but I can STILL run those titles on my Laptop, the point I'm trying to make is that software has become universally operatable.

    And, despite my current computer, the one immediately preceding this one was an AMD Athlon XP @ 1.53GHz and 512MB of RAM running Windows 2000 Pro, so you can see how slow I upgrade (this is the first time I have ever bought/built high end hardware), so once again, folks like me wouldn't be part of the developers consumer base if we needed the latest and greatest to run things, I'm not talking max them out, I'm talking run them period.

    I will agree though, 10 years ago you HAD to upgrade your hardware every couple of years, because even BASIC software, like office suites and the OS you use, wouldn't perform on a PC that by today's standards, is pretty new. Now, a 5 year old store-bought PC can run Windows 7 and MS Office 2010, and I'll admit, the PC I built was because Computer Hardware has been an interest of mine and a hobby since I was 6 years old, but I don't get much actual use out of it (Just had to do it once, ya know?), I am a very casual gamer, honestly I didn't Game at all until this PC (when in rome!), and there is not much I can't do on my laptop that I do day to day on this one, despite the fact that this does it faster (but not worth the price difference). So I see where your coming from, but I just can't imagine what PRACTICAL purposes Productivity Software, OSes, etc. could bring that couldn't run on two 2GHz cores, and within 2GB (or easily upgradeable 4GB) of RAM. INTENSE graphical features? Maybe but what does that do?

    On the flip side is gaming, I understand that, but at the same time most hardcore gamers wouldn't call what happens on my laptop gaming, minimum settings and 25FPS that is, but it's still better than nothing. Some titles I would have never bought if they couldn't run on my laptop, that's lost money for the developer!
     
  22. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #22
    What if you don't read the fine print and buy a BlueRay disc for your DVD Player?
     
  23. el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #23
    this.

    It's one thing for a publisher to sneak in some sales by being vague, but to quote one of the fine philosophers of our day, "You can't fix stupid". Nobody should purchase anything without at least reading the description.
     

Share This Page