iOS 10.3 Beta Says 32-Bit Legacy Apps Will Not Work With Future Versions of iOS

[rp2011]

It's VITAL that Apple or any company not get bogged down in legacy. Apple needs to push people along and let go of folks and not carry them on their backs. In the long term Everyone loses.
No one wants to be in a Windows position while the market moved to Android or iOS, or Blackberry or Nokia. You gotta leave the past in the past and keep moving forward.

 

[truthertech]

I have at least two old apps (dating back to iPhone 3G) that contain a ton of archived data (contacts, notes, etc). I use them sporadically now - but I do still use them. So it's going to be a royal pain extracting all that old data and stashing it somewhere safe. And I guess I have to do it now, while the old apps still work.

Guess I need a Data Migration strategy for my phone? Maybe I should hire a consultant?

Apple: It Just Works! (until it doesn't)

Just to understand. You are upset with Apple because they let you know that some time in the near future your ten year old Apps won't run on their newest system????

 

[radus]

It's time to get rid of the old battery draining 32bit apps, it's a good move.

 

[nwcs]

Yeesh, so much manufactured angst in this thread. It's a smart move by Apple and was inevitable.

 

[GreyOS]

I hope Apple give people adequate warning and an option to downgrade iOS, if that's the case.

While I agree with those that say Apple should move forward and people shouldn't expect support for legacy apps forever, this argument only works if users are fully informed and are given an option to stay on a legacy OS that supports their legacy apps.

Given the way that iOS updates are typically thrust upon users, and the update notes don't go into details like this or are easy to skip over, I am wary.

 

[LordVic]

Just to understand. You are upset with Apple because they let you know that some time in the near future your ten year old Apps won't run on their newest system????

The problem is that there's no real technical reason for cutting off 32bit app support as 64bit processors can run 32bit code.

32bit code doesn't automagically make the code inferior. If the application doesn't have any use for the extension sets from 64 bit, why is it forced?

So this user you have responded to has a business use case where cutting 32bit app support completely breaks his business use case. Your answer to him is that it's HIS fault for having this need and that the correct solution should be to replace all his expensive proprietary security hardware because Apple made an arbitrary decision to cut out support for something that they didn't need to cut out support for.

Listen, at the end of the day, it's apple's "right" to do so. But by cutting out support for something Apple has to also deal with the consequence that they may very well alienate and cut off users who have specific use case scenario. They then need to balance if they think losing such a customer is worth the gains of making such a cut.

Believing that Apple's doing the right decision just because it's Apple is disingenuous and very biased. So I question, what exactly is the motive for this change? is it something technical they're trying to accomplish? if so what exactly is it? is it something financial they're trying to accomplish? if so what is it.

It's not as simple as "Apple is doing it so it's the correct thing to do". that's terrible logic (for ANY company).

 

[Arran]

Just to understand. You are upset with Apple because they let you know that some time in the near future your ten year old Apps won't run on their newest system????

I'd happily pay the developer an upgrade fee so it's worth their while (they have bills to pay too. I get it), but I don't think Apple provides a mechanism for me to do that. Do they? I can't remember seeing a simple upgrade fee in the App Store which "refreshes" their app but leaves my data in-situ.

Usually it's a whole new app and a clean slate (data wise).

 

[Lazy]

Crap. I've got a half dozen apps that I still use that haven't been updated since pretty much their initial launch. And I haven't found replacements for.

Ok, I'm curious: what are these apps? There's not a single type of app that I've ever looked for where there weren't several to dozens of choices that were fairly similar.

 

[truthertech]

The problem is that there's no real technical reason for cutting off 32bit app support as 64bit processors can run 32bit code.

32bit code doesn't automagically make the code inferior. If the application doesn't have any use for the extension sets from 64 bit, why is it forced?

So this user you have responded to has a business use case where cutting 32bit app support completely breaks his business use case. Your answer to him is that it's HIS fault for having this need and that the correct solution should be to replace all his expensive proprietary security hardware because Apple made an arbitrary decision to cut out support for something that they didn't need to cut out support for.

Listen, at the end of the day, it's apple's "right" to do so. But by cutting out support for something Apple has to also deal with the consequence that they may very well alienate and cut off users who have specific use case scenario. They then need to balance if they think losing such a customer is worth the gains of making such a cut.

Believing that Apple's doing the right decision just because it's Apple is disingenuous and very biased. So I question, what exactly is the motive for this change? is it something technical they're trying to accomplish? if so what exactly is it? is it something financial they're trying to accomplish? if so what is it.

It's not as simple as "Apple is doing it so it's the correct thing to do". that's terrible logic (for ANY company).

Haven't there been numerous benefits to users as a whole that have been cited on this thread? What about those?

 

[Rafagon]

It is clear, in this case, that a company charging thousands of dollars for a product w/ an accompanying app, is in extreme dereliction of duty, if they can't perform a simple recompile for their customers.
I would assert that either: they likely will, and you've nothing to worry about, or- they're an EXTREMELY unprofessional company, and next time you drop $1,000 on something- research the company.

Which app did you pay $1000 for? Looks like you’ve been had.

Oh, do you mean the iPhone? You’re not suggesting that Apple should “perform a simple recompile for their customers,” are you?

As far as the “accompanying apps," all of the apps that Apple bundled with your iPhone have been updated to 64-bit.

Flappy Bird was not an “accompanying app."

 

[SeaFox]

Looking forward to seeing millions of 32-bit apps disappear from the store because the developers don't see it as worth the cost to update

I play several games that haven't been updated. They're 'worth' it to me.

So... you want the apps removed despite still using some of them?

 

[Rafagon]

At the end of the day, if the application itself has no use for 64bit extensions and doesn't take advantage of anything in the 64bit realm, why is there a requirement to compile and deploy them as 64 bit?

Because it’s 2017.

I don’t know why everybody is so surprised. Apple removed the 3.5mm headphone jack and products with a 3.5mm plug were WAY more entrenched than 32-bit apps.

Apple likes to move forward, and I, for one, applaud their decision to stop supporting 32-bit apps. I shouldn’t pay the price for "32-bit bloat” (great term, BTW, whoever used it earlier in this thread!) when I paid a nice sum for my 64-bit iPhone—not just the one I currently own, but two that I’ve owned in the past.

 

[Scottsoapbox]

If history is any guide, iOS 11 will require an iPhone 5s or newer (i.e. 64-bit).
[doublepost=1485879838][/doublepost]
If they are commercially viable they'll be updated.

Let's be clear these apps are not currently broken on 10.2.1. Apple is just flipping a switch and breaking them. The developer already has my money they don't suffer. I suffer when my apps stop working.

And for what? So there is slightly less legacy code in iOS?

 

[rp2011]

The problem is that there's no real technical reason for cutting off 32bit app support as 64bit processors can run 32bit code.

32bit code doesn't automagically make the code inferior. If the application doesn't have any use for the extension sets from 64 bit, why is it forced?

So this user you have responded to has a business use case where cutting 32bit app support completely breaks his business use case. Your answer to him is that it's HIS fault for having this need and that the correct solution should be to replace all his expensive proprietary security hardware because Apple made an arbitrary decision to cut out support for something that they didn't need to cut out support for.

Listen, at the end of the day, it's apple's "right" to do so. But by cutting out support for something Apple has to also deal with the consequence that they may very well alienate and cut off users who have specific use case scenario. They then need to balance if they think losing such a customer is worth the gains of making such a cut.

Believing that Apple's doing the right decision just because it's Apple is disingenuous and very biased. So I question, what exactly is the motive for this change? is it something technical they're trying to accomplish? if so what exactly is it? is it something financial they're trying to accomplish? if so what is it.

It's not as simple as "Apple is doing it so it's the correct thing to do". that's terrible logic (for ANY company).

Nonsense. We all remember when Apple was lucky enough to have found Next and not be left behind as a footnote in history.
Obviously Apple has (justly) bigger plans for the company than to satiate those stubbornly living in the past while the world keeps moving forward.
If you stay put l, people pass you by.

 

[Rafagon]

If I payed for an app (with the prospect/promise that the payment is per-life) then I don't care about whether it's worth to recompile to you or to the developer. I want to use what I payed for and if Apple wants to hinder that, then please give back my money!

Let's be clear these apps are not currently broken on 10.2.1. Apple is just flipping a switch and breaking them. The developer already has my money they don't suffer. I suffer when my apps stop working.

And for what so there is slightly less legacy code in iOS?

I’m curious—did any of you people crying about this upcoming change buy software a few years back? Did you ever purchase Windows 98? Lotus 1-2-3? Can you use those now, on current-generation hardware? Did you ask Microsoft or Lotus Software for your money back?

Well, technically, you can still use Lotus 1-2-3, but that’s because third parties created DOS emulators, like DOSBox—not because the original companies went out of their way to ensure their apps still work.

Also, Apple is -not- flipping a switch and breaking them. If you keep your current device and your current version of iOS, you can use your 32-bit apps for as long as you like—at least until your iPhone stops working.

 

[LordVic]

Because it’s 2017.

I don’t know why everybody is so surprised. Apple removed the 3.5mm headphone jack and products with a 3.5mm plug were WAY more entrenched than 32-bit apps.

Apple likes to move forward, and I, for one, applaud their decision to stop supporting 32-bit apps. I shouldn’t pay the price for "32-bit bloat” (great term, BTW, whoever used it earlier in this thread!) when I paid a nice sum for my 64-bit iPhone—not just the one I currently own, but two that I’ve owned in the past.

except there's no 32bit bloat.

explain what this means. 32bit programs are smaller. Use less memory. require less resources.

64bit has the potential of bigger programs. Faster programs and programs with access to more resources. 64bit programs are a great thing WHEN the applications requirements require them.

yes, Developers today SHOULD BE compiling with 64bit.

But there's no reason to cut the 32bit support for legacy. and existing apps. and nobody in this thread has been able to answer WHY. other than to repeat the "32bit bloat" and "because the future!"

neither of those answeres from a technical perspective why Apple should drop 32bit support from iOS. I would understand saying "All FUTURE apps must be compiled at 64bit or be rejected". But the legacy existing Apps that some people still use today for specific reasons have no technical reason to be cut off.

 

[Vashetti]

So... you want the apps removed despite still using some of them?

My first post is sarcasm.

 

[LordVic]

I’m curious—did you ever pay for software a few years back? Did you ever purchase Windows 98? Lotus 1-2-3? Can you use those now, on current hardware? Did you ask Microsoft or Lotus Software for your money back?

Yes. Those still function today on modern windows machines. And in places where (for example win98 might not work today) is because of an actual technical limitation regarding it.

The problem I have is artificial limitations put in place by a business rather than an actual technical limitation put in place by physical devices.
[doublepost=1485890583][/doublepost]

Nonsense. We all remember when Apple was lucky enough to have found Next and not be left behind as a footnote in history.
Obviously Apple has (justly) bigger plans for the company than to satiate those stubbornly living in the past while the world keeps moving forward.
If you stay put l, people pass you by.

what a bunch of unadulterated nonsense you have absolutely swallowed.

using current day technologies that are widely used and accepted as norms does not make something "in the past" just because Apple says so.

repeating this line, without technical evidence to why you believe so doesn't make you seem "forward thinking" it does make you seem like an average consumer who is easily swayed by marketing.
[doublepost=1485890699][/doublepost]

Haven't there been numerous benefits to users as a whole that have been cited on this thread? What about those?

There have been numerous benefits of why 64bit applications are better than 32.

There is no doubt on this. I'm not denying that in any way

What I'm saying, is that there's no technical reason to cut off 32bit support.

YES, 64bit applications where 64bit's are needed are beneficial to the end user. Yes, Compiling 32bit applications under 64 bit also has benefit.

NO, cutting off legacy 32bit support for existing applications without a technical reason for it is not beneficial to users.

 

[konqerror]

At the end of the day, if the application itself has no use for 64bit extensions and doesn't take advantage of anything in the 64bit realm, why is there a requirement to compile and deploy them as 64 bit?

No, you don't understand that in x86-64 and ARMv8 a number of architectural changes were made, in particular in both architectures, the number of registers were doubled from their 32 bit versions. This is a major impact on the Intel side since i386 had very few registers to begin with, and that led to a inefficient stack calling convention. In ARMv8, another major impact was the elimination of condition codes, which apparently makes the circuitry more efficient and branch predictors to work much better, so there is a positive power and speed impact.

You are right that there is a memory impact. Linux has developed the x32 ABI for exactly this (memory stays at 32 bit but the rest changes). Except now you need a recompile anyway, and 3 versions of libraries. (For Linux, it makes sense in embedded systems with no user apps, where 100% of the code can be recompiled to x32)

 

[Rafagon]

except there's no 32bit bloat.

explain what this means. 32bit programs are smaller. Use less memory. require less resources.

64bit has the potential of bigger programs. Faster programs and programs with access to more resources. 64bit programs are a great thing WHEN the applications requirements require them.

yes, Developers today SHOULD BE compiling with 64bit.

But there's no reason to cut the 32bit support for legacy. and existing apps. and nobody in this thread has been able to answer WHY. other than to repeat the "32bit bloat" and "because the future!"

neither of those answeres from a technical perspective why Apple should drop 32bit support from iOS. I would understand saying "All FUTURE apps must be compiled at 64bit or be rejected". But the legacy existing Apps that some people still use today for specific reasons have no technical reason to be cut off.

I’m not an iOS developer, but a quick search on Google reveals that supporting 32-bit apps (or apps that can operate in either 32-bit or 64-bit modes) means including 32-bit libraries and frameworks with the app. iOS has to keep 32-bit function calls around. Dumping those means that both apps and iOS itself can occupy less space.

Source: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/...and-64-bit-to-an-app-which-build-in-old-xcode

Older stuff and stuff that very few people use just ceases to be supported. It’s a fact of life. Not sure in software. How many apps can you name that have been localized for those languages? Or, to name another field entirely, would you go to a surgeon that only performs an outdated, more-invasive procedure? Or would you go to a surgeon who has bothered to update his skills in order to perform the newest, least-invasive procedures?

 

[LordVic]

No, you don't understand that in x86-64 and ARMv8 a number of architectural changes were made, in particular in both architectures, the number of registers were doubled from their 32 bit versions. This is a major impact on the Intel side since i386 had very few registers to begin with, and that led to a inefficient stack calling convention. In ARMv8, another major impact was the elimination of condition codes, which apparently makes the circuitry more efficient and branch predictors to work much better, so there is a positive power and speed impact.

You are right that there is a memory impact. Linux has developed the x32 ABI for exactly this (memory stays at 32 bit but the rest changes). Except now you need a recompile anyway, and 3 versions of libraries. (For Linux, it makes sense in embedded systems with no user apps, where 100% of the code can be recompiled to x32)

Thank you for responding with some technical details.

Yes, I understand 64bit is faster and more efficient. As I've said, I'm not apposed to 64bit. i'm not trying to say "WE MUST KCIK AND SCREAM TO KEEP 32BIT APPLICATIONS!"

What I believe is that all new submissions to the App store should be in 64bit binaries only.

but completely cutting out 32bit legacy support doesn't benefit the end user for legacy apps. if anything, it removes the ability for users to run programs they may have been using and have paid for.

What I'm trying to clarify, and get answer to, is what benefit does cutting out this legacy support have for the end user? Does losing access to that 32bit application suddenly make iOS faster? other programs faster? Does it make the OS better in any way?

these are questions that nobody in this thread has answered outside of retorting with "FUTURE THINKING!" and "because it's 2017". these are not technical reasons. I want technical reasons why 32bit legacy app support is a bad thing if people are going to claim it as such.

I want evidence based decisions, not emotional ones.

 

[d5aqoëp]

Which app did you pay $1000 for? Looks like you’ve been had.

Oh, do you mean the iPhone? You’re not suggesting that Apple should “perform a simple recompile for their customers,” are you?

Oh dear, it seems you didn't read it fully. $1000 is not for any app. It is for installing a new CCTV system because the 5 year old CCTV system's free app on app store was 32 bit only. Once iDevice is updated to iOS 11 this fall, the old 32 bit app will become useless.
Unless the CCTV company has a change of heart and updates their app to 64 bit. You do know how good are the Chinese companies with software updates.

 

[garygrapeappleb]

This is probably intentional. If an app isn't worth a recompile, it probably isn't worth staying on the app store.

It's not just a matter of a "recompile." Apple constantly changes the API, deprecating calls and creating new ones. When they FORCE a developer to update or have their app purged, that isn't fair to the little guys. It can be weeks of work to meet new requirements. They could easily leave apps in the store and have an indicator of compatibility or a "do not show older apps" option. Instead, they pull your apps just because you haven't updated. Not all developers are million-dollar machines.

 

[konqerror]

What I'm trying to clarify, and get answer to, is what benefit does cutting out this legacy support have for the end user? Does losing access to that 32bit application suddenly make iOS faster? other programs faster? Does it make the OS better in any way?

It's been covered. Huge benefits. You're not paying attention. Quick summary. OS becomes smaller (no need to ship 2 versions of libraries), uses less RAM (no need to load 2 versions of libraries into RAM), faster (no need for a step to bridge the 32 and 64 bit interfaces, thunking in Windows terms). Apple doesn't need to maintain and worse test the 32 bit versions of libraries and interfaces (better quality software, faster). The CPU can be made faster and use less power (no need for 32 bit compatibility hardware).

 

[AppleB]

I’m not an iOS developer, but a quick search on Google reveals that supporting 32-bit apps (or apps that can operate in either 32-bit or 64-bit modes) means including 32-bit libraries and frameworks with the app. iOS has to keep 32-bit function calls around. Dumping those means that both apps and iOS itself can occupy less space.

Source: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/...and-64-bit-to-an-app-which-build-in-old-xcode

Older stuff and stuff that very few people use just ceases to be supported. It’s a fact of life. Not sure in software. How many apps can you name that have been localized for those languages? Or, to name another field entirely, would you go to a surgeon that only performs an outdated, more-invasive procedure? Or would you go to a surgeon who has bothered to update his skills in order to perform the newest, least-invasive procedures?

Good stuff.

Sounds like iOS and apps will be more efficient.