Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iOS 14 Again Said to Be Compatible With All iPhones Able to Run iOS 13

4jasontv said:
How will you get security updates if you don't update? Does iOS let you decline feature updates but approve security ones?
Click to expand...
So you do want new updates.

Apple has provided critical security updates on old and new iOS versions in the past.

If Apple wanted to do planned obsolescence, they would have just cut off after 3 years like Android does.

[automerge]1591048518[/automerge]
Shirasaki said:
Merely company slowing down retirement of old devices to curb this “planned obsolescence” narrative.
Click to expand...
So doing the opposite of planned obsolescence is secretly part of "planned obsolescence"? That's extremely stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Locke Cole, subi257, bobob and 8 others
farewelwilliams said:
So doing the opposite of planned obsolescence is secretly part of "planned obsolescence"? That's extremely stupid.
Click to expand...
What?
To push customers buying new hardware products, companies won’t support older devices forever. However, during the process, customers may get infuriated by software update breaking a otherwise perfectly functional device. Hence this “planned obsolescence” narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: asv56kx3088
Abazigal said:
More than phones today are powerful enough to handle whatever Apple throws at it.
Click to expand...

The 6S really is not. The jump from the A9 to the A10 was among the most dramatic both in CPU, and GPU. While the RAM stayed the same from the 6S to the 7, the 7 is a much more capable device today.
 
farewelwilliams said:
no, you still have the option to not update. they only removed the command line function to hide the nagging. big difference. please don't mislead.
Click to expand...
Mere notification is enough for people to get annoyed. Yes. Not “actually pushing the update”. But when next time user wants to check update, instead of receiving security patches, they receive Catalina upgrade, which many people don’t want. You know what that mean? Their devices are less secure because Apple won’t provide an easy way for customers to install security update anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glowplug
Shirasaki said:
What?
To push customers buying new hardware products, companies won’t support older devices forever. However, during the process, customers may get infuriated by software update breaking a otherwise perfectly functional device. Hence this “planned obsolescence” narrative.
Click to expand...

Then don't update. That's still an option, you know? And you still get far more updates than the competing platform if you decide to not update.

There is no planned obsolescence. Period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Locke Cole, pianophile and FightTheFuture
farewelwilliams said:
There is no planned obsolescence. Period.
Click to expand...
I don’t want to derail too much but go and search macrumors news article talking about a company potentially bricking users smart home devices if they don’t start paying “surprise subscription fee”. Not really software update, but certainly fits “planned obsolescence” narrative.
Also, smart appliances are going to be the one hit the hardest by software update driven “planned obsolescence”.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: MandiMac, BvizioN and FightTheFuture
Shirasaki said:
Mere notification is enough for people to get annoyed. Yes. Not “actually pushing the update”. But when next time user wants to check update, instead of receiving security patches, they receive Catalina upgrade, which many people don’t want. You know what that mean? Their devices are less secure because Apple won’t provide an easy way for customers to install security update anymore.
Click to expand...

A small annoyance does not equate to being forced to update and therefore doesn't really count as planned obsolescence.

And it's far better than Windows 10 where they force updates on you and you can merely postpone the update unless you do some hard digging on how to permanently stop updates.
[automerge]1591049593[/automerge]
Shirasaki said:
I don’t want to derail too much but go and search macrumors news article talking about a company potentially bricking users smart home devices if they don’t start paying “surprise subscription fee”. Not really software update, but certainly fits “planned obsolescence” narrative.
Click to expand...
Wink has nothing to do with Apple's planned obsolescence narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marlon DLTH :)
farewelwilliams said:
A small annoyance does not equate to being forced to update and therefore doesn't really count as planned obsolescence.

And it's far better than Windows 10 where they force updates on you and you can merely postpone the update unless you do some hard digging on how to permanently stop updates.
Click to expand...
There are enough examples on this forum and outside when user update their iOS software by accident, because iOS continuously download the latest version and try to install it overnight, or pops up a 10s countdown window telling user the update is about to install.

Yes, permanently disable update in windows 10 is much harder than ever, but there is STILL a way. Good luck even “deferring iOS update” after the next major iOS release for supported devices.

I’m done.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: BvizioN and farewelwilliams
Might be time to upgrade to a 6S. I like to stay a few years behind the curve. There's a certain satisfaction buying a used iPhone for under $100
 
  • Like
Reactions: FightTheFuture
I would be very happy if this is indeed true. While I’m personally typically using the “latest and greatest” hardware, my kids are heavy users of iPad Air 2 and iPhone SE (2016), and I’m not in the mood to upgrade them right now :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: FightTheFuture
farewelwilliams said:
so would you be happier of Apple just said "nah, you won't get the update at all" like how Android does it?
Click to expand...

Nope. That's not how Android does it. Google pushes security patches via Google Play Services monthly, which are installed not unlike an ordinary app update. Google can patch most of the phone this way, without dealing with the vendors. Starting last year with Android Q, Google can patch nearly all of the core OS via the same mechanism.

Like desktop computers, Android decouples application updates (Gmail) from OS services (Google Play Services) from the core OS. Even if lower layers are no longer supported, you still can receive updates from higher levels.

As a real example, Google's health APIs (Google Fit) are available as low as Android 2.3 (2010) because they are delivered through Google Play Services, whereas Apple requires iOS 8 (2014).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rokkus76
The longer devices are supported the better, but I’d be totally ok with Apple just issuing security updates for older versions. It’s quite unusual that iOS12 has seen updates (plural) after iOS13 was the newest iOS, and whilst that might be an exception, I’d like to see it become the new normal.

No-one should expect all the new features of a new iOS on really old devices forever, of course, but some of these devices could be very useful for many years longer if they were patched for security issues - even if only for task and functions with minimal performance requirments.

This should be the quid-pro-quo of the ever-firmer push towards everything being cloud-based, IMHO. Apple are making more and more money from services, and if people don’t feel forced into buying new devices when their old ones still run well, then that’s a device that can still use Apple Music, can still play AppleTV+, can still use iCloud, ApplePay etc etc., all of which still brings Apple money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Locke Cole, Marlon DLTH :), FightTheFuture and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back