Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 17th Feb 2011 00:14 UTC
Apple Well, it might be safe to say that Apple's own engineers stopped testing their Apple apps with 3.x iOS devices, and have created bugs that make these apps unusable. This is to be somewhat expected, Apple has a track record of not-so-great backwards compatibility (on the Mac), but what we also expected was to not get these broken updates forced to us. It's one thing to stop updating the firmware of older iOS models, and another thing breaking them.
E-mail Print r 11   · Read More · 77 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 462797
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Planned obsolence is part of the strategy
by kragil on Thu 17th Feb 2011 01:05 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

Apples success is based on lock-in and control. You aren't supposed to use Apple devices for more than 3 or 4 years. The battery should be dead now or it should die soon. So the number of people that will complain about this in relation to general consumers will be small.

Apple can't keep it's current stock price if profits don't go up, so you have to buy new devices every 2 years. Real Apple fans will have no problem with that.

Reply Score: 9

Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

The 3.1.2 firmware is not more than 1.5 years old though. If not for the devices themselves, that software version should have been supported for longer. However, as I tried to explain in the article, it's NOT about supporting. If Apple doesn't want to support these devices/firmwares, that's fine. My problem comes with BREAKING them. There's a *distinct difference* there.

I'm well aware of how Apple has conducted business with its Mac lines, and how they eliminated older products from new OSX versions, drivers etc. But you see, they never *broke* these Macs! I still have my Powerbook from 2003, it still works without problems, and the apps that don't work with it, well, they don't even install.

But in this case, we're FORCED updates or apps (the App Store update was remote), or we're led to believe that some apps showing as updatable are compatible with our device, when they're clearly not!

If this is part of the plan as you claim, to *break devices on purpose after a while so people buy new stuff*, then this could go to court. I'm not a lawyer, neither I'm interested to sue, but if what you say is true, then this whole thing feels like a con. But I don't believe that Apple is a con artist company. I think they just took the whole matter not very seriously, and stopped testing with 3.x to save engineering time. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm just not happy with the whole situation.

Edited 2011-02-17 01:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

daedliusswartz Member since:
2007-05-28

This is to be somewhat expected

So don't buy the product if you "somewhat expect" this sort of thing.

Reply Parent Score: 0

t3RRa Member since:
2005-11-22

If you visit Korea and see what is happening over there, you would be very surprised then. Keeping a phone for more than a year or two? They would respond "How??" and/or "Why??" .. For them it doesn't matter which brand; Samsung, LG or whatever. .. Oh, the only exception is iPhone.


:) (Oh, I forgot to add a smiley)

Edited 2011-02-17 01:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Apples success is based on lock-in and control. You aren't supposed to use Apple devices for more than 3 or 4 years. The battery should be dead now or it should die soon. So the number of people that will complain about this in relation to general consumers will be small.

Apple can't keep it's current stock price if profits don't go up, so you have to buy new devices every 2 years. Real Apple fans will have no problem with that.


So hang on, it is apparently ok when Android vendors throw their customers under the train every 6 months but it is a travesty when devices older than 2 years don't get a operating system upgrade. Am I the only one who observes this bullshit trend here on OSNews and the number who whine about Apple but ignore what Android vendors do? Planned obsolesce part of the strategy? I'd say it is more the question, "How long does the average customer keep their phone and is it worth pandering to the 2% of cheapskates out there who expect their devices to last for ever?"

Why is it when Android vendors have some of the worst track records when it comes to customer support there are morons here who praise Android for its openness (whilst ignoring the fact that the only way you can upgrade it yourself is to hack the device - I thought it was meant to be open source! if it was open source in my definition of the concept then I shouldn't need to hack the device to apply an upgrade! I should be able to grab the source, compile it and then transfer the image the phone!) and yet ignore what is happening out in the real world. I swear the hatred of Apple by some has blinded them to how they're being shafted by the organisations they put up as champions.

For those who think I am an iPhone fanboy, I don't even own one - I'm holdout for the WP7 phone to come to New Zealand on the XT Network.

Edited 2011-02-17 01:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

Who mentioned Android?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Praxis Member since:
2009-09-17

Not exactly the same. Android makers just tend to abandon it. (I would never buy an android device I wasn't willing to hack personally)

Eugenia is complaining about updates that actively break things. Getting updates that break stuff is worse than not getting updates in the first place.

This doesn't validate the lackluster Android update process in any way though, bringing it into the conversion however is distracting and an invitation to flame wars.

Reply Parent Score: 13

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

First of all, no one in this thread has mentioned Android nor compared Android phones to Iphones. Furthermore, there happen to be several other smartphone OSs that are non-Apple. I own a Palm Treo that is three years old and still going strong. It's very solid, and I intend to use it for many years to come.

Secondly, the author has explained in this thread that the problem with her Apple device is not exactly a lack of support -- the problem is support that actually breaks her Apple device. Google, Apple and others may abandon support for their devices, but bricking those devices for their unsuspecting owners is something else entirely.

Reply Parent Score: 8

mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

For those who think I am an iPhone fanboy, I don't even own one - I'm holdout for the WP7 phone to come to New Zealand on the XT Network.


See that right there is the crux of the problem. Anyone who doesn't share the view that Apple is the devil incarnate, or that Google isn't the messiah of the tech industry, by default MUST be an Apple fanboy.

Oh, and btw, where the hell did it say anything about bricking the device? An App breaking is hardly bricking the device. FFS grow up...

Edited 2011-02-17 03:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: -1

HappyGod Member since:
2005-10-19

So let me get this straight, you're suggesting that we have no right to complain about this breaking of functionality? Or if we do, we're just blinded by our Apple hatred?

You know what, you're right, let's all put our hands together for Apple's job well done. See you at the medal ceremony in two weeks.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Risteard Member since:
2011-02-17

Sorry sorry, wait.

What do you think?

Who has ever said Android is better?

Assuming that Google support is crap, doesn't mean that what apple does is right. And hey, have you read the article? Our guy here said he *DOESN'T* want any update from Apple. Have you read it? Have you read that Apple DOES update old devices, but providing UNTESTED software that actually makes them UNUSABLE? Ok, that's the problem.

This was not a comparison of which company is better or worse. Because if my previous iPod has been made unusable, I don't really care about android stuff. That's all.

Reply Parent Score: 3

M.Onty Member since:
2009-10-23

So hang on, it is apparently ok when Android vendors throw their customers under the train every 6 months but it is a travesty when devices older than 2 years don't get a operating system upgrade. Am I the only one who observes this bullshit trend here on OSNews and the number who whine about Apple but ignore what Android vendors do? Planned obsolesce part of the strategy? I'd say it is more the question, "How long does the average customer keep their phone and is it worth pandering to the 2% of cheapskates out there who expect their devices to last for ever?"


If your definition of a cheapskate is someone who keeps a £500 device for more than two years before ditching it, I don't envy your bank balance. Actually, I might envy your bank balance as it suggests you've got enough in it to render that amount shall change. For many people though, that's almost two months rent.

Its not just about "How long does the average customer keep their phone". The average iPhone buyer may be well off, but there will be a significant minority for whom this is a one time expense. Their brand commitment should be acknowledged.

Reply Parent Score: 3

polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree with you completely. For OSnews members, Apple is the new fun company to bash. Which is why I don't come here all that often anymore. It's not that I'm a diehard fanboy. I own a Mac, but also run Windows and Linux (and BSD now too).

I just get tired of the obvious slant here. It's about as unbiased as Fox News.

That being said, Eugenia is right about the updating thing. They need to put in a mechanism for realizing you've only got version 3.1.x on your device, and not automatically push out updates if it's incompatible.

That doesn't seem to be too much to ask. However I fail to see how this bug has caused so much trouble. Don't we all keep backups of the older versions of the tiny apps? Or is that just me?

I've actually run into this myself, and if you've got the older version, it's just not that big of a deal.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Skai Member since:
2010-08-19

Android includes in the apps design a minimum os requirement.

I believe Apple's apps too.

Here, the only responsibles are people who pretended their update was available on 3.x series, what it obviously is not.

It's certainly a human mistake, most certainly a lack of prooper test. period.

Reply Parent Score: 1