True. but the 3G wasn't a currently selling model when iOS 4 came out, and it was still supported. Same with the original iPhone and iOS 3.
While the 3G received iOS4 it was a total disaster. The performance was abismal and it made the phone almost unusable. It would have been better if the 3G never received iOS4.
If the 3GS gets iOS6 then I hope they optimize the OS for it.
Data is NOT forced on PAYG plans in the U.S., either--at least not on AT&T. I have a voice only plan with AT&T Gophone that, in fact, I use with an iPhone 3GS. So I am very interested in hearing about IOS 6 tomorrow.
Lest, anyone think I am doing anything sneaky, AT&T knows very well that I am using an iPhone on Gophone. In fact, precisely because I have a smartphone on its prepaid, it requires me to choose between a expensive monthly voice and date plan or no data. I have opted to rely on wifi alone.
Yeah, if they are supporting the iPhone 3GS, it makes little sense to not support the third-gen iPod Touch since it's essentially the same hardware so it'd be minimal effort. ...
Then why can't the third-gen iPod Touch it's basically the same thing.
Both these guys are implying that Apple's (presumed) lack of support is some kind of plot, and this guy ...
Quote:
... it makes sense to support the new 5th Generation model and the previous 4th Generation model to encourage 3rd Generation users to upgrade.
Upgrades = more revenue. It's a simple business decision. Keep the product churn going. Encourage users to upgrade at least every 2 or 3 years to get the latest OS.
Is explicitly stating as much.
But it's worth mentioning that despite these kinds of conspiracy theories and despite the rantings of arch capitalists about it "all being about the money," there is no actual record of Apple ever doing this, or ever playing the game of not supporting older products that are able to receive a software update. There is no reason for Apple to screw over it's customers "for the money" or "to encourage them to upgrade" or any such thing and they have never done this.
Every single time this kind of thing is raised, it always turns out weeks later (when no one remembers of course), that the reason that product a, b, or c wasn't supported was actually hardware related, completely rational and in fact, unavoidable.
if Apple doesn't support a particular model with this next OS, you can practically bet on the fact that there is a good, hardware related reason not to do so, whether we are currently aware of the reason or not.
It's NOT free on pre-paid PAYG plans you idiot. Maybe you should engage your brain before your mouth once in a while.
China + India = 2.5 Billion people = Huge sales potential for PAYG phones = Lots of money = Why they will continue to sell the 3GS
I interpreted his reply as the 3GS is already free to have on a monthly plan (as is the iPhone 4), so why would Apple expect customers to pay for the same inferior 3 year old phone on PAYG with a (likely sub-optimised iOS 6 running off it). He kind of has a point.
What part of "2.5 billion" don't you understand? World markets ain't just USA, Japan, Western Europe any more. (Actually, last I checked, all those places were in trouble while the rest of the world is still seeing 5-10% economic growth)
Cook is squeezing every bit of value out of the old 3GS, which must cost peanuts to manufacture by this point. (Low-res screen, lower end cameras, cpu, wireless, battery) Then using it to make sure that Apple competes in all markets in the world, except for the very lowest, and maintains market share. All while making a tidy profit in the process.
Also, booyah, Safari 6. 5.2 is dandy, but if they're jumping a whole number then they must be adding something good.
I'd love more integration with my Apple ID. Probably would be the only thing that would get me to switch back from Chrome.
I love how Chrome integrates my Google ID (gmail account) into the App so I can always have my information, bookmarks, email, calendars, notes, etc. anywhere when I login with my Google ID. That's really all Safari is missing to more fully integrate the User experience. They are just about the same speed/functionality as Chrome otherwise. Additionally, I'd like to see the search and Address windows combined like Chrome.
On the Flipside, the one thing Chrome could use is something like Safari's "Reader" function.
Well, if the rumors are true, it makes me very comfortable about buying an iPhone and very uncomfortable about buying an iPad. The iPhone has the great virtue of being something that stays on the market for a long time, as it gradually migrates down the price points. Not so the iPad. In general I wish Apple would be more communicative about setting out some general parameters for roadmaps of their products. (For exhibit A on this, see "Mac Pro")
But it's worth mentioning that despite these kinds of conspiracy theories and despite the rantings of arch capitalists about it "all being about the money," there is no actual record of Apple ever doing this, or ever playing the game of not supporting older products that are able to receive a software update. There is no reason for Apple to screw over it's customers "for the money" or "to encourage them to upgrade" or any such thing and they have never done this.
Obviously Apple orphans systems to encourage upgrades, as well as to simplify their support burden. This is observably true in the many instances when an "unsupported" system update is enabled by hacks which just bypass the system ID check.
On the other hand, Apple is generally much better on this score than many of its competitors, e.g. the Android handset makers who orphan half their phones the day they're sold.
Well, if the rumors are true, it makes me very comfortable about buying an iPhone and very uncomfortable about buying an iPad. The iPhone has the great virtue of being something that stays on the market for a long time, as it gradually migrates down the price points. Not so the iPad. In general I wish Apple would be more communicative about setting out some general parameters for roadmaps of their products. (For exhibit A on this, see "Mac Pro")
If they did, would there be so much excitement over their product announcements?
Is explicitly stating as much.
But it's worth mentioning that despite these kinds of conspiracy theories and despite the rantings of arch capitalists about it "all being about the money," there is no actual record of Apple ever doing this, or ever playing the game of not supporting older products that are able to receive a software update. There is no reason for Apple to screw over it's customers "for the money" or "to encourage them to upgrade" or any such thing and they have never done this.
Every single time this kind of thing is raised, it always turns out weeks later (when no one remembers of course), that the reason that product a, b, or c wasn't supported was actually hardware related, completely rational and in fact, unavoidable.
if Apple doesn't support a particular model with this next OS, you can practically bet on the fact that there is a good, hardware related reason not to do so, whether we are currently aware of the reason or not.
You might want to say this unavoidable to mac pro users of pre 2008 machines most of which are perfectly capable of mountain lion and won't be getting it cause apple can't be bothered to write a few more drivers...
Also the hardware argument is spurious. If apple decide that gen. 1 ipad is good enough with 128mb of ram, and then the fanbois go, it's not about the specks, it's optimized because apple create both hardware and software, blah, blah, no wonder less than a couple of years later the then current ios 5 runs like shit on it. Apple aims at planned obsoletion of their products so people buy more, period.
You might want to say this unavoidable to mac pro users of pre 2008 machines most of which are perfectly capable of mountain lion and won't be getting it cause apple can't be bothered to write a few more drivers...
Also the hardware argument is spurious. If apple decide that gen. 1 ipad is good enough with 128mb of ram, and then the fanbois go, it's not about the specks, it's optimized because apple create both hardware and software, blah, blah, no wonder less than a couple of years later the then current ios 5 runs like shit on it. Apple aims at planned obsoletion of their products so people buy more, period.
Nothing personal, but this sounds like a load of personal stuff you have about Apple and not based on any actual facts.
My point was only that I haven't ever heard of any proof or evidence that Apple acts in this way that everyone immediately assumes they act when it turns out they don't support their favourite piece of hardware. Apple is not "about the money" it's more about the product. If a piece of hardware is not supported it always (100% of the time) turns out to be the case that if it was supported, it would run like crap or the experience would be severely compromised in some specific way.
People just want to pretend that they know more than the engineers at Apple, or that because they don't care about the compromises, no one else should. They act like armchair quarterbacks while at the same time telegraphing that very fact. They state here that the iPod hardware is "basically" or "almost" the same thing which is in fact quite telling, because it lets us know that even they are quite aware that it's not actually the same hardware.
There are differences in the hardware. It's as simple as that.
They aren't letting you have the software update because it wouldn't work or wouldn't work in the same (acceptable) way as it would on the other devices. As I said, AFAIK there isn't a single substantiated, factual case where this wasn't true and instead the conspiracy theories of the disgruntled people who didn't get the software update was true instead.
Obviously Apple orphans systems to encourage upgrades, as well as to simplify their support burden. This is observably true in the many instances when an "unsupported" system update is enabled by hacks which just bypass the system ID check.
On the other hand, Apple is generally much better on this score than many of its competitors, e.g. the Android handset makers who orphan half their phones the day they're sold.
Well, I just don't think you have any actual proof of this beyond the simple act of saying it. Your argument also revolves completely around the definition of "works." Changing the ID of a system to make a piece of software *run* on it, is not the same thing as saying it works on that device.
My argument is that it wouldn't run "acceptably" or in the manner that Apple wants it to run, and with the performance they want it to have, with all the various features intact etc. I can make Lion run on all kinds of computers, that doesn't mean they should be on the supported list or that a user of one of those machines is actually even getting the "lion experience."
I don't suppose we will ever agree on this as it's one of those "engineer vs. designer" things. An engineer would say that if it's possible to get it to run on the device then it's running on the device, a designer would not agree. It's perfectly valid IMO (and obviously in Apple's as well), to require a certain level of performance and features before it's said to be "running" or workable on one device or another.
How do we know these links even exist if they're not active? You can type anything you want and have it look like a URL.
This is the first I'm hearing of first-gen iPad support, particularly since it has been missing the last few days.
Also, booyah, Safari 6. 5.2 is dandy, but if they're jumping a whole number then they must be adding something good.
Why the hell wouldn't it be supported? Now the iPhone 3GS, sure I can see that being nixed but not the iPad.
Safari 6 should be the full debut of WebKit 2.
Apple seems to be supporting any product they are currently selling with iOS 6. Unfortunately for anyone except AT&T the 3GS only works on the AT&T network. However, it is saying something for Apple that a phone released in 2009 is still upgradable to the latest OS release. That's not something that Android phones can match.
They don't have to support anything below the 4.0 models or anything that shipped with iOS 4.
It looks like they probably will however (because of the "uproar"), but personally I wish they wouldn't. Support of old devices, especially on such a rapidly evolving platform that's essentially in it's early days, is usually a mistake. Apple is being hobbled here by the very popularity of their products, it would be better for all concerned in the long run to cast off the 3rd generation devices.
I doubt Apple will "hobble" iOS 6 to accommodate the 3GS. It's more likely the 3CS won't be completely supported by iOS. However, Apple may be laying the groundwork to show that the iDevices are a better deal due to the extended hardware support compared to Android and others. It's just another way to "raise the bar" for the competitors to try and jump over.
Apple is distancing themselves from the "me too" companies in compelling ways.
Ios 5.1.1. iOS6? Seems like Apple is jumping the gun and jumping os versions rapidly. Why not iOS 5.5 instead of iOS6? Also why the jump in Safari versions. I am running the 5.2 beta. Why jump to Safari 6 when the 5.2 beta is not even main stream? Doesn't make sense.
Tune in Monday morning to see if the keynote reveals why it would make sense. We don't know what will be all announced yet, so given what you know today not making sense, I can understand.
Well, if the rumors are true, it makes me very comfortable about buying an iPhone and very uncomfortable about buying an iPad. The iPhone has the great virtue of being something that stays on the market for a long time, as it gradually migrates down the price points. Not so the iPad. In general I wish Apple would be more communicative about setting out some general parameters for roadmaps of their products. (For exhibit A on this, see "Mac Pro")
Rumors and truth are not compatible. The first incarnation of any Apple product is for the those who like to surf the cutting edge of technology, so lack of long term support for first gen hardware is no surprise to me. I don't see the iPad any less of a good buy than other Apple products. The product that might not be a good buy at this time is the iPod Touch; it may be replaced by the rumored 7" touch device.
Obviously Apple orphans systems to encourage upgrades, as well as to simplify their support burden. This is observably true in the many instances when an "unsupported" system update is enabled by hacks which just bypass the system ID check.
On the other hand, Apple is generally much better on this score than many of its competitors, e.g. the Android handset makers who orphan half their phones the day they're sold.
Apple may feel that not upgrading a device to the latest version gives the device owner a better user experience then upgrading would. Sometimes the right thing to do may not be as apparent as one thinks. I don't feel Apple has abandoned my with my 2006 MBP which is running 10.4.11 on 2Gb of RAM. Upgrading to Lion or Mountain Lion would give me a degraded experience in speed, while giving me the newer features (which I really don't need). I've used Mac OS for 28 years and often don't go for the latest releases for various reasons.
I do agree with you regarding Android where the hardware manufacturers have no financial reason to offer an option to upgrade the software on their recently released phones. Once the phone goes out the door, they are on to the next phone and last months hardware is old news.
It WON'T be a currently selling product when iOS 6 comes out.
You will be able to buy a 3GS like a week before iOS 6/iPhone 6th gen comes out.
So extending it's support for a year does make sense. When iOS 7 comes out, 3GS won't be on sale for a year, so it most likely will not get the update. iPhone 4 should as it'll replace 3GS' current position.
Usually Apple had 2 iPhones for sale, so you got two major updates(the OS that your phone ships with + 2), now Apple has 3 iPhone for sale at the same time and looks like they'll extend the updates to three years, which is amazing IMO!
The 3GS is a piece of crap. Everyone complained about iOS 4 on it, for heaven's sake. Now they demand 6?
Huh? Are you confusing the 3G with the 3GS? The 3G certainly ran iOS 4 like crap ... they should probably never have released iOS 4 for that device.
The 3GS, however, runs iOS 4 (and iOS 5 for that matter) just fine. Sure, it's not quite as snappy as a 4S, but even today performance is still pretty good.
Perhaps... but the production cost of an iPhone 4/4S is still likely significantly higher than the 3GS, due to the retina display, more expensive casing, and additional cameras. If Apple want to continue having a very cheap iPhone for the pre-pay market and developing economies, the 3GS might be a good choice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_Effect
Apple will never tell us anything. This is a good thing.
The iPhone 3GS has the same GPU as the first-gen iPad but pushes fewer pixels, so it has better performance.
I'd like to see them throw in support for all HTML5 tags. And animated PNGs.
Except it will, according to many here who think they'll actually drop the iPhone 4 instead and actually keep a four year old phone on sale, embarrassingly, everywhere.
… Possibly. Maybe.
Huh? Are you confusing the 3G with the 3GS? The 3G certainly ran iOS 4 like crap ... they should probably never have released iOS 4 for that device.
The 3GS, however, runs iOS 4 (and iOS 5 for that matter) just fine. Sure, it's not quite as snappy as a 4S, but even today performance is still pretty good.
Agreed. I have a 3GS and it runs iOS 5 fine, not to mention iOS 4, which it came with when I got it. The 3G was the same speed as the original (2G) iPhone, while the 3GS is much, much faster. It's true it doesn't have the power of the 4 or 4S, but on the other hand it only needs to push 1/4th the pixels, since it has no retina display, so in use it's comparable to a 4.
What nobody on this thread is mentioning is quantity. There are a lot (over 33 million as of March) of iPhone 3GS phones out there, because this thing has been on sale for three years. There are fewer iPad 1 or iPod Touch 3rd gen devices, both of which had short selling periods of a year or less, and are discontinued. So if you look at it in terms of Apple minimizing number of supported platforms while maximizing the number of supported units, it becomes clear that the 3GS has more weight than either the 3rd gen Touch or the iPad 1, both of which will have been discontinued for at least 18 months by the time iOS 6 is released.
Following this logic, I would not worry about iPad 2 support. It was also sold in large numbers and continues to be sold. Likewise the 4th gen Touch, which will have been sold for 24 months by the time it is retired.
