[winteriscoming]

I like all the new things coming in iOS11, including this. I recently got my first iPhone and it's on iOS10. Do users like me get to upgrade just the OS on the same handset when they release iOS11? I haven't found the answer to this on some of the apple articles I have browsed.

[tfoil2]

Yes, upgrades are always free, and new iOS versions are typically supported on several generations of older devices.

[mstade]

It's worth mentioning though that there's often not a 100% feature parity between iOS versions on different devices, typically because of hardware changes. These even applies to devices of the same generation, e.g. iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus have different camera features since the latter has two cameras and the former just has one.

The differences between feature sets on different generations is less and less it seems though. If I recall correctly, the differences between the iPhone 3G and iPhone 4 was bigger than for instance iPhone 6 and iPhone 7. If I weren't such a sucker for new and shiny things, I'd probably buy an iPhone SE today.

[winteriscoming]

Thank you.

[laingc]

As a concrete example, iOS10 runs reasonably well on my spare iPhone 5, which is coming up on 6 years old.

[rimliu]

However iOS11 won't be supported on iPhone 5 and earlier, i.e. on 32bit devices. Only iPhone 5s and up.

[jclardy]

To put it into context - the iPhone 5 was in competition with the Galaxy S III and Galaxy Nexus at launch.

[lazerpants]

And my Galaxy Nexus stopped receiving updates 2-3 years ago despite it being a Google device (mine was also straight from the Google store, so it wasn't the carrier's fault).

[0x0]

While iOS upgrades are usually free these days, it hasn't always been like this. According to wikipedia, iOS 1.1.3 was a paid upgrade on iPod Touches (while being a free upgrade for iPhones).

[k-mcgrady]

The first few upgrades were paid for tax reasons as far as I remember. And then after a few versions they were able to change that.

[kalleboo]

And only on the iPod touch, not on the iPhone. They also had to charge for a WiFi update on MacBooks for "accounting reasons".

[k-mcgrady]

Yeah I think the iPhone got around it because people were already paying monthly for it.

[ahakki]

Yes, I remember that. I had to explain this to my parents so that they would let me use their Creditcard for this purpose.

[JimDabell]

iOS updates have always been free. There's no such thing as iOS 1.1.3, only iPhoneOS 1.1.3.

[MBCook]

No they are right. Due to some sort of accounting thing once upon a time on some of the first iPod touches there would be a small fee to upgrade the OS.

[JimDabell]

Yes, and that was iPhoneOS, not iOS.

[masklinn]

> I like all the new things coming in iOS11, including this.

Killing 32b-only-applications i do not like :/

[eridius]

Killing 32-bit-only-applications sucks for those apps that haven't been updated in years, but it speeds up the OS and should give you a bit of disk space back as well.

[masklinn]

The difference in disk space is basically nonexistent (I could gain significantly more by removing the 32b apps applications, especially since most are games), and the OS speedup/memory gain should be limited and mostly applicable to when you're actually launching 32b applications.

[eridius]

In order to support 32-bit apps the OS needs to include 32-bit versions of all the system frameworks. So dropping support for 32-bit apps means cutting the size of all the system frameworks in half.

As for speedup/memory gain, merely launching a 32-bit app will cause the OS to get a bit slower / use more memory until such time as the app is actually killed by the system. Merely going back to the home screen isn't good enough, since apps stay suspended in the background until the OS decides it needs that memory back. And if you have any 32-bit apps that actually do background processing, you'll end up with 32-bit apps in the background frequently.

[masklinn]

> In order to support 32-bit apps the OS needs to include 32-bit versions of all the system frameworks. So dropping support for 32-bit apps means cutting the size of all the system frameworks in half.

Less than half as 32b code objects will be smaller than 64b ones, but even if it's half how much storage is that exactly? I mean I probably have games bigger than the frameworks on my device.

> As for speedup/memory gain, merely launching a 32-bit app will cause the OS to get a bit slower / use more memory until such time as the app is actually killed by the system.

Well yeah so it's just pay for what you use aka who gives a shit.

> And if you have any 32-bit apps that actually do background processing

Which is unlikely given the vast majority of applications being killed by this move are games.

I mean let's be honest for once, the gain from removing 32b frameworks is pretty much entirely on Apple's side, there's little gain to be found for end users when they're not just plain losing value in this move.

[eridius]

> I mean let's be honest for once, the gain from removing 32b frameworks is pretty much entirely on Apple's side

I've given you multiple concrete benefits to end users. You may not personally care about the code size difference, and you seem to be completely discounting the speed / memory usage issues, but just because you personally don't think those are a big deal doesn't mean they don't actually exist.

[macintux]

I may have to replace my home security cameras because Swann doesn't seem to care about the app that allows me to watch them.

[vbezhenar]

Think carefully before upgrade. You can't downgrade after you upgraded and new upgrades are known to significantly slow down old devices. My iPhone 4S became unusable after iOS 7 and it's almost bricked with iOS 9. This is Apple way to force users to buy new phones.

That said, they force developers to discontinue support for old iOS versions, so if you don't upgrade, you'll stuck with old apps and some might stop work if they rely on remote servers with changed protocols. So if you want to use iPhones, be prepared to buy new phone every 3-4 years.

[scarface74]

Apple doesn't "force" developers to discontinue support for older OS's. Apple does require that you at least have a build that supports both 32 and 64 bit versions.

You can target at least back to iOS 7 (https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/50410) that gives you support for phones back to the 2010 iPhone 4.

Apple also will allow you to download an older version of an app if the newest version doesn't support your hardware. I can confirm that this works back to devices that only support iOS 5 - like my first generation iPad from 2010.

[richardwhiuk]

Apple occasionally release upgrades which the hardware really isn't capable of supporting. I think the worst example was the iPhone 4, which was given the iOS 7 upgrade. iOS 7 was basically only suitable for multi-core capable devices, and the iPhone 4 was the only device it was released on (the same generation iPod and iPad didn't get the update).

[MBCook]

Apple tries really damn hard to make their stuff run well on all devices and it's very impressive how well they support them.

But if your device is a few years old… You're right that you may want to wait and see what the reviews say. Sometimes the updates actually make the phone feel faster, but sometimes (like iOS 7 with all the new transparency effects) it definitely can be a worse experience.