[hugi]

A better strategy would be to allow app publishers to log in and indicate in some way that the app is still "good" and active. Now I have to make a "fake update" to a perfectly fine app because of this.

Of course the best strategy would be to just don't do this at all. I find it offensive that a single company can decide on a whim to erase my perfectly fine software from history, because it's "ancient" in their opinion (two years old).

[theshrike79]

This is more about making sure the app compiles with the latest SDK and whatever requirements that entails.

I still have a few crap apps on my phone that look zoomed in because the author never bothered to update them for HiDPI devices - that was half a decade ago.

[hugi]

It really shouldn't be my issue that Apple isn't able to maintain compatibility for two year old apps.

[hmlongco]

I agree with interpol. There are always new info.plist privacy settings and the like that apps need to support. As I recall there were also some relatively recent TLS and https security requirements. Then there are things like dark mode support and... nevermind.

I'd turn the question around. Why wouldn't an Apple customer who buys a product expect it to be up to date, well-maintained, and reflect current best practices in security and privacy?

Saying that it's not convenient for the developer isn't a great answer to that question.

[interpol_p]

They do maintain compatibility, it's just obviously running in compatibility mode because of hardware changes.

If your app doesn't account for a notched display, or a retina screen, or multi-tasking or whatever, then there's nothing Apple can do aside from run it as it used to run on older hardware, without supporting the new features.

[ido]

Half a decade? Wasn’t that introduced in 2010 with the iPhone 4?

[theshrike79]

The last two years feel like two months or something :D

[prox]

* Fixed bugs and improved performance