Are You An 'iOS Update Victim'? Apple's Inconsiderate Disregard for Backward App Compatibility: Some Notes +
IMHO, anyone who's purchased a fair number of apps for an Apple device over the years is very likely to eventually fall victim to Apple's inconsiderate disregard for backward compatibility - i.e. become an 'iOS update victim'. The following are some comments concerning this regrettable & costly situation. Please feel free to share your own reflections for possible future inclusion on this blog. Please note that this page may be subject to updates so please bookmark it and return often.
INITIAL OBSERVATIONS
* Apple sells its customers (that is, 'possible future iOS update victims' or PFIUVs) apps that Apple knows will likely be incompatible in a short time (e.g. if the device is updated). These apps may cost purchasers (PFIUVs) good money. There is no known limit to how many apps one may lose use of, or of how much money this loss of apps may cost people. "Tough luck" to the customer (a.k.a. 'iOS update victim') seems to be Apple's outlook, as demonstrated by past events & also by correspondence I have received from them.
* Apple knowingly sells its customers (PFIUVs) apps that are likely to be incompatible on their devices in a short time, yet Apple continues to sell the apps to unsuspecting customers anyhow.
* Apple knows that they are selling their customers (PFIUVs) apps that will likely be incompatible on their devices in a short amount of time, yet they do not clearly & explicitly warn of the likely incompatibility before people purchase the apps.
* Apple knows that they are selling their customers (PFIUVs) apps that they may come to rely on - or even need for work / health / etc. - that will likely not be compatible on their devices for very long, yet they sell them to people anyhow.
* Apple knows that they are selling their customers (PFIUVs) apps that they may come to rely on - or even need for work / health / etc. - that will likely not survive a particular iOS update, yet they 'strongly' push iOS updates on customers who may subsequently lose data & functionality due to the update.
* Apple knows that apps containing their customers' potentially important data (including health/medical data & work data) may permanently lose functionality upon iOS updates. Affected customers may never again be able to retrieve their important data from their own devices for no fault of their own after an iOS update. Yet Apple may continue to push updates on their customers (PFIUVs) which have no means of backwards compatibility for affected apps.
* Apple knows that its customers (PFIUVs) may be making improvident purchases - e.g. app purchases that will likely not be compatible on their devices for very long thanks to an iOS update - which are paid for using Apple gift cards received from people's loved ones that were given to commemorate special days/holidays. Yet Apple effectively does nothing to prevent the situation by failing to provide proper backwards compatibility to the gift recipients. As a result, the 'iOS update victims' unfortunately lose functionality or data in their special birthday / anniversary / etc. gifts. In my case, pending iOS app updates will wipe out many of my special 'birthday gift apps'. I will never again be able to use by birthday gift apps that my loved ones paid Apple for. It doesn't seem right.
* The number of lost apps per app update, per 'iOS update victim', can be many - a single customer may irreversibly lose 100's of apps on a single app update. I speak here from experience - a recent iOS update results in a loss of over 200 of my apps. That's more than TWO HUNDRED apps that I spent time researching, spent good money purchasing, and want / need / rely on. All of these will be lost for no good reason and without any consideration.
* Apple has not provided a realistic method of preventing the loss of apps over time. It seems their business model with respect to apps is to: 1-sell apps, 2-break apps with updates, and 3-sell customers new 'replacement apps'. Seems kind of like a racket to me - or at least a conflict of interest. Shouldn't the company who profits from selling apps also have some concern with keeping these apps usable? How can they sell apps on one hand and break apps with the other hand without any liability?
* Apple does not provide a realistic method of mitigating the damage they cause 'iOS update victims' from lost apps. You might get a refund for more recent purchases, but this is usually only if you ask for it, and typically only for your most recent affected purchases. These recent purchases may represent only a small amount of one's total app losses. Plus, a refund of an app's purchase price does not necessarily mitigate the damage (e.g. for lost data, lost functionality), nor does it necessary cover the cost of a replacement app (if there is one). Not to mention all your time and hassle...
* Apple does not seem to care about the above. Trust me, I have tried. If you don't believe me, try contacting them yourself to see how much they 'care'. Don't be too disappointed if you pour out your heartfelt concerns to them only to get back a form letter that isn't even signed by a human (and may not even contain a person's name). And be on the lookout for empty words, for which I suspect there will be several. Those 'empty words' themselves can seem a further insult when one considers both the meaninglessness of the words themselves, and also of the important concerns that went ignored by Apple. And as a cherry on top, they may even call you 'part of the Apple family' as they callously disregard your concerns. What kind of family it is, I don't know...
ADDITIONAL REFLECTIONS
Again IMHO, Apple doesn't really care that they sell customers apps that won't be functional for very long. I say this based on their actual feedback to me. They do not seem to be very sorry (again, if you don't believe me, try contacting them yourself). But why should they care? They make more money selling customers 'replacement apps' and also save money by not investing in proper backwards compatibility features that their customers would justifiably expect and deserve.
Remember that apps don't 'magically' become incompatible on their own. Apple makes the apps stop working due to changes that THEY themselves make to the iOS. Then when Apple makes changes that break apps, Apple proceeds to blame independent 'developer-slaves' for not keeping their apps updated ('developer slaves' are expected to continually update their apps at their own expense and provide these updates FREE of charge to their customers - and they also get to pay Apple $100 per year plus 30% of sales for the privilege).
I am certain that the matter of incompatibility could be solved by Apple if they wanted to. Modern devices are more powerful than the older ones so they should be able to run more apps, not fewer. It's a choice - as evidenced by the actions of their competitors. Both Microsoft and Google (yikes!) tend to show more concern for their customers by providing some backward compatibility. Apple, however, seems to have chosen to "consider only themselves" in this matter rather than zealously regarding the needs of their customers. And if you voice your objections to Apple about the situation, you may be treated to uncaring, unresponsive customer service with empty words - correspondence that shows a complete disregard for your comments or the situation that they have caused. Based on previous correspondence, I would even say they can seem 'heartless', regardless of the impact their actions have had on you or your wallet. Again, try contacting them yourself if you don't believe me. You may be shocked.
I think Apple is playing the odds that they won't get successfully sued on any wide scale. They will probably continue to sell customers (unknowingly transient) apps - and devices with a lot of storage space to hold such apps - then break them with their iOS updates, sell customers replacement apps, break those with iOS updates, sell more replacement apps... and never be held responsible. If anything does come of it, they may make the parties involved jump through all sorts of hoops without ever realizing a successful outcome. Try searching in major search engines about the tactics Apple may employ to avoid responsibly. Again, you may be shocked.
Clearly such a situation would NEVER be permitted by the public if it involved other paid-for items (e.g. music, books, movies). Can you imagine the backlash if every iOS update caused device owners to permanently lose some music albums, books, or movies that they paid for? Can you imagine if Apple then proceeded to blame the artists, authors, or production studios for not updating every album, book, or movie each time that Apple made changes to their iOS - changes which caused the music, books, or movies to become incompatible? It would be a joke. It IS a joke for apps too! And it's even worse with apps. Unlike music, books, or movies which are (generally speaking) not necessary for most people for work/health, apps contain important data and can become necessary for work / health / etc. Apple owes it to their customers to maintain backwards compatibility. And I think if this matter was litigated fairly, the court would tend to agree.
Years ago, I recall there being a relevant class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, I can't find the specifics online so I will have to rely on my (not so great) memory. I believe the lawsuit was filed against Verizon for software purchased on old (dumb) phones not being transferable to other types of phones. I received the notice in the mail and believe the legal action may have succeeded, despite the fact that "pretty much no one" at that time would have expected those very old 'apps' to work on a variety of subsequent 'dumb phones'. Compare that to today's situation where the very SAME apps that worked on one's smart phone on one day no longer work on the SAME 'smart phone' on the SAME day after an iOS update. Clearly there should be liability in Apple's case! Certainly customers should have a reasonable expectation that their app purchases from Apple will survive Apple's iOS update - just like they expect their music, video, and book purchases to continue working after an iOS update. Again, can you imagine the backlash if iOS updates caused device owners to permanently lose various music albums, books, or movies that they paid for? As a matter of justice, apps should not be treated so differently than other purchases. App purchases that you paid Apple for deserve to continue working even after Apple makes changes to Apple's iOS.
SOME EFFECTS ON CUSTOMERS
And this brings me to the real-world effects Apple's disregard for backwards compatibility has on the lives of its customers - effects which are potentially very significant. For example, the loss of an app's functionality or data may...
* Cause medical issues if medical data is lost
* Cause financial issues if financial data is lot
* Cause other personal issues if personal data is lost
* Result in loss of ability to perform various tasks if related app functionality is lost
* Affect one's job (e.g. if apps relied on for work lose functionality)
* Lead to failure to complete necessary tasks (for example, if checklist type app data or functionality is lost)
* Cause loss of sentimental items (e.g. drawings, notes, etc.) if related app data or functionality is lost
* Affect one's ability to view important or interesting saved information if app data or functionality is lost
* Cause permanent loss of other important items (e.g. critical data, notes, checklists, reminders, files, etc.)
* Cause enormous frustration, hassle, anxiety
* Cause loss of enjoyment of one's device (e.g. due to lost functionality in favorite games)
Depending on the apps involved, loss of app functionality or data could affect one's sleep, one's health, one's wellbeing, one's relationships, one's finance, one's recreation, etc. There are probably countless things people rely on apps for. Each loss of an app - besides resulting in lost data or lost functionality - also represents lost money (if a paid app) and lost effort (e.g. effort required to originally research/purchase app, effort to research/replace app, effort to try to extract or recreate lost data from old app). It can also be heartbreaking or stressful to lose a needed or beloved app.
In some cases, it may be possible to supplant some functionality of a broken app with a 'replacement app', but that won't help an iOS 'update victim' to recover lost data. Also, even if one is able to find a suitable, affordable replacement app (and there is NO guarantee of that), there is no assurance that the 'replacement' app will survive the next iOS update. Hardly a good investment!
Clearly people rely on apps for work, health, recreation, etc. They obviously have the potential to be significantly more important to peoples' lives than music albums, books, or movies (generally speaking) - and that fact should be taken much more seriously by Apple. In fact, as I see it, Apple has an OBLIGATION to their customers to do so. Yet Apple is failing us by disregarding our need for backwards app compatibility - and they are profiting from it! (Think replacement apps.)
ANSWERING OBJECTIONS
Lastly, for those Apple-cheerleaders brimming over with objections (some of them seem to be Apple employees, IMHO), here are some responses...
* Objection: It's not technically possible for Apple to offer backwards compatibility. Response: Actually, simulators/emulators do it all the time (in a big way), so it is possible to run multiple versions together. Also keep in mind Apple's enormous pool of talent and almost unimaginable resources. Also consider that Apple's competitors are able to offer backwards compatibility. It is therefore clearly possible for Apple to likewise incorporate backwards compatibility, but Apple simply chooses not to. This is a situation of their choosing, not an inherent impossibility.
* Objection: I don't use apps / I don't need backwards compatibility. Response: First, you may need it in the future. Second, sorry but it's not all about you. While you may not care if doesn't affect you at present, it does affect many others. In fact, some of us have more invested in apps than in our phones. For us it's a very big deal.
* Objection: Can't some of the old apps be updated to be compatible? Response: If the individual developers are still in business (and they likely are not), it may be possible to get a compatibility update. However, the cost to produce an update is borne entirely by the developer as the updates are free to users. Also, some updates are bad or otherwise undesirable. Some are 'necessary evils' that may at least keep the app functional, but others are quite bad and not suitable. I have had to remove a number of updates that I didn't like or were unsuitable/buggy (btw, look in your Recycle Bin as Apple throws out the old versions of your apps - yes, without asking you).
* Objection: I don't have older apps. Response: Over time, various apps you do have will probably become "older" - even apps you really like/need. Besides, having a proper compatibility mode available to you shouldn't harm you, especially if it was modular and could be removed if not needed (or added in if wanted).
* Objection: Old apps can/should be replaced with newer ones. Response: Newer is not always better. Besides, old apps are already paid for (and they may have been expensive!) and they may contain important data that can't be (or can't easily be) transferred over. Furthermore, there is not always a comparable, affordable new app. Note also that similar apps are NOT the same - a similar app may vary widely in features, options, appearance, quality, ease of use, ongoing costs, etc. New apps aren't exact duplicates of old ones. Newer apps may also be more intrusive on privacy than older ones which didn't have such abilities, and newer ones may not be as reliable (or at least not have a proven track record of reliability). Besides, as a matter of fairness, would you tell people who unjustly suffered a financial loss (e.g. lost music albums they paid for) to simply replace the their losses with other 'similar' items that they would need to pay again for?
* Objection: It is the user's fault for updating the device to a newer iOS. Response: First, Apple persistently tries to get/force you to update to a new version of the iOS that may cause your apps to lose functionality. Updates to the iOS may be downloaded to your device without your knowledge or consent (using your bandwidth), iOS updates may be stored on your device without your knowledge or permission (using up space on your device that you paid for), and you will probably get regularly nagged to update, even if you don't want to. Even after you have 'rejected' an update (so-to-speak, as there may be no way to permanently reject an iOS update), you may get a nag screen to enter your password - a screen that is, IMHO, actually a rather covert way of getting someone to accidentally update the iOS (if you are not careful, it is easier to enter your password out of habit than to dismiss the message). One little slip up at 2 a.m. may be all that is needed to inflict your device with an new version of the iOS that will make many of your apps stop working. Also, if a new device is purchased or provided under warranty, the device will likely contain the latest iOS (or 'update to it automatically'). There is likely no way to choose which iOS version you want on your new device. And, if an unwanted iOS update is completed, there may be no way to go back. Even if you own a device that malfunctions while under warranty and Apple owes you an "at least functionally equivalent" new device, you may be stuck with the new iOS, even though it is NOT functionally equivalent. And you therefore may permanently lose functionality (and data) in many of your apps to have the functionality of your defective device restored. How is that the user's fault?
* Objection: I don't want backwards compatibility to slow down my device. Response: It shouldn't if it was done well (e.g. like competitors already do). Also, it may be useful to have an option for the user to remove compatibility mode if it is not wanted and add it back if later wanted. It could be just one of the many default features on a device that you don't particularly want - and aren't there already plenty of those? If possible, the feature could simply be disabled if not wanted. Or it could be something that is added on by those who want it rather than including it on the device by default. Some of us who depend apps would even pay Apple for this option (although we should not have to). Of course the need for this feature is affected by the number of apps one has, how much they are used/needed, how unusual/irreplaceable one's apps may be, etc. In my case, I have informed Apple that I would rather have a slower phone with access to all my needed data & apps. Their response to me sent a clear message that they didn't really care (and I am putting it very politely here). With them, it seems it's Apple's way nor no way (think: "Go away customer, you're bothering me."). In any event, I wouldn't begrudge you a device without compatibility mode and you shouldn't begrudge me (and others who need it) a device with compatibility mode.
* Objection: The need for backwards compatibility affects only a small number of apps. Response: This is patently untrue. In my case, a recent app update affects close to a third of my apps. Prior to that update, I have lost other apps upon iOS updates. Millions of people have purchased these older apps from Apple and are now given no effective way to obtain backwards compatibility from Apple.
* Objection: You can simply restore an app from a backup. Response: Even if you could, you probably can't get data out (not all apps have way to extract data - and restoring from a backup seems likely to be successful only BEFORE the iOS update, not after if the app no longer functions). Besides, even if you could 'restore the app' from a backup, the app will almost certainly not work if it was broken by an iOS update.
* Objection: It's the developer's fault. Response: Although Apple likes to 'blame developers', it is clearly NOT the developers' fault that Apple made changes to the iOS that make apps stop working. It is Apple's fault for not adding backward compatibility to the iOS. It should not be the responsibility of thousands of developers to update / test / release new versions of their apps FOR FREE every time Apple updates their iOS, especially given Apple's historically awful search in the App Store (where you sometimes can't even find an app when you search for it by the app's own title!). How can a developer stay in business under those conditions? Coding can be very expensive and developers who regularly update apps without corresponding sales can be put out of business. Again, the fault lies with big-pocket Apple for not adding proper backward compatibility to their iOS update - and not with thousands of 'little guy' developers for not updating millions of their apps at their own expense (and without any compensation for doing so).
* Objection: You can get an old device to run old apps. Response: You'd think so, but it has presently proven impossible for me to get an equivalent new iPhone with a previous version of the iOS (or one that won't automatically update to the new iOS). Plus, this is not really a solution as: 1-It would probably eventually update and the older apps would not run, 2-It would not run apps that require the newer iOS version, and 3-It may necessitate having to keep/maintain/carry around various old devices for apps that no longer work. Instead, the solution is for Apple to add backwards compatibility to the iOS, at least as an option.
* Objection: Switch to another type of device. Response: This is hardly a solution to lost apps and lost data, especially given the financial investment one already has in equipment, apps, etc. Besides, one may not care for competitors' offerings. Clearly, the solution to lack of backwards compatibility should not been moving to another device - rather, it should be adding in backwards compatibility.
* I object for some other reason. Response: Please keep in mind that affected customers have paid Apple for these apps, and they have paid Apple for the device to use the apps on. They deserve for Apple to make proper efforts to keep the apps working over time. Each affected app may represent many minutes of selection time/effort/research, the expenditure of hard-earned money, and varying degrees of needs / wants / benefits with respect to these apps. Again, people wouldn't put up with it if their favorite music, books, or videos suddenly became permanently incompatible because of an iOS update, and such items are likely to be far less necessary than apps (e.g. think work-related apps, health/medical apps, checklists, etc.). As things are, there is NO means of backwards compatibility for affected apps so users may loose both app functionality and data. Why is it you don't even think backwards compatibility should be an option for those who want or need it?
- - -
Please get the word out there - link to this blog wherever you can!
- - -
+ Notice: This blog is provided 'as is'. Any visitor comments included on this site are the opinions of their authors. All applicable items are subject to change at any time without notice. We are not lawyers and we make no guarantees regarding any item herein.
- - -
Protected by copyright | Short quotes allowed, but an active link to this blog must be included along with all quotes.
INITIAL OBSERVATIONS
* Apple sells its customers (that is, 'possible future iOS update victims' or PFIUVs) apps that Apple knows will likely be incompatible in a short time (e.g. if the device is updated). These apps may cost purchasers (PFIUVs) good money. There is no known limit to how many apps one may lose use of, or of how much money this loss of apps may cost people. "Tough luck" to the customer (a.k.a. 'iOS update victim') seems to be Apple's outlook, as demonstrated by past events & also by correspondence I have received from them.
* Apple knowingly sells its customers (PFIUVs) apps that are likely to be incompatible on their devices in a short time, yet Apple continues to sell the apps to unsuspecting customers anyhow.
* Apple knows that they are selling their customers (PFIUVs) apps that will likely be incompatible on their devices in a short amount of time, yet they do not clearly & explicitly warn of the likely incompatibility before people purchase the apps.
* Apple knows that they are selling their customers (PFIUVs) apps that they may come to rely on - or even need for work / health / etc. - that will likely not be compatible on their devices for very long, yet they sell them to people anyhow.
* Apple knows that they are selling their customers (PFIUVs) apps that they may come to rely on - or even need for work / health / etc. - that will likely not survive a particular iOS update, yet they 'strongly' push iOS updates on customers who may subsequently lose data & functionality due to the update.
* Apple knows that apps containing their customers' potentially important data (including health/medical data & work data) may permanently lose functionality upon iOS updates. Affected customers may never again be able to retrieve their important data from their own devices for no fault of their own after an iOS update. Yet Apple may continue to push updates on their customers (PFIUVs) which have no means of backwards compatibility for affected apps.
* Apple knows that its customers (PFIUVs) may be making improvident purchases - e.g. app purchases that will likely not be compatible on their devices for very long thanks to an iOS update - which are paid for using Apple gift cards received from people's loved ones that were given to commemorate special days/holidays. Yet Apple effectively does nothing to prevent the situation by failing to provide proper backwards compatibility to the gift recipients. As a result, the 'iOS update victims' unfortunately lose functionality or data in their special birthday / anniversary / etc. gifts. In my case, pending iOS app updates will wipe out many of my special 'birthday gift apps'. I will never again be able to use by birthday gift apps that my loved ones paid Apple for. It doesn't seem right.
* The number of lost apps per app update, per 'iOS update victim', can be many - a single customer may irreversibly lose 100's of apps on a single app update. I speak here from experience - a recent iOS update results in a loss of over 200 of my apps. That's more than TWO HUNDRED apps that I spent time researching, spent good money purchasing, and want / need / rely on. All of these will be lost for no good reason and without any consideration.
* Apple has not provided a realistic method of preventing the loss of apps over time. It seems their business model with respect to apps is to: 1-sell apps, 2-break apps with updates, and 3-sell customers new 'replacement apps'. Seems kind of like a racket to me - or at least a conflict of interest. Shouldn't the company who profits from selling apps also have some concern with keeping these apps usable? How can they sell apps on one hand and break apps with the other hand without any liability?
* Apple does not provide a realistic method of mitigating the damage they cause 'iOS update victims' from lost apps. You might get a refund for more recent purchases, but this is usually only if you ask for it, and typically only for your most recent affected purchases. These recent purchases may represent only a small amount of one's total app losses. Plus, a refund of an app's purchase price does not necessarily mitigate the damage (e.g. for lost data, lost functionality), nor does it necessary cover the cost of a replacement app (if there is one). Not to mention all your time and hassle...
* Apple does not seem to care about the above. Trust me, I have tried. If you don't believe me, try contacting them yourself to see how much they 'care'. Don't be too disappointed if you pour out your heartfelt concerns to them only to get back a form letter that isn't even signed by a human (and may not even contain a person's name). And be on the lookout for empty words, for which I suspect there will be several. Those 'empty words' themselves can seem a further insult when one considers both the meaninglessness of the words themselves, and also of the important concerns that went ignored by Apple. And as a cherry on top, they may even call you 'part of the Apple family' as they callously disregard your concerns. What kind of family it is, I don't know...
ADDITIONAL REFLECTIONS
Again IMHO, Apple doesn't really care that they sell customers apps that won't be functional for very long. I say this based on their actual feedback to me. They do not seem to be very sorry (again, if you don't believe me, try contacting them yourself). But why should they care? They make more money selling customers 'replacement apps' and also save money by not investing in proper backwards compatibility features that their customers would justifiably expect and deserve.
Remember that apps don't 'magically' become incompatible on their own. Apple makes the apps stop working due to changes that THEY themselves make to the iOS. Then when Apple makes changes that break apps, Apple proceeds to blame independent 'developer-slaves' for not keeping their apps updated ('developer slaves' are expected to continually update their apps at their own expense and provide these updates FREE of charge to their customers - and they also get to pay Apple $100 per year plus 30% of sales for the privilege).
I am certain that the matter of incompatibility could be solved by Apple if they wanted to. Modern devices are more powerful than the older ones so they should be able to run more apps, not fewer. It's a choice - as evidenced by the actions of their competitors. Both Microsoft and Google (yikes!) tend to show more concern for their customers by providing some backward compatibility. Apple, however, seems to have chosen to "consider only themselves" in this matter rather than zealously regarding the needs of their customers. And if you voice your objections to Apple about the situation, you may be treated to uncaring, unresponsive customer service with empty words - correspondence that shows a complete disregard for your comments or the situation that they have caused. Based on previous correspondence, I would even say they can seem 'heartless', regardless of the impact their actions have had on you or your wallet. Again, try contacting them yourself if you don't believe me. You may be shocked.
I think Apple is playing the odds that they won't get successfully sued on any wide scale. They will probably continue to sell customers (unknowingly transient) apps - and devices with a lot of storage space to hold such apps - then break them with their iOS updates, sell customers replacement apps, break those with iOS updates, sell more replacement apps... and never be held responsible. If anything does come of it, they may make the parties involved jump through all sorts of hoops without ever realizing a successful outcome. Try searching in major search engines about the tactics Apple may employ to avoid responsibly. Again, you may be shocked.
Clearly such a situation would NEVER be permitted by the public if it involved other paid-for items (e.g. music, books, movies). Can you imagine the backlash if every iOS update caused device owners to permanently lose some music albums, books, or movies that they paid for? Can you imagine if Apple then proceeded to blame the artists, authors, or production studios for not updating every album, book, or movie each time that Apple made changes to their iOS - changes which caused the music, books, or movies to become incompatible? It would be a joke. It IS a joke for apps too! And it's even worse with apps. Unlike music, books, or movies which are (generally speaking) not necessary for most people for work/health, apps contain important data and can become necessary for work / health / etc. Apple owes it to their customers to maintain backwards compatibility. And I think if this matter was litigated fairly, the court would tend to agree.
Years ago, I recall there being a relevant class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, I can't find the specifics online so I will have to rely on my (not so great) memory. I believe the lawsuit was filed against Verizon for software purchased on old (dumb) phones not being transferable to other types of phones. I received the notice in the mail and believe the legal action may have succeeded, despite the fact that "pretty much no one" at that time would have expected those very old 'apps' to work on a variety of subsequent 'dumb phones'. Compare that to today's situation where the very SAME apps that worked on one's smart phone on one day no longer work on the SAME 'smart phone' on the SAME day after an iOS update. Clearly there should be liability in Apple's case! Certainly customers should have a reasonable expectation that their app purchases from Apple will survive Apple's iOS update - just like they expect their music, video, and book purchases to continue working after an iOS update. Again, can you imagine the backlash if iOS updates caused device owners to permanently lose various music albums, books, or movies that they paid for? As a matter of justice, apps should not be treated so differently than other purchases. App purchases that you paid Apple for deserve to continue working even after Apple makes changes to Apple's iOS.
SOME EFFECTS ON CUSTOMERS
And this brings me to the real-world effects Apple's disregard for backwards compatibility has on the lives of its customers - effects which are potentially very significant. For example, the loss of an app's functionality or data may...
* Cause medical issues if medical data is lost
* Cause financial issues if financial data is lot
* Cause other personal issues if personal data is lost
* Result in loss of ability to perform various tasks if related app functionality is lost
* Affect one's job (e.g. if apps relied on for work lose functionality)
* Lead to failure to complete necessary tasks (for example, if checklist type app data or functionality is lost)
* Cause loss of sentimental items (e.g. drawings, notes, etc.) if related app data or functionality is lost
* Affect one's ability to view important or interesting saved information if app data or functionality is lost
* Cause permanent loss of other important items (e.g. critical data, notes, checklists, reminders, files, etc.)
* Cause enormous frustration, hassle, anxiety
* Cause loss of enjoyment of one's device (e.g. due to lost functionality in favorite games)
Depending on the apps involved, loss of app functionality or data could affect one's sleep, one's health, one's wellbeing, one's relationships, one's finance, one's recreation, etc. There are probably countless things people rely on apps for. Each loss of an app - besides resulting in lost data or lost functionality - also represents lost money (if a paid app) and lost effort (e.g. effort required to originally research/purchase app, effort to research/replace app, effort to try to extract or recreate lost data from old app). It can also be heartbreaking or stressful to lose a needed or beloved app.
In some cases, it may be possible to supplant some functionality of a broken app with a 'replacement app', but that won't help an iOS 'update victim' to recover lost data. Also, even if one is able to find a suitable, affordable replacement app (and there is NO guarantee of that), there is no assurance that the 'replacement' app will survive the next iOS update. Hardly a good investment!
Clearly people rely on apps for work, health, recreation, etc. They obviously have the potential to be significantly more important to peoples' lives than music albums, books, or movies (generally speaking) - and that fact should be taken much more seriously by Apple. In fact, as I see it, Apple has an OBLIGATION to their customers to do so. Yet Apple is failing us by disregarding our need for backwards app compatibility - and they are profiting from it! (Think replacement apps.)
ANSWERING OBJECTIONS
Lastly, for those Apple-cheerleaders brimming over with objections (some of them seem to be Apple employees, IMHO), here are some responses...
* Objection: It's not technically possible for Apple to offer backwards compatibility. Response: Actually, simulators/emulators do it all the time (in a big way), so it is possible to run multiple versions together. Also keep in mind Apple's enormous pool of talent and almost unimaginable resources. Also consider that Apple's competitors are able to offer backwards compatibility. It is therefore clearly possible for Apple to likewise incorporate backwards compatibility, but Apple simply chooses not to. This is a situation of their choosing, not an inherent impossibility.
* Objection: I don't use apps / I don't need backwards compatibility. Response: First, you may need it in the future. Second, sorry but it's not all about you. While you may not care if doesn't affect you at present, it does affect many others. In fact, some of us have more invested in apps than in our phones. For us it's a very big deal.
* Objection: Can't some of the old apps be updated to be compatible? Response: If the individual developers are still in business (and they likely are not), it may be possible to get a compatibility update. However, the cost to produce an update is borne entirely by the developer as the updates are free to users. Also, some updates are bad or otherwise undesirable. Some are 'necessary evils' that may at least keep the app functional, but others are quite bad and not suitable. I have had to remove a number of updates that I didn't like or were unsuitable/buggy (btw, look in your Recycle Bin as Apple throws out the old versions of your apps - yes, without asking you).
* Objection: I don't have older apps. Response: Over time, various apps you do have will probably become "older" - even apps you really like/need. Besides, having a proper compatibility mode available to you shouldn't harm you, especially if it was modular and could be removed if not needed (or added in if wanted).
* Objection: Old apps can/should be replaced with newer ones. Response: Newer is not always better. Besides, old apps are already paid for (and they may have been expensive!) and they may contain important data that can't be (or can't easily be) transferred over. Furthermore, there is not always a comparable, affordable new app. Note also that similar apps are NOT the same - a similar app may vary widely in features, options, appearance, quality, ease of use, ongoing costs, etc. New apps aren't exact duplicates of old ones. Newer apps may also be more intrusive on privacy than older ones which didn't have such abilities, and newer ones may not be as reliable (or at least not have a proven track record of reliability). Besides, as a matter of fairness, would you tell people who unjustly suffered a financial loss (e.g. lost music albums they paid for) to simply replace the their losses with other 'similar' items that they would need to pay again for?
* Objection: It is the user's fault for updating the device to a newer iOS. Response: First, Apple persistently tries to get/force you to update to a new version of the iOS that may cause your apps to lose functionality. Updates to the iOS may be downloaded to your device without your knowledge or consent (using your bandwidth), iOS updates may be stored on your device without your knowledge or permission (using up space on your device that you paid for), and you will probably get regularly nagged to update, even if you don't want to. Even after you have 'rejected' an update (so-to-speak, as there may be no way to permanently reject an iOS update), you may get a nag screen to enter your password - a screen that is, IMHO, actually a rather covert way of getting someone to accidentally update the iOS (if you are not careful, it is easier to enter your password out of habit than to dismiss the message). One little slip up at 2 a.m. may be all that is needed to inflict your device with an new version of the iOS that will make many of your apps stop working. Also, if a new device is purchased or provided under warranty, the device will likely contain the latest iOS (or 'update to it automatically'). There is likely no way to choose which iOS version you want on your new device. And, if an unwanted iOS update is completed, there may be no way to go back. Even if you own a device that malfunctions while under warranty and Apple owes you an "at least functionally equivalent" new device, you may be stuck with the new iOS, even though it is NOT functionally equivalent. And you therefore may permanently lose functionality (and data) in many of your apps to have the functionality of your defective device restored. How is that the user's fault?
* Objection: I don't want backwards compatibility to slow down my device. Response: It shouldn't if it was done well (e.g. like competitors already do). Also, it may be useful to have an option for the user to remove compatibility mode if it is not wanted and add it back if later wanted. It could be just one of the many default features on a device that you don't particularly want - and aren't there already plenty of those? If possible, the feature could simply be disabled if not wanted. Or it could be something that is added on by those who want it rather than including it on the device by default. Some of us who depend apps would even pay Apple for this option (although we should not have to). Of course the need for this feature is affected by the number of apps one has, how much they are used/needed, how unusual/irreplaceable one's apps may be, etc. In my case, I have informed Apple that I would rather have a slower phone with access to all my needed data & apps. Their response to me sent a clear message that they didn't really care (and I am putting it very politely here). With them, it seems it's Apple's way nor no way (think: "Go away customer, you're bothering me."). In any event, I wouldn't begrudge you a device without compatibility mode and you shouldn't begrudge me (and others who need it) a device with compatibility mode.
* Objection: The need for backwards compatibility affects only a small number of apps. Response: This is patently untrue. In my case, a recent app update affects close to a third of my apps. Prior to that update, I have lost other apps upon iOS updates. Millions of people have purchased these older apps from Apple and are now given no effective way to obtain backwards compatibility from Apple.
* Objection: You can simply restore an app from a backup. Response: Even if you could, you probably can't get data out (not all apps have way to extract data - and restoring from a backup seems likely to be successful only BEFORE the iOS update, not after if the app no longer functions). Besides, even if you could 'restore the app' from a backup, the app will almost certainly not work if it was broken by an iOS update.
* Objection: It's the developer's fault. Response: Although Apple likes to 'blame developers', it is clearly NOT the developers' fault that Apple made changes to the iOS that make apps stop working. It is Apple's fault for not adding backward compatibility to the iOS. It should not be the responsibility of thousands of developers to update / test / release new versions of their apps FOR FREE every time Apple updates their iOS, especially given Apple's historically awful search in the App Store (where you sometimes can't even find an app when you search for it by the app's own title!). How can a developer stay in business under those conditions? Coding can be very expensive and developers who regularly update apps without corresponding sales can be put out of business. Again, the fault lies with big-pocket Apple for not adding proper backward compatibility to their iOS update - and not with thousands of 'little guy' developers for not updating millions of their apps at their own expense (and without any compensation for doing so).
* Objection: You can get an old device to run old apps. Response: You'd think so, but it has presently proven impossible for me to get an equivalent new iPhone with a previous version of the iOS (or one that won't automatically update to the new iOS). Plus, this is not really a solution as: 1-It would probably eventually update and the older apps would not run, 2-It would not run apps that require the newer iOS version, and 3-It may necessitate having to keep/maintain/carry around various old devices for apps that no longer work. Instead, the solution is for Apple to add backwards compatibility to the iOS, at least as an option.
* Objection: Switch to another type of device. Response: This is hardly a solution to lost apps and lost data, especially given the financial investment one already has in equipment, apps, etc. Besides, one may not care for competitors' offerings. Clearly, the solution to lack of backwards compatibility should not been moving to another device - rather, it should be adding in backwards compatibility.
* I object for some other reason. Response: Please keep in mind that affected customers have paid Apple for these apps, and they have paid Apple for the device to use the apps on. They deserve for Apple to make proper efforts to keep the apps working over time. Each affected app may represent many minutes of selection time/effort/research, the expenditure of hard-earned money, and varying degrees of needs / wants / benefits with respect to these apps. Again, people wouldn't put up with it if their favorite music, books, or videos suddenly became permanently incompatible because of an iOS update, and such items are likely to be far less necessary than apps (e.g. think work-related apps, health/medical apps, checklists, etc.). As things are, there is NO means of backwards compatibility for affected apps so users may loose both app functionality and data. Why is it you don't even think backwards compatibility should be an option for those who want or need it?
- - -
Please get the word out there - link to this blog wherever you can!
- - -
+ Notice: This blog is provided 'as is'. Any visitor comments included on this site are the opinions of their authors. All applicable items are subject to change at any time without notice. We are not lawyers and we make no guarantees regarding any item herein.
- - -
Protected by copyright | Short quotes allowed, but an active link to this blog must be included along with all quotes.
Comments
Post a Comment