Automated changes to source code? Do you automate the automation via source code? Does the source code for the automated updates exist in the same repository that it updates? Circular logic if so Also not recommended as it becomes increasingly difficult to control source
Automatic server updates are kind of dumb imho, they are very insecure - why not write a script that "accidentally" points the installer to some juicy virus? If its as easy as you say to insert code automatically then it's a vulnerable point and attackers will find it. Mind you when you're trying to defend your devices from the ultimate malware, there really is only one way to achieve this ... Don't use iOS at all! Then you needn't waste your time trying to escape it.
@@DailyCorvid @Daily Corvid 1) server updates I mean, not sure why it's insecure? Maybe a confidence issue? "points" So a person has to breach virsiok control and breach where the script is held. Okay sure. "attackers" Will more then likely use a more vulnerable library "don't use ios" I don't
IMO the court should rule to force apple to allow side loading apps, some people don't give a crab about security they just prefer convenience, (like android you get a security warning) I bought the device why i can't download whatever i want on it?
You say "imagine" like it's some crazy high number. If you have 50 apps, say 20% of them are old apps that don't need updating. That's 10 apps you'd have to version-bump every couple of years.
@@dannymartial7997 an intern forgets to update it and suddenly your app is in this back catalogue where no one can access it but it's 'tecnically' still there
Everyone saying that you can just change something minor every now and then to get past the requirement doesn't understand that you could not touch an app for two years and when you come back to it to update it, all the tools you needed to make it have been updated/lost and you're app might not be able to be updated properly.
Which is probably one of the points? You gotta keep your release tooling working, so you're ready when a security flaw is found, or when Apple does make breaking changes to a framework.
In two years your code is likely to be trash anyway, if it's a simple app just bloody rewrite the thing and accept that Apple is fascist about their shit, which you bought but will never 100% own. To be clear, your code won't be trash in two years but the DEVICE will be gimped in software by Apple in two years, and it will barely function your app. It's a flaw in Apple's ethics.
@C L in this conversation it seems to me you and your little cronies at Apple ;) You deleted your original comment because what I said was true of it. Proof enough for most people! That is the kind of sneaky shit Russia would be proud of.
"Abandoned" ah yes, I write a small app that does one thing and it works great, but now I need to manage it just so that it doesn't get deleted. Yeah, I'll stick to sideloading my work on Android.
I mean as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen.
@@officialANON001 But that's a different situation entirely (and, to be honest, more of a symptom of iOS not being good at backwards compatibility; I remember this being a big issue when the iPhone X came out since older apps didn't resize properly). If an app /doesn't work/ then it's reasonable to let the developer know that it'll be delisted. But to remove a perfectly functioning app just because it isn't receiving attention is stupid.
I see this as a way for them to force holdouts to fill out the App privacy section thing, among other things like pruning abandoned apps that no longer have a point of contact. They also might have changed their review process recently, and forcing everyone to update is a way to get everything verified against the new standards. Just change the color of something by one hue and push the update lol
Even apps supported by big corps sometimes don't get update steam had a time where they didn't update their app from Jun 10, 2016 to Sep 18, 2019 3 years without an update
Even if Google went down the same route, sideloading still exists on Android. It would still suck, though. This will also suck for games; Apple is going to cause so much lost media in the future if they keep this up.
EDIT: Turns out I was not 100% correct, apps still remain available for the version you were targeting and older devices - just checked again to make sure. Google is doing the same thing aswell actually, I came across this while researching the Android Dev APIs a few days ago For example, your app needs to target at least Android 11 before November 1st, 2022 - otherwise it'll get unlisted from the store. The same requirement exists for Android 12, but a year later. There are also requirements for adding new apps to the store and adding new updates to existing apps. It should be noted that this doesn't set a requirement for phones to be on Android 11 to install new updates, Apps can still allow (and pretty much all do) older Android versions to continue using them.
Google going down same path ? Their more intelligent.. The difference: Google understands customers.. Apple never did. Not an Apple hater, but u'm not gonna lie either.
@C L ...naw, your wrong there. What they said makes sense. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why would I want to buy the new hotness when the old one works just as well (if not better in some cases) and looks just as good? For that matter. No one buys windows 98 anymore, not because it's old, but because there are a load of incompatibilities with 98 and modern computers, hardware, and software. Not to mention 98 isn't that good to begin with. Most people skipped it because 95 was basically just 98 anyway so, say it with me now, "Why buy the new hotness when the old one works more or less the same and looks just as good". I know for a fact that's why my dad skipped 98 and waited for XP.
One good reason for this is if apps are using 3rd party dependencies as those dependencies become out dated they will have known security exploits. A better way to handle this though would be to directly monitor 3rd party dependencies in apps and take down apps with out dated dependencies.
agree with this point. To add: They should force rebuild \ updates for security. Reason they are doing it this way, by date, is because other methods are even more arbitrary. One way would be to do a CVE scan of every app in the store, and say "if your app is above a CVE score of 3 you have to rebuild". Well, why 3? Why not 2? or 4? How hard is to to assign a CVE every month to every app in the AppStore? Easier to just say: do it by date. This is a positive thing from a security perspective. Agree that it is a pain in the butt for everyone, but that is security for you.
@@robster3323 yeah going by date is definitely easier, but it doesn't fully cover the use case. You could be releasing monthly updates for a software project and be using 10 year old versions of some packages. I've seen this in many commercial software products. Although I think this is less likely in the immediate future because there's been renewed interest in keeping dependencies up to date following the log4j exploit.
Complete Apps you have to purchase once in order to download and use, should be exempt from this rule or at least giving a much larger time window for an update. Besides, Apple already makes certain apps useless and unavailable if those are too old for the current IOS-version. While I can see the arguement. There are just some Apps that work completely fine on the day they released, without much hassle.
"That would throw errors." What would? A vulnerable library that is exploited to hack your device wouldn't throw any errors if exploited "correctly". Feels disgusting to sorta defend Apple. Still don't like that move. I would rather just add a big fat warning to apps that weren't updated in a certain time and maybe down rate them in the search.
Apple hasn't set any standards the app update has to follow - so the iphone customers will get what they exactly deserve a fake version bump which actually muddies up consumer's information on when an app was last updated so this problem can be atleast navigated from user side - not using un-updated apps
I believe, based on their past behavior on basically everything else they do, is about forcing people to give them more money. If you have a finished app but you need to "maintain" it so it doesn't get deleted, you will have to dedicate resources to it, that means constantly spending money that you need to get back somehow, forcing you to go from single purchase to subscription model, and then they take their cut through the App Store. Basically developers will be charged rent to have their apps in the store or they will be dealt with.
I'm a musician. I have a tuner app on my phone that gives me the pitch of a sound in Hz, and its respective note. It works, there's LITERALLY nothing wrong with it, in terms of functionality. But hey, let's have the developers spend time adding content that does not enhance the core purpose of the program.
First? Also they need to relax on how often you update apps. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I love apple’s hardware but god they really are just trying to push indie developers off the platform.
I mean as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen.
@@officialANON001 I think the app deletion shouldn't be automatic, but based on user feedback. If an app hasn't been updated for a year and many users are reporting excessive glitches or unoptimized UI, it can be deleted, but will be left alone otherwise.
I feel like the abandoned part has to mean apps that are unused/rarely used by consumers. Like all those now obsolete apps like all those flashlight apps, or hidden photo albums. If it’s abandoned by the devs but work fine and have a meaningful user base should be fine to stay. But this will also make for someone to make a script that will send out a timed bump every two years or whatever
This also forces people to get new apple computers/phones. If your device gets too old, it won't let you download new apps, artificially making your device unusable. I had an iphone 4S until 2020, which worked great for everything I needed. But I couldn't download any new apps (even simple flashlight apps) because they required new IOS that my phone wouldn't allow. Any older apps were granfathered-in, meaning I could use them just fine, but I couldn't always update, and I couldn't download it again if I uninstalled it. By abandoning old libraries and forcing developers to use new ones, they make apps no longer able to run on old devices, meaning you can't even grandfather them in.
I have similar problems on Android recently... "You have not interacted with xyz app in 6 months, we are removing it's permissions, so it cannot work".. ¬_¬ ... The reason I have not interacted with it in 6 months, is because it's a background app that works flawlessly and hasn't broken, so had NO NEED to interact with it.. Yes, I can go in an exempt it from losing it's permission.. I just shouldn't have to.. It's been working fine for 11 years... why try to step on its' toes NOW? (just as a FYI, the app itself has been receiving updates, this is just me complaining about the interactivity requirement from user now)
Would recompiling an app periodically have any security benefits maybe ? Fresher SDKs/Libraries with latest sec patches maybe ? I dunno ...just a thought
yep and thats why i think apple is doing this plus recompiling the app should renew the old UI and better performance also, this all to improve UX i dont see why people dont like it, the dev just gotta open the project file and test build it then submit it, maybe if the dev don't own a MAC to update it thats the problem
@@DeeezNuts I can see both sides (assuming we're right about the motivation) If you had an app which theoretically had like, zero security risk API calls it'd be a pain. But I think it'd be a bit much to expect Apple to fine tooth comb apps to that level. (I'm not sure how automated you could make that) But yeah, it's locking people into keeping Mac machine and dev license. Not exactly outside Apples M.O. to be fair
@@Jay_Long_626 I don't think its the license, doesn't the app gets deleted if you don't renew(not sure) also forgot to add earlier that with them showing what the app tracks in app store before you download, i thinks its mandatory to state what you track, but because the apps are old and not updated there isn't any data about that for the apps. i can't of anything other than the MAC thing
@@Jay_Long_626 i think i have an idea of why they doing it.. by updating the apps with new SDKs its most likely will make it not work on old IOS versions which will force the Users to update/get a new phone
@@Justin_Leahy They do support them thats why i still use my 8+ fine, but with the SSR program they don't support any old model which are the ones that need SSR. with that and the mandatory updates to old apps(which might cause them not to work) if feels like they really just want to abandon them , IMO.
Only justification I can see is if they're using an old, vulnerable library. But they should be targeting apps with vulnerabilities then, not just any old app. (But seriously though, update your dependencies regularly)
I immediately figured this was to make all apps have the “nutrition” privacy label. That way they can say at WWDC that all apps have included it to promote themselves and further justify that the Apple App Store provides specific safety that another one doesn’t.
Version bumps are not easy as you have to recompile them for the latest version of iOS and that can mean a significant amount of work as literally every system component will have changed
To be fair, as an iPad app developer for work (god help me) you can't NOT update your app every year, as the certificate from Apple expires annually - so you have literally NO CHOICE but to update your app at least once a year. So..........?? It has been this way for a long time.... at least for Enterprise developers like myself.
As someone who is a developer for an enterprise organization, this is the most frustrating thing. We have 1 small app that does very little, but our users wanted it in the app store, so one developer (who is now technically a manager) learned how to write IOS apps and now once a year he has to crack open our perfectly functional app, recompile it, fix all the new errors and warnings (due to deprecations) and upload it to the app store again. I can't wait until we convert that stupid app to a webpage.
at a minimum, any developer needs to tell if the old App still works fine with newer versions of iOS and hardware. If they do that then leaving it on the store as is would be fine with me, even if it was made 3 or 4 years ago. Maybe a yearly update to the description verifying the newest hardware and OS it was tested on for any potential new buyers.
Or at least have it fit properly to your screen, it’s doesn’t happen nearly as much now a days but every now and then I’ll come across an app not optimized for the notched iPhones (like not being optimized for the different aspect ratio, so it’s blown up)
They literally don't need this. Apple has the data on error rates from its apps. If error rates are spiking they can notify developers and give time to fix before removal. No, they don't need ur idea
@@Alan-me8bs I rarely send the report to Apple so they don't always know error rates. Who the fuck are you to tell me Apple doesn't need my idea ? I said my opinion, it wasn't meant for Apple anyway. You can disagree without being an asshole about it.
Apple just dont understand the idea that software can be without bugs. You NEED to update - like they do - all the time... I think it tells a lot about the quality of apple software..
I believe this is mostly to reduce clutter on the App Store and to make sure abandoned apps that developers are no longer supporting aren’t left on the App Store unnecessarily. I can see why some apps that already work fine wouldn’t “need” updates but it’s relatively easy to do a version bump just to let apple know you’re still managing your app.
It's awkward but I think I might actually (edit:)kinda(/) be with apple on this one: Go for a annual versioning, i.e. year as the first value in version and at least once a year rebuild against updated/newer libraries, so even if your program hasn't changed it will get security and stability fixes of the updated libraries.
It's because of crap like this that I bought a refurb Apple device last time instead of new to see how Apple is going on about stuff. Every time they take a step forward because of laws forcing them to do sh*t right, they take 10 back. Next time I say to myself "the refurb Apple" looks like a better value, I'll think about it 5 times instead of twice.
The last comment about errors I think it's missing the point when it comes to library security. We have seen cases where a common coding library has a security vulnerability in it and loads of devs have it in their code. It may not error, but it will be a security weakness.
And these issues pop up and are closed relatively quickly. Apples solution is shit. Also depticated / vulnerable libraries can be marked with warnings. So apple knows which apps use them
It's a way to keep apps updated with the latest optimizations and SDKs. Rebuilding and version bumping actually does what Apple (and ultimately users, indirectly) wants: fast adaptation of apps to new technologies and devices. For example, when the new iPad Mini came out, i believe that a way to adapt to the new form factor was just rebuilding and reuploading the app without making any change, just rebuilding with the latest Xcode. Otherwise iOS would try to adjust the app layout itself at runtime but not always with exceptional results.
not exactly? don't app development usually use frozen library versions? A rebuild will actually do nothing in that case (the entire point of having a very good dependency management system is to have repeatable consistent builds that always uses the same dependencies specified) the developer has to manually and intentionally update the library versions
@@aravindpallippara1577 The libraries apple wants you to update (use the latest versions of) are their libraries, like UIKit. Also, rebuilding with the latest xcode makes optimizations for newly released devices, as far as i know. Xcode updates its swift compiler periodically with more optimizations in general, so a rebuild actually changes the output binary In some cases, like with iOS 12, i don't remember the reason, Apple managed to auto update all apps to have a faster launch time, just based on the already compiled binary. i remember it was a pretty big difference of performance.
To upload an app you have to pay 100$ a year for dev account. Let's say I'm a student who just made a couple of games 2 years ago and don't realy want to make games anymore. I have to pay 100$ again to just bump a version so that my games wont get deleted?
I wonder what is the % of app that has not been update for years and still works fine. I have a tons of app purchased years ago, they no longer run well, developers abandoned them years ago. Yet people don’t know, still buying them without realizing it is a lost child already.
Well… I would probably just change the font of one hidden/obscure menu, and change it back 6 months later calling it a bug fix. That or something stupid, unless apple forbids that.
I think the original idea was to help on the cybersecurity space. I don't like apple however if an app hasn't been updated in a long time a malicious person could easily take advantage of it even if the app works fine.
One more time.... Google is considering something similar,but it is related to targeted android versions,and less about raw age.Its going to muffle discover ability for these api target lowers. There's an android police article written on April 6th that explains it. It actually seems like this is apple copying Google,and well....I understand the idea and concept,but I do still want user choice. At least on Android you can sideload to bypass....still ...the argument of "old is bad" is flawed in my opinion.
If it’s a broken app that hasn’t been updated in a very long time. It’s also being uninstalled or rarely opened by users (I’m sure they can see that data) then that makes sense to remove it from the App Store.
You have an app that has not received an update in four years? Hah! I'm using an app on my iPhone that was last updated six years ago - and it is working absolutely fine.
isnt it like 10k to get a ap-fail on the, we want money store. then 5k if you change somthing. to make sure it works.... so its a, update and giv us more money or ... im at a loss here, get a android phone, install base linix, get all the protection android has deleted, find a dialer, phone is better, faster, more protectioned, less batteri use, cost $300 not $2k. and if you have time to boot it. is a laptop.. next ltt topic, linux vs adroid. how much did hey strip from linux, and where to get droid?
Apple removing apps is a pain in the be-hind.. For legit reasons, not comply with App Store rules... fair enough... but not just because 'they want to" money island (LucasArts) iOS games got canned right around the time Disney took over.. The valid reasons to keep using older apps is more is like anything "reason to keep using old apps" which is: There are no better equivalent out there, and even if there are, its to the exact same behaviour, doesn't function the same way, cometic issues etc... all valid points. But then the negative would be, developers would have to keep old code around, just for the % of users who.use. older phones (which would be reducing more and more anyway over time) Again, forcing users along the road..... It happens all the time even with steaming now too. When will it end... Customers come first my ****
Apple is known to not care about breaking compatibility with old software in new OS updates, so them seeing this as normal for developers on their platform to do is expected.
Apple hates gaming and they will always take the chance to prove me right. I mean it’s one thing to not have many games on your platform but to actively screw around with the ones that are.
Yeah. But....if iOS updates and devices come out with new features and screen sizes (like the iPad mini 6...) and higher resolutions, and the apps in question haven't been updated to take advantage of them (and I'm talking years down the line), I would consider those abandoned too, even if they work perfectly.
I don't necessarily disagree with Apple. Personally, idc if the app has a million 5 star reviews, if I haven't seen an update in the last couple years, I'm going to assume it's not supported anymore and I'm rolling the dice on if it's going to keep working after I've invested my time into using it. iOS versions (and phone models) are constantly updating, make sure the app still works optimally in the new OS version, and then just push, like others have said, a color change for an invisible object, and at least show that the app has been looked at recently by it's developers.
Not to mention security issues. I took a class in college wrt Android development, and you'd be surprised how many older apps are just not up to standard. Mind you, these apps are like waaay older than 2 years, and the barrier to entry for Android apps is probably lower. But when building apps, you target X% many devices, not expecting to support every android device. The implicaiton is we don't support old enough hardware, why wouldn't software be the same?
@@Alan-me8bs it's not a perfect solution, but if you were a giant company like apple, this is a much simpler solution than dealing with each app. I'm sure this wasn't a haphazard decision, even if it feels a little reckless. Is it a good solution? No probably not. But carpet bombing old, insecure or even just aesthetically unpleasing apps might actually be apple's objective here so really the cricitsm should be towards apple's goals and not so much the method.
I disagree with apps never needing updates. It is very likely they have security vulnerabilities, especially if they have 0 updates in two years! Is this the best solution? Maybe not. Because it still doesn't force developers to fix those vulnerabilities. But there can definitely be a need, even if the app is "finished".
i think apple has done tisalso bevore becasue i had already this problem a few years ago that i couldnt download a baught app again. (the company went bankrupt but the app worked perfect) after sending apple a e-mail i could download it again, after the iphone decided to auto remove the app cause to not often use... so at least this problem is solved by keeping the app downloadable for people who baught it already...
I would hope Luke being responsible for a software company would know how important it is to keep your libraries up to date. A 2 year old app without crashes can absolutely be full of security issues. Software is never complete. It makes total sense to me for Apple to start forcing the developers to keep their apps up to date.
This doesn’t apply to something like a calculator app. Assuming they add all the features they plan to right off the bat and have no bugs, there’s no reason to be forced to update it. There aren’t security issues with something that has such a basic function.
@@CupofJ0E your super simple calculator app that doesn't use any external libraries is simply not a realistic app that would be impacted by this because there is literally no one downloading such an app so there is no harm in removing it. The app might exist as a hobby project in which case again there is no harm in removing it. Any non trivial app will need to be updated regularly or risk becoming a security problem. A trivial app will not be in large use and won't impact many people if it is removed, realistically. And if their hobby project with 2 users is still important to them, they can update the app and they won't be removed, problem solved.
@@RoukeBroersma even then, if no security issue is discovered, there’s nothing to change, as another comment said, imagine the amount of useless updates people will have to download just to keep the app on the App Store.
@@CupofJ0E the security issues would have been discovered and fixed in the used libraries. On some small apps I manage I have updates to the used libraries every week. If I would not timely update the libraries and release a new version of the apps I would potentially be exposing my users to the problems. If the developers of an app are not doing this they have effectively abandoned the app, which means any security issues will likely never be fixed. That is not acceptable and it's good Apple is trying to do something about it.
Absolutely shocks me how blind you guys are to security updates. I am not saying the 30 day period is fair, I think that is silly. But seriously lacking in understanding that security updates for applications exist. I cannot tell you how many vulnerabilities and bad coding security I have seen used and found looking at apps. This can be very dangerous, especially when the apps now a days require permissions that imo are scary. Not saying I agree entirely with apple on this, but I really found the scoffing annoying considering how little you thought about it.
but they can never be truly "finished" as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen.
Can we please delete the producer at the end. I usually watch all the clips of a wan in sequence and I can't possibly listen to that guy 5-7 times every few days. IT'S ALSO THE SAME CLIP!!!
Apples not wrong. And when you buy something off the Google play store, you’re rolling the dice whether or not it will work. Especially 3-D applications. Apple is constantly putting out new updates to their iOS and it’s not unreasonable to ask a developer who is selling an app on the App Store to make it fully compatible with the hardware of newer phones. If it’s not financially viable, then Apple needs to incentivize it, but they are not wrong with this idea
Except that wasn't the issue. Apple just demanded them push an update. They didn't demand anything be fixed. Regardless of that, if apple's updates are causing apps to break, that isn't the fault of the app-makers, it's the fault of apple.
@@officerminiwheats Didn’t even think about that. I was unaware that you could pay ahead of time for licenses. I thought it was just embedded into the amount of revenue you got from Apple
@@officialANON001 it is a minor annoyance but for some people that can disturb their workflow at an inopportune time. For instance if Linus' permanent Teamviewer license was invalidated by Apple via the arbitrary app update rate.
Why is she holding the pen like she's about to stab somebody to death with it? I literally can't look away it looks like she's gonna surprise Linus with a pen in the temple lol. You can't seriously get anything done like that can you? She needs a little rubber block device that goes over the pen shaft to make the middle more comfy for awkward users of pens. Pen grafters? Arrrgh wish I could remember their name! It's either that or terribly bad handwriting, that falls off the page and knackers your wrists before you've actually written anything! Best of luck hope you get one, I forget what they're called. But they're shit hot when you need and don't have one :) Trust! Linus you should supply them through your work budget as it's usually dyslexic people who were not corrected early on at school. The block takes a few months then you can take it off and write perfectly without it! Highly recommend them, sorry have no idea what the company name was but sure you can Google them! Pen grips maybe...
I mean as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen...
I suppose you write a script that changes the color of a non-visible element and updates the app periodically.
Lol changes it to an rgb value seeded with current time. So it's always different and requires fuck all development
Automated changes to source code? Do you automate the automation via source code? Does the source code for the automated updates exist in the same repository that it updates? Circular logic if so
Also not recommended as it becomes increasingly difficult to control source
@@italianbasegard nah it wouldn't be bad. Doing a rebuild of the current master and running this script.
Nice try to sound smart tho lol
Automatic server updates are kind of dumb imho, they are very insecure - why not write a script that "accidentally" points the installer to some juicy virus? If its as easy as you say to insert code automatically then it's a vulnerable point and attackers will find it.
Mind you when you're trying to defend your devices from the ultimate malware, there really is only one way to achieve this ... Don't use iOS at all! Then you needn't waste your time trying to escape it.
@@DailyCorvid @Daily Corvid 1) server updates
I mean, not sure why it's insecure? Maybe a confidence issue?
"points"
So a person has to breach virsiok control and breach where the script is held. Okay sure.
"attackers"
Will more then likely use a more vulnerable library
"don't use ios"
I don't
Imagine the amount of useless updates the users will have to download, just because the devs want to keep their app on the platform
IMO the court should rule to force apple to allow side loading apps, some people don't give a crab about security they just prefer convenience, (like android you get a security warning)
I bought the device why i can't download whatever i want on it?
So, basically like FB messenger which have update like every week and that change log for last year is everytime the same text... :D
You say "imagine" like it's some crazy high number. If you have 50 apps, say 20% of them are old apps that don't need updating. That's 10 apps you'd have to version-bump every couple of years.
Lets imgine, you have many un updated app, its gonna suck in every expect of customers experience
@@dannymartial7997 an intern forgets to update it and suddenly your app is in this back catalogue where no one can access it but it's 'tecnically' still there
No. You really need to update your perfectly working app from a perpetual license to a monthly subscription. ;-)
Everyone saying that you can just change something minor every now and then to get past the requirement doesn't understand that you could not touch an app for two years and when you come back to it to update it, all the tools you needed to make it have been updated/lost and you're app might not be able to be updated properly.
This is so true.
damn entire frameworks live and die in 2 years
Which is probably one of the points? You gotta keep your release tooling working, so you're ready when a security flaw is found, or when Apple does make breaking changes to a framework.
In two years your code is likely to be trash anyway, if it's a simple app just bloody rewrite the thing and accept that Apple is fascist about their shit, which you bought but will never 100% own.
To be clear, your code won't be trash in two years but the DEVICE will be gimped in software by Apple in two years, and it will barely function your app. It's a flaw in Apple's ethics.
@C L in this conversation it seems to me you and your little cronies at Apple ;)
You deleted your original comment because what I said was true of it. Proof enough for most people! That is the kind of sneaky shit Russia would be proud of.
"Abandoned" ah yes, I write a small app that does one thing and it works great, but now I need to manage it just so that it doesn't get deleted.
Yeah, I'll stick to sideloading my work on Android.
I mean as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen.
@@officialANON001 But that's a different situation entirely (and, to be honest, more of a symptom of iOS not being good at backwards compatibility; I remember this being a big issue when the iPhone X came out since older apps didn't resize properly). If an app /doesn't work/ then it's reasonable to let the developer know that it'll be delisted. But to remove a perfectly functioning app just because it isn't receiving attention is stupid.
@@Jmcgee1125 I mean the App Store has over 2 million apps I think having a blanked solution is easier than a per app basis rule
@@officialANON001 ask for forgiveness and not permission seems like whats happening here
@@officialANON001 tell the world u don't understand app development without telling the world u don't understand anything about app development.
I see this as a way for them to force holdouts to fill out the App privacy section thing, among other things like pruning abandoned apps that no longer have a point of contact. They also might have changed their review process recently, and forcing everyone to update is a way to get everything verified against the new standards. Just change the color of something by one hue and push the update lol
Even apps supported by big corps sometimes don't get update
steam had a time where they didn't update their app from Jun 10, 2016 to Sep 18, 2019
3 years without an update
And the Steam app is horrible, they should have been updating it reguarly.
@@scooby149999 Yes that thing is terrible.
...and it sucks
Even if Google went down the same route, sideloading still exists on Android. It would still suck, though. This will also suck for games; Apple is going to cause so much lost media in the future if they keep this up.
EDIT: Turns out I was not 100% correct, apps still remain available for the version you were targeting and older devices - just checked again to make sure.
Google is doing the same thing aswell actually, I came across this while researching the Android Dev APIs a few days ago
For example, your app needs to target at least Android 11 before November 1st, 2022 - otherwise it'll get unlisted from the store. The same requirement exists for Android 12, but a year later. There are also requirements for adding new apps to the store and adding new updates to existing apps.
It should be noted that this doesn't set a requirement for phones to be on Android 11 to install new updates, Apps can still allow (and pretty much all do) older Android versions to continue using them.
@@marcorennmaus wow, glad I read this
@@marcorennmaus That's still pretty dumb
@Carl Gunderson No, it doesn't at all, for all of the reasons laid out by Luke and Linus in the video.
Google going down same path ? Their more intelligent..
The difference:
Google understands customers..
Apple never did.
Not an Apple hater, but u'm not gonna lie either.
* Luke explaining Apple app removals *
Sarah: _Dying of laughter_
What are they doing lol
@@deshanrodrigo2378 Not sure, probably signing some merch along with a random drawing of something
"Why would you want something old that still works when you can spend more on something new" is entirely in line with Apple's brand.
"why be you when you can be new?"
@C L ...naw, your wrong there. What they said makes sense. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why would I want to buy the new hotness when the old one works just as well (if not better in some cases) and looks just as good? For that matter. No one buys windows 98 anymore, not because it's old, but because there are a load of incompatibilities with 98 and modern computers, hardware, and software. Not to mention 98 isn't that good to begin with. Most people skipped it because 95 was basically just 98 anyway so, say it with me now, "Why buy the new hotness when the old one works more or less the same and looks just as good". I know for a fact that's why my dad skipped 98 and waited for XP.
@@SpiritedSpy I see you have good taste in movies
This is 2022? Throw away or sell stuff and be controlled ? lol.. Someone hit me on the noggin again so.i can sleep forever.
One good reason for this is if apps are using 3rd party dependencies as those dependencies become out dated they will have known security exploits. A better way to handle this though would be to directly monitor 3rd party dependencies in apps and take down apps with out dated dependencies.
agree with this point. To add: They should force rebuild \ updates for security. Reason they are doing it this way, by date, is because other methods are even more arbitrary. One way would be to do a CVE scan of every app in the store, and say "if your app is above a CVE score of 3 you have to rebuild". Well, why 3? Why not 2? or 4? How hard is to to assign a CVE every month to every app in the AppStore? Easier to just say: do it by date. This is a positive thing from a security perspective. Agree that it is a pain in the butt for everyone, but that is security for you.
@@robster3323 yeah going by date is definitely easier, but it doesn't fully cover the use case. You could be releasing monthly updates for a software project and be using 10 year old versions of some packages. I've seen this in many commercial software products. Although I think this is less likely in the immediate future because there's been renewed interest in keeping dependencies up to date following the log4j exploit.
I think this is the main reason for doing this
Complete Apps you have to purchase once in order to download and use, should be exempt from this rule or at least giving a much larger time window for an update. Besides, Apple already makes certain apps useless and unavailable if those are too old for the current IOS-version.
While I can see the arguement. There are just some Apps that work completely fine on the day they released, without much hassle.
"That would throw errors." What would? A vulnerable library that is exploited to hack your device wouldn't throw any errors if exploited "correctly". Feels disgusting to sorta defend Apple. Still don't like that move. I would rather just add a big fat warning to apps that weren't updated in a certain time and maybe down rate them in the search.
Apple hasn't set any standards the app update has to follow - so the iphone customers will get what they exactly deserve a fake version bump which actually muddies up consumer's information on when an app was last updated so this problem can be atleast navigated from user side - not using un-updated apps
@@aravindpallippara1577 You're absolutely right.
I believe, based on their past behavior on basically everything else they do, is about forcing people to give them more money. If you have a finished app but you need to "maintain" it so it doesn't get deleted, you will have to dedicate resources to it, that means constantly spending money that you need to get back somehow, forcing you to go from single purchase to subscription model, and then they take their cut through the App Store.
Basically developers will be charged rent to have their apps in the store or they will be dealt with.
if the update needs to be big then yeah, but if you can just update a single thing, like a color in the background, then that doesnt make much sense
Thirty days is way too short, I could maybe see the justification if it was a few years but every month is way too much developer overhead liability.
if google goes this way try nova launcher it has a option where you can hold on a app & you get the apk file it
Yeah! The calculator app on my iPad needs updating! Now!
I'm a musician. I have a tuner app on my phone that gives me the pitch of a sound in Hz, and its respective note. It works, there's LITERALLY nothing wrong with it, in terms of functionality. But hey, let's have the developers spend time adding content that does not enhance the core purpose of the program.
I'm expecting a lot of apps to get an extra line of unused code that is just a commented/noted "fuck apple"
Another reason for this may be to force all apps through their tightened app review guidelines.
This sounds very plausible to me. Sucks for the devs. To have the app reviewed every once in a while may not be bad for the end user though.
First? Also they need to relax on how often you update apps. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
I love apple’s hardware but god they really are just trying to push indie developers off the platform.
I mean as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen.
@@officialANON001 I think the app deletion shouldn't be automatic, but based on user feedback. If an app hasn't been updated for a year and many users are reporting excessive glitches or unoptimized UI, it can be deleted, but will be left alone otherwise.
@@officialANON001 am, u don't do any dev work do u?
I feel like the abandoned part has to mean apps that are unused/rarely used by consumers. Like all those now obsolete apps like all those flashlight apps, or hidden photo albums. If it’s abandoned by the devs but work fine and have a meaningful user base should be fine to stay. But this will also make for someone to make a script that will send out a timed bump every two years or whatever
This also forces people to get new apple computers/phones. If your device gets too old, it won't let you download new apps, artificially making your device unusable. I had an iphone 4S until 2020, which worked great for everything I needed. But I couldn't download any new apps (even simple flashlight apps) because they required new IOS that my phone wouldn't allow. Any older apps were granfathered-in, meaning I could use them just fine, but I couldn't always update, and I couldn't download it again if I uninstalled it. By abandoning old libraries and forcing developers to use new ones, they make apps no longer able to run on old devices, meaning you can't even grandfather them in.
@@Justin_Leahy Android has still the option but ios dont thats the whole point
Your designer to your right, might need an app, to see how much money you can piss away on useless Graphic Design crap.
Will LMG be doing a break down on the new Toyota Solid State Batteries?
I have similar problems on Android recently... "You have not interacted with xyz app in 6 months, we are removing it's permissions, so it cannot work"..
¬_¬ ... The reason I have not interacted with it in 6 months, is because it's a background app that works flawlessly and hasn't broken, so had NO NEED to interact with it..
Yes, I can go in an exempt it from losing it's permission.. I just shouldn't have to.. It's been working fine for 11 years... why try to step on its' toes NOW?
(just as a FYI, the app itself has been receiving updates, this is just me complaining about the interactivity requirement from user now)
Would recompiling an app periodically have any security benefits maybe ? Fresher SDKs/Libraries with latest sec patches maybe ?
I dunno ...just a thought
yep and thats why i think apple is doing this plus recompiling the app should renew the old UI and better performance also, this all to improve UX i dont see why people dont like it, the dev just gotta open the project file and test build it then submit it, maybe if the dev don't own a MAC to update it thats the problem
@@DeeezNuts I can see both sides (assuming we're right about the motivation)
If you had an app which theoretically had like, zero security risk API calls it'd be a pain. But I think it'd be a bit much to expect Apple to fine tooth comb apps to that level. (I'm not sure how automated you could make that)
But yeah, it's locking people into keeping Mac machine and dev license. Not exactly outside Apples M.O. to be fair
@@Jay_Long_626 I don't think its the license, doesn't the app gets deleted if you don't renew(not sure)
also forgot to add earlier that with them showing what the app tracks in app store before you download, i thinks its mandatory to state what you track, but because the apps are old and not updated there isn't any data about that for the apps.
i can't of anything other than the MAC thing
@@Jay_Long_626 i think i have an idea of why they doing it.. by updating the apps with new SDKs its most likely will make it not work on old IOS versions which will force the Users to update/get a new phone
@@Justin_Leahy They do support them thats why i still use my 8+ fine, but with the SSR program they don't support any old model which are the ones that need SSR.
with that and the mandatory updates to old apps(which might cause them not to work) if feels like they really just want to abandon them , IMO.
Only justification I can see is if they're using an old, vulnerable library. But they should be targeting apps with vulnerabilities then, not just any old app.
(But seriously though, update your dependencies regularly)
I immediately figured this was to make all apps have the “nutrition” privacy label. That way they can say at WWDC that all apps have included it to promote themselves and further justify that the Apple App Store provides specific safety that another one doesn’t.
A member with arms thanks Linus that's an image I didn't need this morning
I still have flapoy bird and I've migrated it through 4 phones
Version bumps are not easy as you have to recompile them for the latest version of iOS and that can mean a significant amount of work as literally every system component will have changed
To be fair, as an iPad app developer for work (god help me) you can't NOT update your app every year, as the certificate from Apple expires annually - so you have literally NO CHOICE but to update your app at least once a year. So..........?? It has been this way for a long time.... at least for Enterprise developers like myself.
As someone who is a developer for an enterprise organization, this is the most frustrating thing. We have 1 small app that does very little, but our users wanted it in the app store, so one developer (who is now technically a manager) learned how to write IOS apps and now once a year he has to crack open our perfectly functional app, recompile it, fix all the new errors and warnings (due to deprecations) and upload it to the app store again.
I can't wait until we convert that stupid app to a webpage.
@@jaredwilliams8621 lol - yah, Apple is making themselves obsolete. :P
at a minimum, any developer needs to tell if the old App still works fine with newer versions of iOS and hardware. If they do that then leaving it on the store as is would be fine with me, even if it was made 3 or 4 years ago. Maybe a yearly update to the description verifying the newest hardware and OS it was tested on for any potential new buyers.
Or at least have it fit properly to your screen, it’s doesn’t happen nearly as much now a days but every now and then I’ll come across an app not optimized for the notched iPhones (like not being optimized for the different aspect ratio, so it’s blown up)
They literally don't need this. Apple has the data on error rates from its apps. If error rates are spiking they can notify developers and give time to fix before removal.
No, they don't need ur idea
@@Alan-me8bs I rarely send the report to Apple so they don't always know error rates. Who the fuck are you to tell me Apple doesn't need my idea ? I said my opinion, it wasn't meant for Apple anyway. You can disagree without being an asshole about it.
some apps aren't supported on modern ios, there are a few games i'd like to play but they physically wont work
Apple just dont understand the idea that software can be without bugs. You NEED to update - like they do - all the time... I think it tells a lot about the quality of apple software..
*added notes and performance improvements
the note on github: fuck apple (date)
I believe this is mostly to reduce clutter on the App Store and to make sure abandoned apps that developers are no longer supporting aren’t left on the App Store unnecessarily. I can see why some apps that already work fine wouldn’t “need” updates but it’s relatively easy to do a version bump just to let apple know you’re still managing your app.
Within 30 days you need to get response from customers and update the app dependent on whats required ???
It's awkward but I think I might actually (edit:)kinda(/) be with apple on this one:
Go for a annual versioning, i.e. year as the first value in version and at least once a year rebuild against updated/newer libraries, so even if your program hasn't changed it will get security and stability fixes of the updated libraries.
It's because of crap like this that I bought a refurb Apple device last time instead of new to see how Apple is going on about stuff. Every time they take a step forward because of laws forcing them to do sh*t right, they take 10 back. Next time I say to myself "the refurb Apple" looks like a better value, I'll think about it 5 times instead of twice.
Maybe this is just Apple's way of forcing individuals to buy a new Mac to update their app they created several years ago so it can stay on the store.
The last comment about errors I think it's missing the point when it comes to library security. We have seen cases where a common coding library has a security vulnerability in it and loads of devs have it in their code. It may not error, but it will be a security weakness.
And these issues pop up and are closed relatively quickly.
Apples solution is shit.
Also depticated / vulnerable libraries can be marked with warnings. So apple knows which apps use them
It's a way to keep apps updated with the latest optimizations and SDKs. Rebuilding and version bumping actually does what Apple (and ultimately users, indirectly) wants: fast adaptation of apps to new technologies and devices. For example, when the new iPad Mini came out, i believe that a way to adapt to the new form factor was just rebuilding and reuploading the app without making any change, just rebuilding with the latest Xcode. Otherwise iOS would try to adjust the app layout itself at runtime but not always with exceptional results.
not exactly? don't app development usually use frozen library versions? A rebuild will actually do nothing in that case (the entire point of having a very good dependency management system is to have repeatable consistent builds that always uses the same dependencies specified)
the developer has to manually and intentionally update the library versions
@@aravindpallippara1577 The libraries apple wants you to update (use the latest versions of) are their libraries, like UIKit. Also, rebuilding with the latest xcode makes optimizations for newly released devices, as far as i know. Xcode updates its swift compiler periodically with more optimizations in general, so a rebuild actually changes the output binary
In some cases, like with iOS 12, i don't remember the reason, Apple managed to auto update all apps to have a faster launch time, just based on the already compiled binary. i remember it was a pretty big difference of performance.
So that’s why I can’t find that game I played in 2012 on the App Store anymore.
Check your purchased section, that’s where I found some of my older games from around then
if its Infinity Blade, we're screwed, Epic stop supporting it a long ago
a fix that no one asked for or needs or wants
To upload an app you have to pay 100$ a year for dev account. Let's say I'm a student who just made a couple of games 2 years ago and don't realy want to make games anymore. I have to pay 100$ again to just bump a version so that my games wont get deleted?
I wonder what is the % of app that has not been update for years and still works fine. I have a tons of app purchased years ago, they no longer run well, developers abandoned them years ago. Yet people don’t know, still buying them without realizing it is a lost child already.
ummm? security updates don't count?
What about single player phone games that don't need updating....
what if apple themselves dont update de appstore, let hell begin
Well… I would probably just change the font of one hidden/obscure menu, and change it back 6 months later calling it a bug fix. That or something stupid, unless apple forbids that.
Put in the work to…..break it
Damn Luke, do you ever take a breath?
dont take me away mr oops
Version 3, 3.1, 3.14, Version 3.14159 this is pie you know the lyrics
what if the dev is like.. *dead* ? that's stupid.
I think the original idea was to help on the cybersecurity space. I don't like apple however if an app hasn't been updated in a long time a malicious person could easily take advantage of it even if the app works fine.
One more time....
Google is considering something similar,but it is related to targeted android versions,and less about raw age.Its going to muffle discover ability for these api target lowers.
There's an android police article written on April 6th that explains it.
It actually seems like this is apple copying Google,and well....I understand the idea and concept,but I do still want user choice. At least on Android you can sideload to bypass....still ...the argument of "old is bad" is flawed in my opinion.
If it’s a broken app that hasn’t been updated in a very long time. It’s also being uninstalled or rarely opened by users (I’m sure they can see that data) then that makes sense to remove it from the App Store.
Oh no Apple is doing something stupid..... 🥴. Keep buying and supporting their products and services.... 🤯
They plan to drop old APIs, that's why the new policy
I just want to know what Sarah and Linus are laughing at.
Already downloading too much useless update all these years. Update that pretty much doing nothing are not welcomed.
I'm still trying to figure out why Apple exists, and why people enjoy and celebrate them
No way they’re deleting tower madness 2
These apps taking so much space on Apple servers
How about they mandate better patch notes :P
You have an app that has not received an update in four years? Hah! I'm using an app on my iPhone that was last updated six years ago - and it is working absolutely fine.
Is anyone else more interested in wtf is happening with Linus and sarah
Does Apple update there own apps? Lol
What's the challenge here?
isnt it like 10k to get a ap-fail on the, we want money store. then 5k if you change somthing. to make sure it works.... so its a, update and giv us more money or ... im at a loss here, get a android phone, install base linix, get all the protection android has deleted, find a dialer, phone is better, faster, more protectioned, less batteri use, cost $300 not $2k. and if you have time to boot it. is a laptop.. next ltt topic, linux vs adroid. how much did hey strip from linux, and where to get droid?
Apple removing apps is a pain in the be-hind..
For legit reasons, not comply with App Store rules... fair enough... but not just because 'they want to"
money island (LucasArts) iOS games got canned right around the time Disney took over.. The valid reasons to keep using older apps is more is like anything "reason to keep using old apps" which is: There are no better equivalent out there, and even if there are, its to the exact same behaviour, doesn't function the same way, cometic issues etc...
all valid points. But then the negative would be, developers would have to keep old code around, just for the % of users who.use. older phones (which would be reducing more and more anyway over time)
Again, forcing users along the road..... It happens all the time even with steaming now too.
When will it end... Customers come first my ****
Apple is known to not care about breaking compatibility with old software in new OS updates, so them seeing this as normal for developers on their platform to do is expected.
Apple hates gaming and they will always take the chance to prove me right. I mean it’s one thing to not have many games on your platform but to actively screw around with the ones that are.
Yeah. But....if iOS updates and devices come out with new features and screen sizes (like the iPad mini 6...) and higher resolutions, and the apps in question haven't been updated to take advantage of them (and I'm talking years down the line), I would consider those abandoned too, even if they work perfectly.
U think changing the resolution of a phone will break any pre existing app? 😂😂
@@Alan-me8bs No....but then those apps would no longer be full screen, which for me makes an unpleasant experience.
@@Tjoeb123 name a few apps that when opened don't take up the entire screen so? 😂😂
I don't necessarily disagree with Apple. Personally, idc if the app has a million 5 star reviews, if I haven't seen an update in the last couple years, I'm going to assume it's not supported anymore and I'm rolling the dice on if it's going to keep working after I've invested my time into using it. iOS versions (and phone models) are constantly updating, make sure the app still works optimally in the new OS version, and then just push, like others have said, a color change for an invisible object, and at least show that the app has been looked at recently by it's developers.
Not to mention security issues. I took a class in college wrt Android development, and you'd be surprised how many older apps are just not up to standard. Mind you, these apps are like waaay older than 2 years, and the barrier to entry for Android apps is probably lower. But when building apps, you target X% many devices, not expecting to support every android device. The implicaiton is we don't support old enough hardware, why wouldn't software be the same?
@@Wezla you took one class on android development? One?
@@Alan-me8bs it was an elective in college just an introduction. I only bring it up cause it had a focus on security
@@Wezla but updating an app doesn't ensure security whatsoever. It depends on the external libraries in most cases.
So their solution is shit
@@Alan-me8bs it's not a perfect solution, but if you were a giant company like apple, this is a much simpler solution than dealing with each app. I'm sure this wasn't a haphazard decision, even if it feels a little reckless. Is it a good solution? No probably not. But carpet bombing old, insecure or even just aesthetically unpleasing apps might actually be apple's objective here so really the cricitsm should be towards apple's goals and not so much the method.
I disagree with apps never needing updates. It is very likely they have security vulnerabilities, especially if they have 0 updates in two years!
Is this the best solution? Maybe not. Because it still doesn't force developers to fix those vulnerabilities. But there can definitely be a need, even if the app is "finished".
i think apple has done tisalso bevore becasue i had already this problem a few years ago that i couldnt download a baught app again. (the company went bankrupt but the app worked perfect) after sending apple a e-mail i could download it again, after the iphone decided to auto remove the app cause to not often use... so at least this problem is solved by keeping the app downloadable for people who baught it already...
I would hope Luke being responsible for a software company would know how important it is to keep your libraries up to date. A 2 year old app without crashes can absolutely be full of security issues. Software is never complete. It makes total sense to me for Apple to start forcing the developers to keep their apps up to date.
This doesn’t apply to something like a calculator app. Assuming they add all the features they plan to right off the bat and have no bugs, there’s no reason to be forced to update it. There aren’t security issues with something that has such a basic function.
@@CupofJ0E your super simple calculator app that doesn't use any external libraries is simply not a realistic app that would be impacted by this because there is literally no one downloading such an app so there is no harm in removing it. The app might exist as a hobby project in which case again there is no harm in removing it. Any non trivial app will need to be updated regularly or risk becoming a security problem. A trivial app will not be in large use and won't impact many people if it is removed, realistically. And if their hobby project with 2 users is still important to them, they can update the app and they won't be removed, problem solved.
@@RoukeBroersma even then, if no security issue is discovered, there’s nothing to change, as another comment said, imagine the amount of useless updates people will have to download just to keep the app on the App Store.
@@CupofJ0E the security issues would have been discovered and fixed in the used libraries. On some small apps I manage I have updates to the used libraries every week. If I would not timely update the libraries and release a new version of the apps I would potentially be exposing my users to the problems. If the developers of an app are not doing this they have effectively abandoned the app, which means any security issues will likely never be fixed. That is not acceptable and it's good Apple is trying to do something about it.
It doesn't make sense because devs will just publish empty updates
Absolutely shocks me how blind you guys are to security updates. I am not saying the 30 day period is fair, I think that is silly. But seriously lacking in understanding that security updates for applications exist.
I cannot tell you how many vulnerabilities and bad coding security I have seen used and found looking at apps. This can be very dangerous, especially when the apps now a days require permissions that imo are scary.
Not saying I agree entirely with apple on this, but I really found the scoffing annoying considering how little you thought about it.
Clearly no one has thought as much as you have
Please educate me on how a side scrolling shooter or forum app needs monthly security updates.
@@Alan-me8bs If I am not mistaken, there was once a CVE with fonts, F*CKIN FONTS!!!
But I still have to 100% verify this info.
@@tablettablete186 that's an external library not the app
If an app connects to the Internet, they need to check for & fix security issues is the one reason I can see to support this from apple.
They should make it possible to mark apps as ‚finished‘. So THEN they can make it possible to remove unfinished and unmoderated apps
but they can never be truly "finished" as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen.
@@officialANON001 you keep copy pasting this. It's really obvious u don't understand any sort of development
Typical apple users
Can we please delete the producer at the end. I usually watch all the clips of a wan in sequence and I can't possibly listen to that guy 5-7 times every few days. IT'S ALSO THE SAME CLIP!!!
Apples not wrong. And when you buy something off the Google play store, you’re rolling the dice whether or not it will work. Especially 3-D applications. Apple is constantly putting out new updates to their iOS and it’s not unreasonable to ask a developer who is selling an app on the App Store to make it fully compatible with the hardware of newer phones. If it’s not financially viable, then Apple needs to incentivize it, but they are not wrong with this idea
You wont be refunded for the licenses you paid for if the app is abandoned just keep that in mind. Lost a bunch when switching to 64 bit
Except that wasn't the issue. Apple just demanded them push an update. They didn't demand anything be fixed. Regardless of that, if apple's updates are causing apps to break, that isn't the fault of the app-makers, it's the fault of apple.
@@officerminiwheats I do not think 99% of people care like oh no that app I bought for $2 over 2 years ago does not work anymore what will I do.
@@officerminiwheats Didn’t even think about that. I was unaware that you could pay ahead of time for licenses. I thought it was just embedded into the amount of revenue you got from Apple
@@officialANON001 it is a minor annoyance but for some people that can disturb their workflow at an inopportune time. For instance if Linus' permanent Teamviewer license was invalidated by Apple via the arbitrary app update rate.
Why is she holding the pen like she's about to stab somebody to death with it? I literally can't look away it looks like she's gonna surprise Linus with a pen in the temple lol. You can't seriously get anything done like that can you? She needs a little rubber block device that goes over the pen shaft to make the middle more comfy for awkward users of pens. Pen grafters? Arrrgh wish I could remember their name!
It's either that or terribly bad handwriting, that falls off the page and knackers your wrists before you've actually written anything! Best of luck hope you get one, I forget what they're called. But they're shit hot when you need and don't have one :) Trust! Linus you should supply them through your work budget as it's usually dyslexic people who were not corrected early on at school. The block takes a few months then you can take it off and write perfectly without it!
Highly recommend them, sorry have no idea what the company name was but sure you can Google them! Pen grips maybe...
Sarah and Linus flirting in the background
Loose the woman
that girl has no reason to be there
android ftw. f...apple. for android you can just extract the apk save it and install it on your new device if they pull this crap too.
I mean as a user I am glad this is a thing the number of apps on the Appstore that have become useless because of the app not being optimized for new devices so the controls are off the screen...
@@officialANON001 examples?
@@officialANON001 atleast you have the option to do so.
... 'touch my-app.apk'