Apple App Store Appears to Be Widely Removing Outdated Apps (theverge.com) 76
"Apple may be cracking down on apps that no longer receive updates," reports the Verge:
In a screenshotted email sent to affected developers, titled "App Improvement Notice," Apple warns it will remove apps from the App Store that haven't been "updated in a significant amount of time" and gives developers just 30 days to update them....
In 2016, Apple said it would start removing abandoned apps from the App Store. At the time, it also warned developers that they would have 30 days to update their app before it got taken down. That said, it's unclear whether Apple has continuously been enforcing this rule over the years, or if it recently started conducting a wider sweep. Apple also doesn't clearly outline what it considers to be "outdated" — whether it's based on the time that has elapsed since an app was last updated, or if it concerns compatibility with the most recent version of iOS.
Critics of this policy argue that mobile apps should remain available no matter their age, much like old video games remain playable on consoles. Others say the policy is unnecessarily tough on developers, and claim Apple doesn't fully respect the work that goes into indie games.
Earlier this month, the Google Play Store similarly announced it would begin limiting the visibility of apps that "don't target an API level within two years of the latest major Android release version." Android developers have until November 1st, 2022 to update their apps, but also have the option of applying for a six-month extension if they can't make the deadline.
In 2016, Apple said it would start removing abandoned apps from the App Store. At the time, it also warned developers that they would have 30 days to update their app before it got taken down. That said, it's unclear whether Apple has continuously been enforcing this rule over the years, or if it recently started conducting a wider sweep. Apple also doesn't clearly outline what it considers to be "outdated" — whether it's based on the time that has elapsed since an app was last updated, or if it concerns compatibility with the most recent version of iOS.
Critics of this policy argue that mobile apps should remain available no matter their age, much like old video games remain playable on consoles. Others say the policy is unnecessarily tough on developers, and claim Apple doesn't fully respect the work that goes into indie games.
Earlier this month, the Google Play Store similarly announced it would begin limiting the visibility of apps that "don't target an API level within two years of the latest major Android release version." Android developers have until November 1st, 2022 to update their apps, but also have the option of applying for a six-month extension if they can't make the deadline.
Not outdated, just old (Score:5, Insightful)
The applications are not outdated, they are just older. They still work correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But they do not attract new hype.
With close to 2 million apps in the App Store, that is completely irrelevant. If you want a hype machine you need to stack-rank a small curated selection of apps.
Re: (Score:1)
The real reason is not that the apps are "outdated" or "old", but that they still run on old hardware. When you submit the update, you need to conform to the updated app store submission requirements which include a minimum version of XCode/iOS and other compiler settings that make it impossible for the code to run on older devices. The result is that people with older devices can't find anything that runs on them anymore, and they have to upgrade.
Sure, there is an option to keep older versions available, b
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:3)
This is also the reasoning for making "smart" devices cloud dependent. So when the device is no longer "cool" they remotely pull the plug and make you buy again (under a different brandinh/company name, of course)
Forget the enviromental impact that the sudden brand new mountain of e-waste generates, they don't care. They are going to celebrate their new profit stream over expensive wine held in a wine holder made from a taxidermied endangered animal and an entree of dophin unsafe tuna.
Re:Not outdated, just old (Score:5, Interesting)
I expect the real concern (from Apple's point of view) is: if they haven't updated their app, they haven't submitted the privacy checklist that all apps are supposed to include so that customers can see how much of their personal data is being vacuumed up by the app's developer.
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:3)
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:2)
Lets say someone needed an app that is old and iOS only. Maybe because some favorite device requires it and there is no updated or Android version of it. Now the device is useless if the app is deleted off the phone for any reason, or the user replaces the phone.
This is where the inability to sideload apps will really bite the iPhone user in the ass.
Apple will never have a "retro store" as another poster suggested because they will cite "security and privacy", and an idea like that would nev
Re: (Score:1)
The applications are not outdated, they are just older. They still work correctly.
That's precisely the problem!
They work on old iPhones and Apple doesn't want that. Apple wants people to be buying new iPhones.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course Apple wants you to buy new iPhones. But tying this to that is pure speculation and you have no proof.
Re: (Score:1)
Of course Apple wants you to buy new iPhones. But tying this to that is pure speculation and you have no proof.
It gives Apple plausible deniability, though. "We're not making your several-generations-old iPhone obsolete, it's those meddling third party app developers!"
Re: (Score:2)
I could show you my proof... but then I'd have to kill you.
Re:Not outdated, just old (Score:4, Informative)
The developers or their users don't decide what software is allowed to exist and how it should be used anymore: Apple and Google do, on their respective platforms.
Like I keep saying, we're right back in the old days of the mainframe. The gigantic high-tech monopolies have wrestled control of their own computers away from their owners.
Re: (Score:1)
The developers or their users don't decide what software is allowed to exist and how it should be used anymore: Apple and Google do, on their respective platforms.
It isn't as if we weren't warned [youtube.com]. RMS was speaking out about this too [slashdot.org], for as long as it has been on the radar.
The masses just gave the warnings a collective shrug, and now we're stuck with highly popular mobile computing platforms where the device owner has no control over the software.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, and sadly RMS is partly responsible for the collective shrug. Correct and right on the money though he is, he's been creepy and annoying at the best of time, and has always come across as an extremist who's best passed up for someone a bit more tolerant.
Not everybody has the presentation flair and power of persuasion of, say, Carl Sagan. RMS filled a much-needed role, but he just isn't as good as we all needed him to be, and we lost out.
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:1)
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:2)
This and that software in general is being shifted to teh cloud.
When microcomputers became useable and affordable in the late 1970s, there was a collective sigh of releif of no longer having to timeshare on some big old mainframe that users had no real control over. Now we are being monstered back into the very thing people despised.
Re: (Score:3)
You'll get that with floppy drives and EGA video too.
Vendors have to, on occasion, drag their customers, kicking and screaming, into the future.
Though I see both sides of the issue here. I'd like to see Apple and others develop a "retro" store where people can go to download abandoned apps, or especially apps that won't run on the current OS. One reason I upgraded my phone recently (iPhone 5 to 13! culture shock!) was that apps on the store that were ON my phone could no longer be downloaded because new
Re: (Score:2)
Or actually an emulator that emulates old iOS (before the 64 bit idiocity) that can run old apps.
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:2)
"Though I see both sides of the issue here. I'd like to see Apple and others develop a "retro" store"
I can tell you for a fact that this is never going to happen.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of them *don't* work correctly, though. I have a number of apps that I love, but haven't been updated in years and no longer work correctly.
Re: Not outdated, just old (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it depends on what the app do if it shall be removed since some apps depends on backend services while others like calculator emulators and standalone calculation apps aren't really aging the same way and will probably work "forever".
So I think that it's necessary to classify the apps before really removing them.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a several apps in this kind of category that are really important to me. I might actually dump my iPhone if I were to lose them. There are one or two that I use maybe once a year or so, but they are the only way I can do something now without wasting an hour trying to do it with pen and paper.
It is the same issue on the desktop. I had an old Fortran program that did some black body radiation calculations that I needed periodically. Doing it any other way was quite tedious or required a much more adv
Re: (Score:1)
I used to use Apple hardware for simulations and really enjoyed the development environment for that (even though Altivec was kinda useless). These days I wouldn't
Re: (Score:2)
Culling this stuff might make sense to Apple, but it hurts their customers.
Correction: hurts some of their customers. Everyone's use case is different, right? You've got mission critical apps you cannot lose. Fair enough. Most people though are probably more in my situation. It's an annoyance but not a tragedy. There are some that I've lost and miss. A couple have no substitutes and I've had to just accept that and let it go. But for others I've found equivalent replacements that are actively maintained. For some, I've found better replacements than the ones they replaced, and tha
Re: (Score:1)
I think it depends on what the app do if it shall be removed since some apps depends on backend services while others like calculator emulators and standalone calculation apps aren't really aging the same way and will probably work "forever".
Newer versions of iOS manage to break compatibility with older apps, especially games. The iOS port of Tales of Monkey Island randomly crashes on the latest iOS, and it has long since been removed from the app store when Telltales Games closed.
It's a good thing most iOS games are just ports from other platforms, because there are so many games that would be lost forever between iOS incompatibilities and Apple pulling them from their store for whatever reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And at some point, they won't. Is it OK to take money for an app with an end date?
Sure. Is it stated anywhere "This app will work forever in perpetuity on any and all versions of future hardware"? No of course not. When you buy software you know that eventually you will be unable to use it. Now if that end date is tomorrow, then you have a point...
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta clear out old inventory to make display space for the latest fashions. Apple is running a retail business after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? That was moderated Insightful on today's Slashdot.
Are you actually naive enough to believe that any nontrivial app is completely bug free? Or that any existing app cannot be broken by later changes to the OS?
So how about solutions? I still favor the financial model tab in general, and as it would apply in this case it would let people who are considering installing an app assess how likely it is that the app will still be supported later. ADSAAuPR, atAJG, but I ain't holding my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
Most iPhone users believe apps are like fruit: if they get too old, they get smelly and attract bugs. I'm quite surprised the fruit(tm) vendor hasn't required developers to implement a "best-buy" date by which the application will expire if the user doesn't purchase the upgrade. After all, you can never be too sure, right?
If there's anything an iPhone user fears more than anything, it's getting caught using old software.
Apple and Google both, this is a "dick move" (Score:1)
Because both the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store have minimum OS/API level targets for both new apps and app updates what they're effectively doing is cutting off support for older versions of iOS and Android.
This tactic both forces a migration of customers on older devices to something released during the last 1-2 years as well as killing off the second hand market for phones and tablets. Would love to see the EU look into this, since the US government is basically toothless and gutless when it c
Re: Apple and Google both, this is a "dick move" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Minimum OS/API level targets based on OS version are a stupid idea anyway, from a technical point of view. What would make more sense is deprecating obsolete APi functions and eventually removing them with a generous forewarning period.
We see that in Windows and Linux, but after much longer times compared to iOS and Android. The latter are setting a bad example of planned obsolence.
Re: Apple and Google both, this is a "dick move" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I suspect marketing, as in pushing developers to migrate to new OS versions => Users need to follow => need new phones as many phone makers do not support new OS versions on old phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple’s 6 year old iPad Air 2 is still being updated to the newest iOS. No one is being forced to update to newer hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
An Android app has two metadata items relating to compatibility: the minimum API supported and the "target" API, which is a hint to newer versions to use compatibility mode with the app. The requirement to constantly update the target API doesn't require also updating the minimum API. What it does mean is a constantly growing test surface for people who want to continue to support old devices.
Calling /r/datahoarder (Score:1)
How do we mirror?!
Re: (Score:2)
No need. The apps remain available for download for anyone who previously did so. They’ll just be unlisted/unavailable for new downloads.
Re: (Score:2)
Until they are "no longer compatible" with some deliberate OS/API change.
Shift "backwards compatibility" to developers... (Score:3)
That's what this amounts to, in reality. That the overhead of keeping backward compatibility in place is clearly "loss making" for Apple/Google.
It means your app is never really "done", if you want to keep it up for download, you have to play by the rules and update so it's compatible with the latest OS release, by at least ... 2 years?
The older I get, the more cynical I become about the constant need to meddle with something that already works.
But, sure, I'm aware of security concerns - and it's probably near impossible to track whether an application meets the security standards of the OS.
However, we are very much heading toward a point where the industry as a whole - software and hardware - can force upgrades on people that require a new device.
Microsoft, who were once pretty damn good with backward compatibility, are heading down this route with windows 11.
Call me cynical, but this seems to be more a case of forced sales - sales of hardware and software - on a much more rapid cadence than before.
It's an odd situation - Apple and Google would cease to have a viable mobile operating system, if it wasn't for third party applications - if it wasn't for thousands of developers, creating software for the platform.
Conversely, those developers wouldn't have a platform with a large enough user base to earn a living, if it wasn't for Apple and Google.
However, this is all massively one-sided - both these giants "call the shots", despite the fact their devices would be bland without the developers who make great applications.
Wouldn't it be good if developers could pull themselves together to form a union? ... the chances of this happening? Zilch.
All it would take, is for some of the most popular apps - the big "draw cards" for end users, to get onboard.
"Sorry Apple/Google, from now on, this is something you have to negotiate with our developers union"
Re: (Score:2)
That's what this amounts to, in reality.
Good. Backwards compatibility is fine for mission critical systems but we should not be burdening the consumer with an OS built upon layers and layers of backwards compatibility resulting in endlessly increasing amount of bloat.
Re: (Score:2)
BIOS is still chugging along on PCs, even with attempts to replace it with the more complex and generally pointless UEFI.
Mysteriously it didn't break out backs to maintain compatibility for the last 40 years.
Apple likes to throw out old APIs and subsystems and replace them with new ones. They're a bit like Google in that respect. But where is the big pay off versus more traditional software?
Re: (Score:2)
BIOS is still chugging along on PCs, even with attempts to replace it with the more complex and generally pointless UEFI.
Indeed it is and as if to make my point for me, the outdated requirements of the BIOS (or rather it's compatibility layer, read on) are precisely the reason AMD's latest CPU line caused backwards compatibility breaking changes to motherboards at consumer expense. This old cruft is precisely why a modern AM4 motherboard cannot boot every AM4 CPU, precisely why recent firmware updates came with a warning saying "applying this will make computers with CPU x, y, and z unbootable".
even with attempts to replace it with the more complex and generally pointless UEFI
You may think it pointless, mos
Change for change sake (Score:2)
Re:Change for change sake (Score:4, Insightful)
What a stupid rule. This is not the way to declare apps abandoned. "If it ain't broke, change it," is not how the expression goes. I've seen so many apps with "improvements" which have updated them into piles of crap. Certainly Apple knows a thing or two about that.
How is it a bad thing to be occasionally rebuilding against the latest system?
Look what happened when Apple dropped 32 bit support from macOS: quite a few apps died, simply because they developers didn't follow Apple's guidelines and make their apps 64 bit. The same thing with the M1 chips; recompiling to be a universal binary is (relatively) trivial (there are important exceptions to this, but those developers have announced they are working towards full M1 support); how long should Apple have to keep Rosetta around?
Re: (Score:1)
I'll chime in. Because Apple, unlike Google, requires you use an Apple Mac to do development. Not everyone has one of these. I have to borrow one and set it up (and deal with all the provisioning profiles and certificate mess that Apple didn't think through and adds no security) to compile my iOS build. If Apple released an iOS build kit for Linux then it's a bit easier.
For the curious - I am not so cheap that I didn't buy a
Re: (Score:2)
How is it a bad thing to be occasionally rebuilding against the latest system?
It's not a bad thing at all. Actively maintained apps should definitely do that. But it is a bad thing to throw away perfectly functional things, be they hardware or software.
Look, it's Apple's prerogative to run their app store however they see fit. If some apps are a PITA to list and promote and don't fit with Apple's agenda of selling new iPhones, they are free to delist those apps.
Likewise, if Apple won't host your app in their store, you are free to offer it in an alternate competing store, or offer
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly have no whizzy piece of hardware/software out there in the marketplace. To ask a company to keep supporting a platform in its original form over years is just plain silly. Do you expect to use your rebuilt carburetor on a modern car? How about the software you wrote 10 years ago? Are you still supporting it?
Re: (Score:2)
To ask a company to keep supporting a platform in its original form over years is just plain silly.
Why? Microsoft was famously focussed on compatibility with Windows for a very long time before the modern always-online, auto-updating junk came along, and almost everything was better about both using Windows and developing applications to run on it back then.
How about the software you wrote 10 years ago? Are you still supporting it?
Actually yes. In fact I think the only software I've written professionally in the last 10 years that doesn't still run was broken by someone declaring the platform it built on obsolete and not because the software itself either wouldn't run or wasn't
Re: (Score:2)
> Microsoft was famously focussed on compatibility
Microsoft sure did (Maybe they still do?) like to advertise this. But in reality they have been doing periodic cullings at least as far back as vista. Back in those days, I used to keep a separate hard drive around, with basically just XP and Steam, so I could keep running a bunch of things that MS broke and left behind.
Re: (Score:2)
There have been some breaking changes over the years, it's true, particularly with things like device drivers. But many applications that were written for Windows 95 might still have run on Windows 7 two decades later. They certainly didn't break everything written for Windows 95 in Windows 98, and everything written for Windows 98 in Windows ME, and so on. The major mobile OSes and their respective app stores have come awfully close to doing that several times now.
Idiocracy in IT (Score:2)
"Once the known bugs and vulnerabilities in an app have been eliminated and time has demonstrated the app's robustness, it has to be removed from our app stores." -- Google and Apple [implied].
A strong reason for breaking down their walled gardens and mandating that device owners be allowed to choose alternative app stores, with force of law.
YES! (Score:3)
Google playstore could do that too but google thrives on spammy crapware so they wont
Re: (Score:2)
Google playstore could do that too but google thrives on spammy crapware so they wont
*sigh* https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org] So desperate to post some anti-Google drivel that you missed the fact that they did it first and Apple is the one playing catchup.
But hey, anti-google is the new anti-microsoft so enjoy the informative mod from people who clearly shouldn't have modpoints.
Just 130 Days (Score:2)
As if you would need longer.
1. Recompile with new copyright notices
2. Re-submit to Apple Store.
There, you're updated.
Re: Just 130 Days (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That's dumb (Score:2)
That will surely remove useful apps which are simply no longer updated.
Why not just drop them to the bottom of the search results, and put a notice on them that they appear to be abandoned?
This is a de facto admission that many of these apps are malicious, and Apple has no better plan for getting the number of malicious apps in the app store down than removing them en masse.
Re: (Score:2)
People who already have the app, can still download the app. People who don't have the app right now can no longer acquire it until its been checked against the latest standards. It's not terribly unreasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
Despite the headline, they're *not* removing the apps. They're removing them from new downloads. Things like deprecated APIs
Android 2.3 apps still work on Android 12. Maybe Apple should work on backwards compatibility? Fucking amateurs.
Better Solution: Phase Them Out (Score:2)
I get the concern that there are tons of apps that simply have been abandoned, and Amazon has no idea if an app hasn't been updated because it still works perfectly or if it is really dead.
A better solution would be to phase out old apps, and there's a very simple way to do this. When an app joins the store, set its maximum Android version to the current version plus one. Require developers to update the app to flag it as compatible with newer Android releases. So as consumers get newer devices abandoned
It does make sense (Score:1)
So if you need an "abandoned app" (Score:2)
And it's 30+ days from now, you are screwed.
And iPhone is locked down from sideloading
(You sad puppy faced locked behind bars as Apple raises the key, kisses it, and tucks it back into it's pocket giving the pocket a couple loving pats and walks away)
Please name one app thatâ(TM)s effected.. (Score:1)
Still using that app? Don't get a new device... (Score:1)
Apple's constant purging of the app store has been a thorn in my side every time I've upgraded devices--they no longer let you restore/copy over apps from another device, instead you have to newly download them from the app store. So any time they've deemed something "outdated" and purged it, you can't get it on your new device... which is tremendously annoying if the app would still work fine on that device, and particularly if it's something you paid for. I get that they want to impose limits on how long