Do I get my money back?

[sracer]

If you bought an app that is 32bit and the developer failed to update that app, is it apples fault or the developer? Apple has been warning the development community for a while and lately the consumers.

Als consider that you bought an app (or apps) that ran in a specific version and was certified for that OS level. You cannot get your money back because a future update broke that app.

This is all on the developer, not apple

I disagree with the point I bolded.

When a person went to buy a 32-bit app from the store, Apple did NOT pop up a warning indicating that the app would not be able to run on iOS 11. That pop-up should've been going on for at least the last 3 months and probably from the point where they knew iOS 11 would be 64-bit only.

The message that pops up when you started a 32-bit app that it would not be supported in the future is too late because it is after the purchase was made.

Apple has no problem nagging customers that an iOS update is available. But having customers update iOS primarily benefits Apple so they have the nag screen. Warning customers away from spending money on apps does not benefit Apple and so therefore no nag screen.

 

[UBS28]

True.
We don't seem to have this entitlement issue back when software cost more than just a few dollars, yet now people want the OS maker to be responsible. Imagine if people are demanding Microsoft to refund old DOS applications.

Having said that, it would be wise for developers to clearly stated that they will no longer support their old apps. At least customers will be made aware.

As for Apple, I do think Apple should allow sorting of apps based on "last updated" date. This will at least allow new customers to have a better judgement whether to download an old app or not.

The Windows 10 version that I have on bootcamp runs 32-bit and 64-bit. And you can make DOS programs work with a work around.

What entitlement issue? You do realize that I am paying Apple also with every App I buy, not just the developer of the App. So Apple has easily earned much more money of me than these few apps that do not work.

 

[maflynn]

I disagree with the point I bolded.

It's still the developer's fault for not updating their apps. Apple warned them years ago. No matter how you slice it, there's a level of personal responsibility and since you're executing a financial transaction with a developer you expect to get something that works. If they choose to be lazy and do nothing how is that apple's fault?

 

[sracer]

It's still the developer's fault for not updating their apps. Apple warned them years ago. No matter how you slice it, there's a level of personal responsibility and since you're executing a financial transaction with a developer you expect to get something that works. If they choose to be lazy and do nothing how is that apple's fault?

No where did I say that the developer was NOT at fault. I disagree that it was ONLY the developer's fault. Apple prides itself in curating the app store. They're the ones selling the developer's app. They bear SOME responsibility.

 

[maflynn]

I disagree that it was ONLY the developer's fault

but it is.

Apple communicated to the developers that they need to convert their apps to 64bit in 2014. This is now 2017 and if there's an app that is 32bit, that's not apple's fault. They did what they could to get developers on board 3 years go

 

[pika2000]

The Windows 10 version that I have on bootcamp runs 32-bit and 64-bit. And you can make DOS programs work with a work around.

What entitlement issue? You do realize that I am paying Apple also with every App I buy, not just the developer of the App. So Apple has easily earned much more money of me than these few apps that do not work.

Have you done what others have recommended? Complaining here won't solve your issue.

 

[sracer]

but it is.

Apple communicated to the developers that they need to convert their apps to 64bit in 2014. This is now 2017 and if there's an app that is 32bit, that's not apple's fault. They did what they could to get developers on board 3 years go

Well, if you refuse to see it, even when Apple itself understands their responsibility, then rock on.

Why do you think Apple removed iOS app store purchases from the latest version of iTunes (12.7) for macOS? Because they know they can't predict which device the app will be installed on and so can't prevent someone from downloading a 32-bit app onto their 64-bit iOS device. And rather than scare away a customer with a warning popup, they removed that function altogether.

By requiring the individual iOS device to download the app directly from the store, Apple can ensure that customers are only downloading the app compatible with their device.

 

[D.T.]

It's still the developer's fault for not updating their apps. Apple warned them years ago. No matter how you slice it, there's a level of personal responsibility and since you're executing a financial transaction with a developer you expect to get something that works. If they choose to be lazy and do nothing how is that apple's fault?

Yep. I've had plenty of paid apps (generally some kind of development support software) that broke due to an OS related issue, if the developer/company didn't update it, I didn't ask MS for a refund, and in a few cases, the developers weren't even warned at potential compatibility issues (vs. Apple's long lead time of developer FYI).

The truth of the matter (speaking from 25+ years of experience as a dev/architect/writer) is software flips out and inherits bugs all_the_time. Underlying libraries change as the OS is updated, dependencies break, performance issues arise over time - I'm currently working on an update for a pretty major application because the original devs left, and even just over the course of 12 months or so, dozens of new issues arose as usage picked up and more use cases were explored. Software is never static: there's always something to improve, fix, correct, test - this is no different, it's a bit of adaptive maintenance due to a requirement from the OS, and devs were well aware of this months ago (I immediately contacted my clients).

 

[maflynn]

Well, if you refuse to see it, even when Apple itself understands their responsibility, then rock on.

Its not refusal to see. Apple did what they needed too, and the onus falls on the developer, pure and simple.

 

[UBS28]

It's still the developer's fault for not updating their apps. Apple warned them years ago. No matter how you slice it, there's a level of personal responsibility and since you're executing a financial transaction with a developer you expect to get something that works. If they choose to be lazy and do nothing how is that apple's fault?

The developer has also a role to play in it. But I put more blame on Apple since they created this problem (which all developers are forced to clean up this mess created by Apple) and some developers are not active anymore.

And i really do not see the point of switching exclusively to 64-bit when we have iPhone’s with 2 gb ram, except to break many apps.

 

[sracer]

Its not refusal to see. Apple did what they needed too, and the onus falls on the developer, pure and simple.

There is a "warranty of merchantability" that Apple is aware of and they know that they are responsible for. This too is "pure and simple".

 

[chabig]

And i really do not see the point of switching exclusively to 64-bit when we have iPhone’s with 2 gb ram, except to break many apps.

It's not about RAM. Apple always pushes their OS forward. By deprecating 32 bit support, they can shed legacy code, and don't have to dedicate resources to carrying it forward. You mentioned Windows...how much legacy (i.e., crap) code do you think Win 10 carries to continue running DOS programs? Why do you think Win 10 has multiple UIs? And the CPU has to support 32 code too. By going all in with 64 bits, the new A11 chip can do without the 32 bit support and those transistors can be dedicated to new and better functions, like more speed, more cores, the GPU, the ISP, and the neural engine. Whether the iPhone or iPad will have more than 4GB RAM in the future is irrelevant. At some point, 32 bit software will cease to run. There is no better time than now.

 

[maflynn]

There is a "warranty of merchantability" that Apple is aware of and they know that they are responsible for. This too is "pure and simple".

Actually it is pure and simple - this doesn't fit, and you're bending over backwards to try to make your point.

The implied warranty is that the app works on IOS 10 which it did. Apple fulfilled its end by communicating that there is a stated requirement for IOS11 that apps be 64 bits.

 

[darkarn]

As a workaround, is it possible for current iOS 11 users to downgrade to iOS 10?

 

[b0fh666]

As a workaround, is it possible for current iOS 11 users to downgrade to iOS 10?

not for long, so do it quick.

 

[darkarn]

not for long, so do it quick.

Thanks for the confirm!

 

[Ethosik]

The Windows 10 version that I have on bootcamp runs 32-bit and 64-bit. And you can make DOS programs work with a work around.

What entitlement issue? You do realize that I am paying Apple also with every App I buy, not just the developer of the App. So Apple has easily earned much more money of me than these few apps that do not work.

And that is why Windows 10 is such a huge mess. I can get Photoshop 5 working on it, which was released in 1998. That is the problem with Windows, supporting EVERYTHING, never getting rid of legacy code and dropping old old old stuff.

 

[OriginalAppleGuy]

It's not the amount of RAM available to the OS that's the concern with iOS. They decided to go with 64 bit processor technology to enable faster processing of various functions. So they rewrote iOS with a 64 bit kernal. Anytime a 64-bit OS runs a 32-bit Application it has to create a 32-bit address space to do so. That requires more RAM and processing power. Hence the notice about slowing down your device.

Always always always check how often a developer updates their app before buying it. If it's not a complicated app, once or twice a year may be okay. Otherwise they should be providing more. If the app hasn't been updated in over a year, think twice about using it.

Remember, buyer beware. Just because you don't take the time to research things doesn't make you innocent and without fault.

 

[iapplelove]

OP I also would imagine it’s probably writin somewhere in the fine print,we can’t get our money back.

Sucks, as I lost a few favorites too but it is what it is.

 

[newellj]

Edited because I actually think this is basically a non-issue and my post could be read the other way.

 

[masotime]

Seems that apps which I paid are removed from the App Store when I tried to reinstall them under iOS 11. So I just lost money?

What app do you need so much that has no current 64-bit equivalent?
[doublepost=1505940137][/doublepost]I’d also like to point out that it is incredibly naive to assume that the only advantage of a 64-bit architecture is just a larger addressable memory space.

Quoting from https://liliputing.com/2013/09/64-bit-chip-iphone-5s-matters.html

• ARMv8 architecture doesn’t just increase the memory capacity — it also features a new instruction set which boost performance and reduces power consumption.
• Certain apps (including games) will be able to make use of that new instruction set, and acess to additional registers in the A7 chip to boost performance.

In fact, AnandTech ran a series of benchmarks and found modest-to-huge performance gains when running certain types of tasks using the new iPhone’s 64-bit processor. Built-in support for AES encryption offered performance gains of more than 800 percent in cryptographic tests. Other gains were much more modest, but 64-bit performance seems noteworthy in almost every test.

64-bit allows for more advanced chip architecture / instruction sets / usable registers. True, Apple could have simply continued support for 32-bit applications, but this has been going on for 4 years already, how much leeway is Apple supposed to give?

I’m pretty sure that Face ID, 4k60, HEVC / HEIC, real-time Machine Learning and Augmented Reality would not have been possible in a performant way if we were still stuck with older architecture.

 

[gnasher729]

But with these iOS devices with only 4 gb, 64-bit is really pointless and dropping 32-bit just adds more annoyance.

As a software developer, I can assure you that using an ARM processor in 64 bit mode has _huge_ advantages compared to 32 bit mode. I would estimate about 50% gain in speed from that. Dropping 32 bit support means that Apple doesn't need to keep both 64 bit and 32 bit versions of all their libraries on the phone, in case you use a 32 bit app. And running a single 32 bit app means huge parts of those libraries will be loaded into RAM, so your RAM goes further if you don't use any 32 bit apps.

 

[pat500000]

This is when buyers no longer trust those app developers.

 

[danny842003]

I saw no warning... you need to accept not everyone lives in the tech world or frequents forums around apple.

The warnings were displayed when you opened the apps. You need to accept that’s what happens.

You also need to accept you own a licence to the software and in the terms and conditions this will all be laid out to stop people getting refunds. You need to accept you accepted Apples terms and conditions.

 

[AFEPPL]

The warnings were displayed when you opened the apps. You need to accept that’s what happens.

You also need to accept you own a licence to the software and in the terms and conditions this will all be laid out to stop people getting refunds. You need to accept you accepted Apples terms and conditions.

Normal people don't see all this forum crap and no one and i mean no one reads the Ts&cs so don't even think about playing that card.....

I was simply not aware, regardless of how much you protest that it was mentioned 2 years ago or more ago or even yesterday...., so I'm sure normal people are just the same....... i'd love to tell you what projects I'm working on - but I'm not allowed due to NDAs....