Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Ansath

Cancelled
Jun 9, 2018
4,791
5,249
Didn’t even realize 13.7 was released when I posted this, it makes sense. Tomorrow probably, or maybe 4pm today

Since WatchOS 7 beta 7 came out today, without iOS 14 B7, I am really unsure when iOS 14 B7 will come. If iOS 14 B7 was coming today, then the watch beta would have been left to come with it, surely.

I still wanna know if iOS 13.7 supports WatchOS 7 B7, as that's really weird how they came out together.

So based on that, the next beta should be the GM.

Yea, so either way, this isn't the GM, it's just the potential last build before a GM.

A 30 second google search revealed exactly what I've been saying, that the last beta can be the GM:

watchOS 6 Beta 9 build: 17R5575a
watchOS 6 GM build: 17R575

I wasn't disputing that any beta could be the last before a GM, I was only disputing that this wasn't the actual GM, and I might have misunderstood your reply to my dispute of that. Although this *could* be the last build before GM, it's not anywhere near a guarantee, and we don't want some people on here thinking otherwise.
 

TimFL1

macrumors 68010
Jul 6, 2017
2,003
2,409
Germany
Since WatchOS 7 beta 7 came out today, without iOS 14 B7, I am really unsure when iOS 14 B7 will come. If iOS 14 B7 was coming today, then the watch beta would have been left to come with it, surely.

I still wanna know if iOS 13.7 supports WatchOS 7 B7, as that's really weird how they came out together.



Yea, so either way, this isn't the GM, it's just the potential last build before a GM.



I wasn't disputing that any beta could be the last before a GM, I was only disputing that this wasn't the actual GM, and I might have misunderstood your reply to my dispute of that. Although this *could* be the last build before GM, it's not anywhere near a guarantee, and we don't want some people on here thinking otherwise.
You seem to misunderstand. No one is arguing that this is the last build before the GM. I was just saying that last year, beta 9 was the same build as the GM. So people who had B9 installed got no OTA update with the GM release, because they already got it a week before with B9.
That happens quite often that the last beta equals the GM.

So we could literally sit on the GM in 1-2 weeks without knowing (it could even be this beta if the rumors about a reveal event / press release for the S6 next week are true).

//EDIT: 13.7 does not support wOS 7, I tried with my dads phone (and my Watch) just for you (I ****ed up by unpairing though, but I guess it should restore over night).
13.7 seems to be just a backport of the new exposure system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ansath

Ansath

Cancelled
Jun 9, 2018
4,791
5,249
You seem to misunderstand. No one is arguing that this is the last build before the GM. I was just saying that last year, beta 9 was the same build as the GM. So people who had B9 installed got no OTA update with the GM release, because they already got it a week before with B9.
That happens quite often that the last beta equals the GM.

So we could literally sit on the GM in 1-2 weeks without knowing (it could even be this beta if the rumors about a reveal event / press release for the S6 next week are true).

// EDIT: 13.7 does not support wOS 7, I tried with my dads phone (and my Watch) just for you (I ****ed up by unpairing though, but I guess it should restore over night).
13.7 seems to be just a backport of the new exposure system.

Well, we don’t know what iOS 14 B7 build is yet anyway. Only the watch build. So, yes, could be the last watch build that becomes the GM. Or we might get 2 more betas. Until GM comes, we don’t know. 😊

Hmm, as for 13.7 & WatchOS 7 b7, well that answers the question form me and the other person.

Curious indeed as to them releasing that out of sync.

Maybe iOS 14 B6 is the last build that becomes GM. Nothing will surprise me now.
 

TimFL1

macrumors 68010
Jul 6, 2017
2,003
2,409
Germany
The a at the end of a build only denotes that the build passed QA the first time around. It‘s not unusual for betas to go to a and then back to a higher letter.

I never got the sentiment that an a build is better than one with b or c at the end. One could argue that the a build potentially has nasty issues QA didn‘t catch, whereas the b or c one had them look „closely“ before giving their stamp of approval.
That being said, I don‘t think there was ever a final release based on a beta without an „a“ build so I don‘t think b6 is the GM (we‘re probably looking at 1-3 more betas).
 
  • Like
Reactions: sbailey4 and Ansath

gwhizkids

macrumors G5
Jun 21, 2013
13,270
21,442
If someone is commenting in a defined speculation thread, how is it not the assumption that their comments within that thread are speculation?


  1. If it's a rule, make it a written rule.
  2. Unless someone in here is an Apple software engineer on the iOS team (and even if there is/was no one would believe them—I'd bet even if someone took a pic of their terminal w/ their Apple badge next to the screen, there'd be "fake!" comments), there's really no "evidence" to post—it is, as the thread defines it as—speculation by default. Why would anyone—with the absence of proof that you already know doesn't exist (in a practical sense)—take it as a definitive "statement"? A qualifier is superfluous within the context of the discussion being had.


Agreed.

It's as if there was a thread titled "What do you guess the weather will be tomorrow?"

...and people got up in arms about someone posting "Sunny." but weren't bothered by ""I think it'll be sunny."

Context matters. We know already that these are all qualified comments not only because of the thread title/purpose, but because the ability to make definitive statements about the future doesn't exist. If you're reading this thread, you understand that these are all speculative guesses, you're not reading a comment in a vacuum divorced from its context.

Not "defending" anyone, I just think the premise of requiring "evidence" (which is conjecture itself!) on a thread where we are literally invited to speculate...is pretty silly.
One word posts are a waste of the reader's time. They are also a waste of the poster's time. Of course this is all conjecture. But the value is in people posting about WHY they think something will happen. That is the speculation I envisioned when I created the "Speculation" thread concept. I keep pointing that out not for self-congratulatory purposes, but because it makes me singularly qualified to state what this type of thread was designed to accomplish.
 

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
51,392
19,461
If someone is commenting in a defined speculation thread, how is it not the assumption that their comments within that thread are speculation?


  1. If it's a rule, make it a written rule.
  2. Unless someone in here is an Apple software engineer on the iOS team (and even if there is/was no one would believe them—I'd bet even if someone took a pic of their terminal w/ their Apple badge next to the screen, there'd be "fake!" comments), there's really no "evidence" to post—it is, as the thread defines it as—speculation by default. Why would anyone—with the absence of proof that you already know doesn't exist (in a practical sense)—take it as a definitive "statement"? A qualifier is superfluous within the context of the discussion being had.


Agreed.

It's as if there was a thread titled "What do you guess the weather will be tomorrow?"

...and people got up in arms about someone posting "Sunny." but weren't bothered by ""I think it'll be sunny."

Context matters. We know already that these are all qualified comments not only because of the thread title/purpose, but because the ability to make definitive statements about the future doesn't exist. If you're reading this thread, you understand that these are all speculative guesses, you're not reading a comment in a vacuum divorced from its context.

Not "defending" anyone, I just think the premise of requiring "evidence" (which is conjecture itself!) on a thread where we are literally invited to speculate...is pretty silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ansath

Silverstring

macrumors 6502
Apr 30, 2005
447
654
Are we confident that the iOS beta will not come out today because of 13.7?

I read through today's comments, and did some googling, and couldn't pin down whether or not Apple has done both releases on a single day.

If not, what's the leading theory on why the day can't be shared? Is it probably a question of server load? I can theorize why iOS/iPadOS/tvOS/watchOS betas are tied together, but it's unclear why people tie macOS beta releases and non-beta iOS versions to beta iOS releases. I assume they're—at this point—separate teams/schedules?
 

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
51,392
19,461
Are we confident that the iOS beta will not come out today because of 13.7?

I read through today's comments, and did some googling, and couldn't pin down whether or not Apple has done both releases on a single day.

If not, what's the leading theory on why the day can't be shared? Is it probably a question of server load? I can theorize why iOS/iPadOS/tvOS/watchOS betas are tied together, but it's unclear why people tie macOS beta releases and non-beta iOS versions to beta iOS releases. I assume they're—at this point—separate teams/schedules?
The typical release windows for the day have come and gone now, so the confidence seems fairly high that it won't happen today. The rest of the week is certainly still within the realm of fairly good possibility, although it can certainly be something that's more for next week.
 

Dianneeraser

macrumors regular
Sep 24, 2017
115
200
Sometimes as part of discussions in threads like this there are things that are more than speculation that are posted, like something based on information that was leaked or articles that were posted or something else of that nature. Being able to distinguish information like that from something that just pure speculation (that is also beyond simply random "today" or "tomorrow" type of posts that aren't even really speculation) is something that plays a role.


Unless you are Apple....it's all speculation...
 
  • Like
Reactions: jamezr

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
51,392
19,461
Unless you are Apple....it's all speculation...
It can all be called that unless Apple says it, but there is still a range of pure random guessing, speculation based on something like past history or other observations, and even likelihood of something based on leaks and other type of announcements. Not everything carries the same type of meaning behind it, and the way things are stated makes a difference in relation to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gwhizkids

gwang73

macrumors 68030
Jun 14, 2009
2,597
2,119
California

Ansath

Cancelled
Jun 9, 2018
4,791
5,249
Yup.
5.0 beta 712.0 beta 716R5349aWatch2,613 Aug 2018
5.0 beta 812.0 beta 916R5357aWatch2,620 Aug 2018
5.0 beta 912.0 beta 1016R5360aWatch2,624 Aug 2018
5.0 beta 1012.0 beta 1216R5363aWatch2,631 Aug 2018
5.0 GM12.0 GM16R364Watch2,612 Sep 2018

6.0 beta 713.0 beta 717R5566aWatch2,615 Aug 2019
6.0 beta 813.0 beta 817R5571aWatch2,621 Aug 2019
6.0 beta 913.0 beta 917R5575aWatch2,627 Aug 2019
6.0 GM13.0 GM17R575Watch2,611 Sep 2019

Coolio, so todays WatchOS beta isn't explicitly going to be the final release then, since it seems the logic for iOS builds ending with an 'a' does not hold for WatchOS. Thanks for sharing that.
 

tdar

macrumors 68020
Jun 23, 2003
2,102
2,522
Johns Creek Ga.
  • Like
Reactions: compwiz1202
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.