Comment by JumpCrisscross
4 days ago
The rollback provisions, granted. But I’m arguing the other stuff requires QC attention Apple may not want to provide to a legacy line. That isn’t not allowing something that can be done. It’s not building something they don’t want to.
>But I’m arguing the other stuff requires QC attention Apple may not want to provide to a legacy line.
Oh come on. This is HN, we know how development works, how modular an OS, how the patch process works and what that entails for testing in an incredibly restricted and limited hardware base. We know they have no issue doing retroactive updates for quite awhile on the same code base for Macs, which have enormously more hardware variance then iDevices. These are extremely high profit margin premium products. You really don't need to carry water for the multi-trillion dollar megacorp with absolute wide eyed credulity.
And on other systems, even if it wasn't supported, it'd be perfectly possible for hardware owners to patch various components or implement workarounds. It's only on iOS that Apple is utilizing technical controls to stop that dead.
>That isn’t not allowing something that can be done.
Yes, it is. They are 100% using their technical controls built into the underlying hardware and then on up for not allow something that can be done. They could trivially allow hardware owners, even if only as a buy-time option, to have the ability to add their own certificates to the iOS root of trust, and in turn install and modify any software they wished on their own to the extent of their abilities. Apple wouldn't have to do anything except not exert maximal artificial control.
They don't do that. They have the power. It's their responsibility in turn. It's pretty irritating anyone who has been around the block as much as you have would try to white wash that. FFS.