Apple dictates that all new apps must fully support the iPhone X screen
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
I don’t have a X but I have apps that still don’t support the iPhone 6 screen size. Not ancient apps that have never been updated.
TiVo updates their app regularly. Every 2 or 3 months. But it still doesn’t support the screen size released four years ago.
This is a good move but at some point it needs to apply to existing apps or you end up with an obnoxious loophole.
And I’d only apply it to updates to apps.
Presumably they're going to make their own apps compatible by then.
When the larger screens came out (from 3.5 to 4' to 4.7'), new apps had to support them as well.
Also, when iOS 7 was released it introduced major changes to the full screen layouts, and manny apps had to deal with it. (in order support both iOS 6, and 7).
So, nothing new
The notched screen and rounded corners makes it a different beast.
Another issue we found is support for the overflow when hiding the top bar on scroll and other minor issues that I have no time to tell.
But the real problem is that you need to test and test all screens, something difficult in a complex app. Especially since the X was released in late November and difficult to find for some time.
That does not mean that having a compatible app by April, 6 months later is a hard requirement. But updating the support requires a good amount of work, it is not trivial and could consume a good chunk of time to do that.
I'll grant the low end of Android apps is probably much worse than the low end of iOS apps, but I generally don't use those apps in the first place.
> The email didn't clarify exactly what support for the iPhone X's "Super Retina" screen means—does it just mean the resolution and aspect ratio must be supported, or do developers also have to update their apps to respect the rounded corners, sensor array (which many people call "the notch"), and the home indicator?
Requiring support for the aspect ratio and resolution alone would hardly be unreasonable. It's their flagship device and a taller aspect ratio is becoming common everywhere.
Sounds like the "home indicator" is the trickiest thing for some full screen apps? Without having an iPhone X it's hard to know for sure, but is that similar to how Android apps have to respect that swiping up on the lower portion of the screen on a Pixel or such is interpreted by the OS as bringing up the on-screen buttons instead of going through to the app?
Does anyone have more concrete info on what "supporting" means for the X?
My iPhone X is the best phone I've every used and the notch is a nothing burger except for folks that can only knock Apple.
Naturally they want software to play ball - what company doesn't want software to work well with their hardware?
Sounds like someone that has an agenda. And Ars' use of "DICTATE" is a loaded word they obviously used to boost click-ability. There are plenty of other words like requires, updates standards, etc that don't have the connotation of dictates.
I've never seen anyone say they like the notch, only tolerate / ignore it.
There is, the notch could instead be a black bar that extends across the width of the screen. whether that's a better decision is arguable, but it's definitely possible.
Instead, they chose to rub the user's face in it as a marketing ploy.
So now we've shared competing anecdotes. We can conclude only that anecdotes aren't arguments.
"The sales figures prove that it has been seen as largely successful."
Demand for the X has actually been pretty weak:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-to-curtail-iphone-x-produ...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/26/investing/iphone-x-weak-sale...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-iphone/apple-suppli...
https://mashable.com/2018/01/22/iphone-x-discontinued-predic...
> “We’re thrilled to report the biggest quarter in Apple’s history, with broad-based growth that included the highest revenue ever from a new iPhone lineup. iPhone X surpassed our expectations and has been our top-selling iPhone every week since it shipped in November,”
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-q...
https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/1/16961562/apple-q1-2018-ear...
Since you're quoting percentages to justify your insistence of "Demand for the X has actually been pretty weak", here are some more percentages you've left out:
> The Company posted quarterly revenue of $88.3 billion, an increase of 13 percent from the year-ago quarter and an all-time record, and quarterly earnings per diluted share of $3.89, up 16 percent, also an all-time record.
> lots of mass market products are terribly designed
Insinuating the iPhone X is terribly designed which isn't my experience (the only one I have). By definition all personal experiences are anecdotal, so no I haven't conducted any empirical studies (neither have you), but we can infer given the iPhone X is Apple's top selling phone that most people prefer the iPhone X despite its higher price.
"we can infer given the iPhone X is Apple's top selling phone that most people prefer the iPhone X despite its higher price."
Maybe, maybe not. But that's not what you said. You said merely that you liked the iPhone X.
I have directly responded to the comment I've quoted, as evident by looking at the parent comment that my comment replied to.
> Maybe, maybe not. But that's not what you said.
That's exactly what I've said, you've even copied it verbatim, which was in response to your comment pointing out the very obvious fact that personal experiences are anecdotal, which you've somehow tried to contradict using your own anecdote. It should not surprise anyone that most comments are anecdotal (especially those beginning with 'I') but which should at least count for 1 data point with experience which is more than enough to respond to unsubstantiated claims.
No, I didn't. But I will now:
"The iPhone X is the best device I've owned. The notch quickly became unnoticeable but took a few days to get used to lack of a physical home button but that's also become natural to use and going back to use my wife's iPhone now feels more mechanical/primitive."
>Otherwise devs would just rely on compatibility and people would get used to the idea that iPhone X is the one where apps don't really work that well. Almost nobody would question whether that's dev's or apple's fault.
Microsoft spends their own money to make sure apps work with a newer version of Windows. I'd say that is the right choice given the enormous disparity in resources.
I’ve read on the official Microsoft blogs how many special case hacks are in Windows just to maintain compatibility with one app. Can you imagine how horrible that code base must be?
I am a developer and have been one professionally for 20+ years. I have a hard time for feeling bad for developers who have to actually do their job and keep up with technological changes.
The notch was a disturbing design decision not because it was all that awful, but because it was a run-of-the-mill faux pas that should have been obvious. You don't have to be an expert at human psychology to realize that people won't see the extra pixels you're giving them on either side, they'll only see the "missing" ones in the middle.
It seems that Apple is so focused on the details that they're starting to overlook obvious things. Ever proofread a long document, combing through the footnotes and spending hours on the spelling and grammar minutiae, only to realize later that you overlooked a glaring typo in an 18-point subheading? That's the notch.
It does, because this is not a new phenomenon.
Apple regularly enforces that Apps are built to support the latest versions of its phones and OSes.
At the design phase for FaceID, competing designs are presented, each with their own tradeoffs. These are then culled further for a manufacturing phase, where the design is further iterated on. Finally, they are presented with the limitations of supply-chain and engineering.
Why would a company at Apple's scale not test out many different variations and ask the question: why the notch > black bar on the top (or even embedded into the device itself)? From a marketing perspective, a black bar would have been worse - less distinctive, less screen, potentially more noticeable in a bad way ("the screen you don't have", "wasteful"). The complaints may have been similar. Given the compromises between the target device size, actual requirements of FaceID, and distinctive look, I'd say Apple hit their goals and the market is mostly receptive.