Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | superlupo's comments login

I have been a developer and nerd since 25 years, and I always expected that Apple also patches some previous versions. E.g. around a week ago they released both iOS 17.2.1 and iOS 16.7.4: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222

So why should I assume that latest iOS 16 isn't completely patched? I think it's a shame to say at least that Apple has no public policy of how which OS versions are supported and which are not, it's just guesswork. Whereas I definitely know how long Microsoft supports Windows versions, e.g. Windows 10 until October 14th, 2025: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/windows...


It's not completely patched. Stop assuming. I've always assumed that Apple or Google or Microsoft consider three factors for deprecated devices or software: 1. Severity of Issue, 2. Expected work required to fix issue, 3. Number of users involved

I think if something is a relatively easy fix and high severity that they will fix it. I don't think they view security updates as a tool to force people to buy new products. The low hanging fruit for large numbers of users gets fixed. The underlying software however, should not be trusted or viewed as secure.

Even though these applications are bundled with the operating system, they are probably separate code bases and if they believe the patch can be accomplished across the versions with minimal work like fixing the same line of code in the old version it probably goes out. If they have to do a major overhall of the old operating system and port the new browser version to the old software, it probably doesn't.


I can only recommend to give Firefox another go, if you don't use it by default. It really has improved the last years, it also had made much progress in privacy features, and doesn't want to kill ad-blocker like Google wants. Also, Firefox on Android finally started supporting extensions.

Another thing: Because no other browser engines are allowed to be installed on iOS, those numbers should be subtracted from the total.


I hear this everytime a thread on HN pops up. Everyone talks about the major improvements, how it performs well nowadays etc. after a few years of perf. issues. But it runs like shit on my Macbook Pro 2019 (Intel) 32GB RAM. Videos freeze, it takes ages to cold start. Every interaction feels slow to me compared to chrome.


... which of course won't happen because the port can only be digits, and changing the URL spec would affect the whole world


Reading, not even trying to understand that list makes my brain explode.


NAT64+DNS64 is the best transition method as it eliminates the need for dual-stack.

Clients can be IPv6 only and ideally need a CLAT installed to handle the edge case of IPv4 literals in apps that don't use DNS. The ISP's internal network can be IPv6 only. Only this NAT64 translator needs to speak both IPv6 and IPv4, and only for non-IPv6 traffic.


On hacker news. You're going to find a big contingent of people who are getting things like VPS/colo/dedicated/cloud hosting, only get an IPv6 address on that (or finding that an IPv4 address costs extra) ... and are occasionally finding some customers can't reach their sites without every host having an IPv4 address or paying for something like cloudflare.

So there is a bit of a demand, especially here, for forward compatibility.


I would place a bet that this will not be fixed in the first stable release. I can't remember that Apple once didn't release the release candidate.


I've basically given up reporting bugs with Apple as they just seem to be ignored and either never fixed, or fixed some years later when the corresponding component is completely rewritten.

I basically resent filing bugs with companies that have enough money to do proper testing, I don't want to work for them for free, especially if there is no answer, or a 1st-level answer who hasn't even tried the filed repro case. However, I am happily reporting bugs with open source projects.


I don't put a lot of effort into bug reports, but it's not a zero-sum game.

If they never fix the bug, they got no value out of your report...

If they fix your bug, then now software you use works better...


But you still get security fixes for Windows 10 for years to come


Isn't that quite the same as running

  debootstrap focal ./ubuntu-rootfs http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/
  systemd-nspawn -D ./ubuntu-rootfs

?


You've basically reinvented REST


That’s completely backwards. Content negotiation was part of HTTP early on (check RFC 1945, HTTP/1.0). Fielding’s REST thesis came after HTTP 1.1, and used HTTP as an example of REST’s concept of representations.


Fielding's REST thesis also goes into great detail and emphasis on using HTTP's content negotiation definitions. This is probably the least used part of Fielding's definition of REST, but he greatly encourages defining custom media types for application objects, and he believes those are a much more fundamental part of REST design than the HTTP verbs, for example.


No


IAB will try to do everything to go pre-GDPR, where it could track users across the whole web. Without explicit consent, forwarding an ID like e-mail address is illegal, of course.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: