There used to be a large public tracker running on .si, used widely in Slovenia where .si is from. Almost everyone who's been online in the last 20 years in Slovenia knows of or has used it. It also didn't disappear because of legal notices.
Not necessarily. You can have dozens of Word instances open and it still doesn't bog the system down nearly as much as 5 Notions with the Chromium renderer. Word might not seem fast, but it's lightweight enough to work on the crappiest PCs you (or the IT dept) can find.
I can easily do those on my Late 2013 MBP running Catalina, but not iOS development for the App Store, because it has a minimum Xcode version requirement, which in turn requires a newer OS, which requires buying a new Mac.
Apple requires developers to build the apps with at least Xcode 16 targeting the SDK of least iOS 18 to submit new apps / updates to the App Store [1]. This limits how far back you can go with the iOS version, thus dropping older phones.
Yes, you can definitely download older SDKs and target older iOS versions, but you cannot publish those apps on the App Store anymore.
You can absolutely publish apps that target versions of iOS prior to iOS 18; eg all my apps are iOS 15+, I published one as recently as last week.
You can build an app with the iOS 18 SDK that target previous versions just fine (as long as your calls to APIs posterior to the version you’re targeting, if any, are wrapped in the proper macros) and submit them to the App Store.
So yes, you have to build your apps with the latest SDK to publish them - but that doesn’t restrict the target OS version in any way (ie I can build apps that target iOS 9 with the iOS 18 SDK).
Where it starts to be a pain for new apps built in 2025 is if you want to target pre iOS 13, as you’ll have to use the older AppDelegate mechanism, but still totally doable.
(That’s getting deprecated with the next release, but deprecated APIs still build just fine).
The "target SDK" and "minimum SDK" versions can be set separately. It's mostly just a cultural norm in the Apple ecosystem not to support older versions.
This is supported by 1. Apple being relatively good at releasing new versions iOS for older hardware. 2. Users (at least historically) typically being on a ~2 year upgrade cycle. But it's also just the case that the Apple ecosystem (including on macOS) tends not to value backwards compatibility as much as other ecosystems.
UI-wise, perhaps, but the underlying foundation was far from solid. A single poorly written program would bring the entire system to its knees. Same for drivers. System startup files would occasionally randomly break, requiring booting with a startup floppy and manually restoring them. Plus a ~512MB RAM limit. Windows NT (even 4.0 at the time) was light years ahead of that.
Oh, and I think we're forgetting the Ad Panel on the desktop, absolutely huge (at least on 800x600) toolbar buttons in Explorer, and other "bloat" IE integration brought us in W98 ;)
This. Active X was a bit of a turd; by disabling IE preloading W98SE was almost snapppy... until a heavy threaded working environment crawled it down; was very subpar compared to w2k/XP, even under a Pentium 4 and 512 MB of RAM.
oh, i've used that too, but i didn't know that - it's been a while.
This gives me the opportunity to test out my wiki install for note-taking in real time; set up 86box and do the same things i've been doing with pcem (clone the drives (copy/paste)), screenshots, the works. +1
I'd argue this is not as big of a factor in governments as it is elsewhere (plus, they already use software that's way worse than LO in terms of UI/UX).
It's more that someone somewhere gets their % when selling them the commercial software, be it Microsoft or someone else.
reply