Talk:IOS: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:19, 9 June 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IOS article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 90 days

IOS received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Telecommunications B‑class

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Technology B‑class

	Technology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Computing: Software B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as High-importance).

Apple Inc. B‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IOS article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 90 days

Licensing

With Apple now allowing developers to share discussions and information from the code, I believe that GPLv3 code can be distributed on the App Store. The lone source for the claim of GPLv3 incompatibility states that if Apple did allow App Store apps to have their source code posted, that it would be complaint. Well, Apple now does that, they modified their NDA to lift that.

I think it's time to update that second, clarifying that iPhone OS can't contain GPLv3 code, but apps can be shared on the App Store, so long as the source code is shared in public. Toycars (talk) 13:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source for that? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:07, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Digital Rights Criticism section

As discussed initially on the iPad talk page I'm adding a new section to this article on Digital rights criticism. If this is in the wrong place can this be discussed there? Thanks -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As that discussion has been archived I guess it'll have to be discussed here if needed or a new section will have to be created on the iPad talk page. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

iPhone SDK release dates assumes America / Northern Hemisphere

The release date of iPhone SDK 4.0 in the SDK History is listed as Summer 2010, in the Southern Hemisphere we receive the iPhone OS Updates at the same time as the Northern Hemisphere so the season reference has little meaning.

Richardwooding (talk) 08:12, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the problem is it was announced as such by Apple. We could change it to "Mid 2010", but that would change the announcement and could be an interpretation that wasn't intended. GoldRenet (talk) 10:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given only about 10% of the worlds population lives in the southern hemisphere and Apple is an American company it seems pretty clear what "summer 2010" means, so I think it should stay as it is. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article Name

What's the WP policy on article names? Currently the article is still on IPhone_OS, while IOS_(operating_system) redirects here. I would think we'd want this article under a new name with IPhone_OS redirecting to it. ViRGE (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was moved, then I reversed the move because there was no explanation or source for the move. If you provide a source, I will gladly move it back. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 18:35, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apple has renamed "iPhone OS" to "iOS". Will this suffice as a source? http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/iphone_os_renamed_ios_4/ ViRGE (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apple also have it on there website. (Cannot get more official than a company website.) http://www.apple.com/iphone/softwareupdate/ --Thomas G 19:44, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Article move to iOS

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to iOS (Apple). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:08, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IPhone OS → IOS (operating system) — Ryankiefer (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC) ALT: IPhone OS → IOS (Apple)[reply]

Support, mildly prefer iOS (Apple) per AppleInsider and I'm sure more notable sources will come along shortly. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would support moving to iOS (Apple) since iOS (operating system) is a disambig page. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 18:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that makes more sense. I support the move to iOS (Apple). Ryankiefer (talk) 18:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. IOS (as an operating system) is already used primarily by Cisco, but also by Nintendo. iOS (operating system) should be a disambiguation page, and iOS (Apple) the primary page for this article. ViRGE (talk) 18:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given that Cisco IOS is a router operating system I don't think its as generally well known as iPhone OS outside network administrators. Therefore I've redirecting iOS (operating system) to this page.

I'm easy about which name we go for, iOS (Apple) is shorter and still descriptive so my preference would be for that - though iOS (operating system) should redirect to that page. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would support iOS (Apple) to avoid headaches with the Cisco product. Having iOS (operating system) as a disambig makes sense. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 19:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:DLINKS (and the section above that) why is a disambiguation page at iOS (operating system) needed? This article is fairly clearly the primary topic and a hatnote should suffice. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why not Apple iOS and Cisco iOS? — ceejayoz ^talk 20:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - a reliable source exsists, in the form of Apple now refering to it as iOS. -- sk8er5000 ^yeah? 20:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Since it's being used on iPad now, it should be referred to as a universal OS like Apple is now doing. ConnorJack (talk) 20:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why the hell would we not rename the article? They renamed the product. Alex Muller 21:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support move to iOS (Apple) because, Cisco IOS is also an operating system. Reliable source, sk8er5000? Check any tech site or Apple.com - iOS 4 page. --Andrew-LGP -| Talk to me |- 22:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In reply to the comment made on my talk page, I prefer "iOS (Apple)" or "iOS (Apple operating system)" - "iOS (operating system)" is ambigious - Cisco's iOS also is a operating system, as well as Apple's. "iOS (Apple)" would proberly be the best as it's more to the point. And @Andrew-LGP: I actually linked that a RS exsisted, linking to the iOS page as proof. -- sk8er5000 ^yeah? 00:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support iOS (Apple) Name has been officially changed. "(Apple)" avoids ambiguity with Cisco's OS. --Cybercobra (talk) 01:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support iOS (Apple). Short, up to date and clearly related to Apple Inc. LovesMacs (talk) 02:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "IOS" is an operating system made by Cisco. Neutral on the alt. 76.66.193.224 (talk) 04:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, of course. iOS is its name.--Nickthegeek (talk) 04:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support move to iOS (Apple) as there's also the Cisco iOS. Plus, the fact that iPhone OS is now called iOS is documented all over the web. GoldRenet (talk) 08:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support move to iOS (Apple) as it avoids confusion with Cisco. David Bailey (talk) 10:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, obviously. This is the new name and Cisco has already sold it to Apple. —fetch ·comms 15:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support move to iOS (Apple) Airplaneman ✈ 18:02, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it OK to go ahead and move this to iOS (Apple) now per WP:SNOW? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, but won't an Administrator have to do it since iOS (Apple) is now a redirect page? -TheTechFan (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I had already tagged the pages as csd g6, to make way for a move.--Terrillja _talk 19:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done as requested --B (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name clarification

Keep in mind that the operating system is only named "iOS" from version 4 onwards. There is no such thing as "iOS 3". (This is similar to Apple renaming "System" to "Mac OS" around version 7.5 - there is no such thing as "Mac OS 6".) In the article, please be careful to refer to the operating system as "iPhone OS" for versions before 4. - Brian Kendig (talk) 18:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Everything should refer to the operating system as "iPhone OS" still, and then each mention should be checked individually if they need to be updated or not. In articles that mention "iOS", they should at probably at least say "iOS (formerly iPhone OS)" at the first mention. Gary King (talk) 19:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there is mention of iOS 3, 2 etc. in the section entitled hacking and jailbreaking. Someone should revert that to iPhone OS.Bill Heller (talk) 02:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've move-protected the page for a day so it doesn't go anywhere until discussion here progresses a bit. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion, but I think Apple is going to refer to any iPhone OS as iOS from here on out, including 3.2, 2.0, and 1.0 release of the "iOS". I think it might be wise to rename the article as iOS as whole. Bentoman (talk) 21:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Every device running the iPhone OS (iPad, iPod, iPhone, iToiletbrush, etc) were referred to as 'iOS devices' in today's keynote. That means the operating system has been retroactively renamed and every version of iPhone OS will be referred to as iOS from now on. It doesn't get any more clear than that. Whoever moved the article back to its old name, please pull down your pants and bite the rope before we spank you. --Joffeloff (talk) 01:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2]

"Now there's another major milestone we're about to hit. This month we will sell our 100 millionth iOS device. iPads, iPhones, iPod touch.."

CLEAR ENOUGH? I'm not gonna bother moving it back because I can foresee whoever moved it in the first place is the kind of pedantic retard to engage in an editing war without looking at the talk page, so whoever did that can read this and then perhaps concede their position. --Joffeloff (talk) 02:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When Apple changed their name from Apple Computer Inc to Apple Inc, they did not sell their older products as the x, made by Apple Computer Inc until they came out with a new version. They changed the name retroactively, just as they have clearly done here. If this was a completely new OS, then it would be differentiated, but it isn't, rather it's just a rebranding.--Terrillja _talk 05:16, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, no. Everyone here is wrong. No employee at Apple has referred to versions 3 and below as "iOS 3". It has only ever been referred to as iPhone OS 3 etc. Doing a simple find-and-replace is nothing to replace true editing. You've just proved you are both lazy and Apple fanboys. I think being a fanboy validates as having a "close connection" to the subject, don't you? WP:NPOV 90.201.84.62 (talk) 16:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, but it would be good to see a source to back that up so we can be definitive. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr. Anonymous IP - no, you're wrong, I do not own a single Apple product. I watched Engadget's live update of the keynote and the slideshow distinctly referred to the older devices as 'iOS devices'. You really think they would do that as a mistake for Jobs' WWDC keynote? --Joffeloff (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is wrong!

There is no iOS 3.1.3, so you can't rename the article, because, it hasn't changed the name, only the name for iPhone OS 4.0(now iOS 4) , so .. undo please the renaming... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atiko4 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but Apple has re-named the OS to iOS, and Steve Jobs announced it in the keynote that makes it apply so previous version of the OS are now considered iOS as well. So there is no point in renaming the article to iPhone OS. Bentoman (talk) 07:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 115: / Line 115: @@
 == This is wrong! ==
 There is no iOS 3.1.3, so you can't rename the article, because, it hasn't changed the name, only the name for iPhone OS 4.0(now iOS 4) , so .. undo please the renaming...  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Atiko4|Atiko4]] ([[User talk:Atiko4|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Atiko4|contribs]]) 22:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+Sorry, but Apple has re-named the OS to iOS, and Steve Jobs announced it in the keynote that makes it apply so previous version of the OS are now considered iOS as well. So there is no point in renaming the article to iPhone OS. [[User:Bentoman|Bentoman]] ([[User talk:Bentoman|talk]]) 07:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)