It had been in the works for a while, but now it has formally been adopted. From the article:

The regulation provides that by 2027 portable batteries incorporated into appliances should be removable and replaceable by the end-user, leaving sufficient time for operators to adapt the design of their products to this requirement.

  • djs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s up to individual developers what the minimum OS version they support for their app is. If you have previously downloaded an app and the minimum version is raised above the version you are running on your device then you can still download the most recent version that supports your device

    • Balder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, what happens is that it takes effort to keep supporting multiple OS versions. iOS has a history of users being like 90% on the newest OS every time there’s a major update, so a lot of companies only support one previous version beyond the current.

      Android is a different matter. It has always been a fragmented mess and new OS adoption has always been very slow (it’s faster nowadays though). Because of that Google maintains a set of libraries that make sure Android features work the same way across multiple versions, which eases the burden on developers.

    • 418teapot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem is all of these apps are using proprietary APIs to communicate to centralized backends, which then deprecate the APIs and the old versions cease to work. Back when software was largely communicating over standardized protocols it was feasible to run an old version of software for years after it had been stopped being maintained, but protocols don’t make money, APIs do.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But why should I have to have downloaded the app previously? The app version for the previous OS version was already published at some point. It’s definitely available and it would definitely work on the device. All they have to do is allow you do install it. But they explicitly refuse so you’ll buy a new device. Which is forced obsolescence by definition.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I developed and shipped iOS apps, and what you wrote is actually incorrect.

      Apple does not allow developers to put on the app store applications built targetting an iOS version below a certain point.

      Also Apple controls the build environment for applications which are listed on the App Store: you have to build and push the app for the store on Xcode (contractually and enforced cryptograhically) and it even has to be running on a Mac computer (contractually).

      So it’s not up to individual developers what the minimum OS version they support for their app, at least not if they want to be able to distribute it via the App Store (which is the only way they can be distributed for non-rooted phones).

      Absolutelly, lots of devs just go along with the Xcode defaults (which by the way, are a soft push by Apple) and build against a very recent iOS version, but those who want to support really old iPhones aren’t allowed to.