This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
IOS 10 was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page seems like somebody pasted an article from a website into Wikipedia. It has all sorts of opinions and needs to be revised urgently. --Nicolás Macri (talk) 23:15, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion of whether Template:Infobox OS should be used with multiple version numbers - for example, to list both a "software update" and "next major release" beta, or to list betas from more than one release stream. If you believe that multiple {stable, preview} releases should never appear in that infobox, or if you believe that they should appear under some or all circumstances where there's more than one beta of the OS in question available, you might want to comment there. (I have no strong belief either way; I'm OK with the main OS page listing only the "next major release" beta, but listing betas from multiple streams if they exist, but I'd also be OK with other choices.) Guy Harris (talk) 08:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I'm curious, why do edits about adding "Limited support" to devices in the Supported devices section get removed? I would think that's good information to have. If a device supports the OS, but not all advertised features of it, isn't that valuable information? LocalNet (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi. If you read the entire sentence, you'll notice the focus is on his opinion of the ability to use extensions rather than the extensions themselves. "Those" doesn't fit in the context if you read the whole sentence. LocalNet (talk) 10:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi @KAP03: What was the reason behind putting "No" on the B-class criteria for supporting materials? Are we missing anything notable? LocalNet (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi @KAP03: Your efforts on iOS articles are greatly appreciated! But out of curiousity in regards to this edit, is it actually talking about the Messages App Store and its initial lack of a "Categories" tab rather than the general App Store? The book search URL posted did not render the actual preview for me, unfortunately, and a quick Google search only results in articles about the Messages App Store being updated with a "Categories" section after its initial launch without it. One example. Is it the same thing, or am I misunderstanding? LocalNet (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
on the apfs (Apple FS) is mentioned that 10.3 will migrate to this new filesystem on the iphones and that iphone 5 is not compatible, but in this ios 10 article no single mention of this is done, so who is wron here the filesystem article on wikipedia or this or bot making both outdated?? 190.96.79.218 (talk) 07:19, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
> iOS 10 restricts a workaround that some developers used to probe or read certain hardware information pertaining to the device's battery, such as the number of battery cycles, the charging voltage, the input/output current and the real charge. Apple's I/O Kit framework is considered private by Apple and it rejected apps that used it. The workaround was still able to retrieve some of this information without using I/O Kit. On iOS 10, apps that use this workaround either crash or show wrong information.
I find this paragraph really misleading. It is listed under removed functionanality, however, it was never meant / intended to function in that way previously, so it cannot be "removed" as to speak. Also, this functionality still exists in IOKit, it just requires entitlements not provided for normal apps.
For this reason, I have removed this paragraph Nullpixel (talk) 18:09, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: PiGuy3 (talk · contribs) 03:38, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Overall this is a well written article.
About this revert from LocalNet. To explain why I added the "source".
"Third-party application support only", means implicitly that there is no support from Apple, e.g. security updates (or features) coming to the operating system. "application support only" means we, Apple, still allow people to sell apps (or give) through our app store, by you "third" parties.
I was a little surprised that iOS 10, a recent version, has no support (what I'm sourcing with the ref, not that you can actually still install new apps), and went looking to confirm it. It seems true that a "major" version upgrade is needed to get security updates, and with it you get new features in iOS 11. comp.arch (talk) 10:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA from 2017. While the only issue with citations is a refimprove tag at the version history section, i have to call out the prose here. Maybe this is unwarranted but over half the article's prose is just one sentence paragraph after one sentence paragraph after one sentence paragraph. I'm nominating this to see if the prose is enough to warrant a delisting or a rewrite. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:00, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
I’ve seen a mixed response to this decision, on one hand, I can see that it can kind of clutter of the page, but on the other hand, lots of people read it, including me, and version history is kept on literally every other page except this one, personally, I want it back, what do you think of this whole situation? Let me know! ChocoForever (talk) 14:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)