Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>Purely for what it's worth - just one opinion for you.</p> <p><strong>As of 2011, many large successful high-selling developers would be going with 4.0.</strong></p> <p>Updated for Summer 2012:</p> <p><strong>As of 2012, pretty much all large professional development companies would be going with 5.0.</strong></p> <p>A comment for February 2014:</p> <p>It seems to be <strong>more true than ever</strong> that it is <strong>only worth bothering with the most recent version.</strong>. Thus currently it is <strong>only worth bothering with the latest iOS, namely iOS7</strong>. But moreover that is <strong>more true today than ever</strong>.</p> <p>Moreover: it is becoming <strong>more and more expensive</strong> to support the older versions. If you have a iOS7 app, and your client is considering how much it would cost to make it somehow work with iOS6, the answer is "a lot". (Just forget even earlier iOS.) But moreover, <strong>this 'go back one' difficulty has now increased tremendously</strong>.</p> <hr> <p>Original post:</p> <p>Traditionally in the Apple universe, there has explicitly <strong>not been a concern</strong> with legacy.</p> <p>In the Apple universe, there is <strong>more of an expectation that: users are 'sophisticated users' and that users up to date</strong>.</p> <p>(There are any number of historical examples of this: OS-X basically blew away all os9 development, with only a polite veneer of legacy support.)</p> <p>In contrast, in the Windows universe, and now in the Google universe (Google is the new Windows), there is always a general desire to support legacy. Apple tends to support a clean break with the past, MSFT/Google tend towards accumulation/legacy.</p> <p>By the way, this is neither "good nor bad." But it's just a fact that the Apple universe "expects users to keep up" (for better or worse) and the Google/Microsoft universe "believes in old-version support" (for better or worse).</p> <p>Another way to look at it: to be blunt and a bit rude, the few iPhone users who don't upgrade their iPhones (could it be any simpler?) tend <strong>not to be</strong> sophisticated enough to <strong>purchase stuff</strong> at the app store.</p> <p>Penultimately, don't forget that the latest versions are really pretty incredibly more advanced than the previous major release. As a new developer, you will really struggle to program for older versions (ie, avoiding using all the new features in the latest major version).</p> <p>One final very minor point: the "hard" approach to upgrading is a significant barrier to (A) idiots who try to steal your software and (B) hacking and viruses. (Observe any recent virus fiasco in the 'android' world - something we fight to avoid in the Apple world.) Each new version is that much more proof against jailbreaking, warez, and viruses.</p> <p>Important ................... Don't forget it will take you a <strong>very long time</strong> to finish and get your app in store. You may well be looking at the NEXT!! major version.</p> <p>In a word - if you are new to Apple/iOS business, one of the pleasures is that (very generally speaking) you <strong>do not have to worry</strong> about legacy nonsense. There's no NT, Vista, W97, etc here :) Forget legacy, and move ahead! Quite simply, in the Apple universe paying customers do not hold on to legacy. You can assume Apple users are paying customers, who move ahead.</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POBreakdown of iOS versions being used
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. USFattie
    1. USFattie
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POBreakdown of iOS versions being used
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTAcceptedByOriginator
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. CO4.3 doesn't support iPhone 3G any more, for example. And there are still a lot of them out there. So it might be worth support older version (after all, it's not hard to link against 4.3 and still have a deployment target of, say 4.0 or even 3.x, through testing with `respondsToSelector:`).
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USDarkDust
    2. COWhat I forgot to say: on iOS, you often *do* have to worry about legacy issues but it's not as big a problem as on other platforms.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USDarkDust
    3. COIt would still seems nice to get a current breakdown now iOS 4 should be seeded. At the moment I do use respondsToSelector and have set to support as far back as 3.1, but testing is the problem as all my devices are updated to iOS 4.x
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USLuuk D. Jansen
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload