Apple is (yet again claiming it's) changing the way it develops software internally following iOS 13’s buggy debut

[Arlen Holder]

Dateline today... (moments ago)...
o Inside Apple's iPhone Software Shakeup After Buggy iOS 13 Debut
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-21/apple-ios-14-features-changes-testing-after-ios-13-bugs>

"The testing shift will apply to all of Apple┬ operating systems,
including iPadOS, watchOS, macOS and tvOS. The latest Mac computer
operating system, macOS Catalina, has also manifested bugs such as
incompatibility with many apps and missing messages in Mail."

"Software chief Federighi is overhauling development and testing of iOS 14
to make it easier to spot problems early."

We've heard this before, from Federighi himself, multiple times
o INHO, this is yet another marketing spin of imaginary quality

HINT: Remember the infamous internal letter where Federighi complained that
Marketing ran the schedule - not Engineering!

Given iOS 13 proved the point that iOS is a buggy diarrhea of frequent
releases, it's not surpriing that Apple marketing went (yet again) into
high gear to create the imaginary illusion that Apple cares about quality
when the proof is clear that Apple cares more about schedule than quality.

HINT: Apple _knew_ about iOS 13 huge security holes in July!

o Apple is changing the way it develops software internally following iOS 13┬ buggy debut
<https://9to5mac.com/2019/11/21/bloomberg-ios-14-ios-13/>

"Software chief Craig Federighi and lieutenants including Stacey Lysik
announced the changes at a recent internal 'kickoff' meeting with the
company's software developers. The new approach calls for Apple's
development teams to ensure that test versions, known as 'daily builds,' of
future software updates disable unfinished or buggy features by default.
Testers will then have the option to selectively enable those features, via
a new internal process and settings menu dubbed Flags, allowing them to
isolate the impact of each individual addition on the system."

"When the company┬ iOS 13 was released alongside the iPhone 11 in
September, iPhone owners and app developers were confronted with a litany
of software glitches. Apps crashed or launched slowly. Cellular signal was
inconsistent. There were user interface errors in apps like Messages,
system-wide search issues and problems loading emails. Some new features,
such as sharing file folders over iCloud and streaming music to multiple
sets of AirPods, were either delayed or are still missing. This amounted to
one of the most troubled and unpolished operating system updates in Apple┬
history."

"The new strategy is already being applied to the development of iOS 14,
codenamed 'Azul' internally, ahead of its debut next year. Apple has also
considered delaying some iOS 14 features until 2021 - in an update called
'Azul +1' internally that will likely become known as iOS 15 externally -
to give the company more time to focus on performance."

NOTE: The facts show Apple has _never_ tested iOS sufficiently, which
Google proved beyond any shadow of any doubt, which means, for _years_,
Apple has been touting imaginary privacy & security that never existed.

"The timing of the iOS 13.1 update was moved up by a week to Sept. 24,
compressing the time that iOS 13.0 was Apple┬ flagship OS release. New
iPhones are so tightly integrated with Apple software that it would have
been technically impossible to launch the iPhone 11 with iOS 12, and since
13.1 wasn┤ ready in time, Apple┬ only choice was to ship with 13.0 and
update everyone to 13.1 as quickly as it could."

--
The fact remains, despite Apple Marketing genius to spin the buggy iOS
relesaes into reputed "changes" and Apple owner gullibility; it's a lot
easier to advertise quality, than it is to deliver it, where the proof is
that Apple has _never_ sufficiently tested its iOS relesaes (preferring to
release frequently, instead of to release queality), wherre the customers,
strangely enough, _feel_ safe, from the mere fact of the frequent diarrhea
of releases.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 23:17:29 -0600, Ant wrote:

> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-21/apple-ios-14-features-changes-testing-after-ios-13-bugs
> from
> http://apple.slashdot.org/story/19/11/21/182244/inside-apples-iphone-software-shakeup-after-buggy-ios-13-debut
> and
> http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/11/to-cut-down-on-bugs-apple-is-changing-how-it-develops-its-software/

Hi Ant,
You're an adult, not an apologist, so a different conversation can ensue.

o Inside Apple's iPhone Software Shakeup After Buggy iOS 13 Debut

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/gEgKkkUy0yw>
PS: It's not just the "iPhone"; it's everything (just to be clear).

I published earlier that Craig Federighi is trying to fix the problem that
the software coming out of Apple is based on _schedule_, not quality
(which is something I've been proving for quite a long time, as you know).
o Apple is (yet again claiming it's) changing the way it develops software internally following iOS 13┬ buggy debut
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/Q-EfcyXrOrs>

Remember, Apple has the _same_ problem with hardware (e.g., wireless
charging and extremely poor overall power delivery design for years).

The _adult_ question for us to ponder, Ant, and other adults
o Is whether Apple is simply putting "spin" on the problem or solving it

Adults on this newsgroup will remember, Craig Federighi has complained that
schedule trumps quality before (remember the leaked internal email?).

That was two years ago (as I recall), where, if anything, it got worse
(e.g., iOS 13 is far bugger than iOS 12 was, by all accounts, although not
as buggy, perhaps as the infamous iOS 11 (e.g., facepalm) and 10 (e.g.,
broadcom fiasco) were).

In _every_ case, I've reported these bugs where it's patently obvious to
adults that, at Apple, schedule trumps quality.

The problem for us adults to ponder is the most basic fact of Apple:
o It's trivial to _advertise_ quality - but much harder to deliver

The _huge_ problem at Apple, as I see it, is they're literally drunk on
Marketing of imaginary (or upcoming) functionality, where they schedule the
marketing shills to the nth degree.

I've been in many startups, where one or the other runs the show:
o Either engineering tells marketing what they built, and when, or,
o Marketing tells engineering what to build, and when.

Apple is clearly the latter.
o IMHO, Craig Federighi is not powerful enough to change that dynamic

IMHO, nobody is, because without Marketing, IMHO, Apple is nothing.
o It's that important.

I realize and accept that _adult_ may rationally and logically disagree
with my assessment; however always remember my facts are always materially
correct.

As adults, people ware _welcome_ to disagree with the weight I put on
marketing over engineering at Apple, as that's how adults work.

--
Apple isn't going to change that its forte, is MARKETING just because
Engineering can't deliver on the marketing promises and schedule.

[Brian Gordon]

In article <qr8r84$ooa$1...@news.mixmin.net>,

>Apple isn't going to change that its forte, is MARKETING just because
>Engineering can't deliver on the marketing promises and schedule.

I spent a lot of years in Silocon Valley, with schedule based releases They
were all successful. Yhe key was, if it isn't ready drop it for now. It looks
like Apple doesn't buy into that.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
| Brian Gordon -->bri...@panix.com<-- brian dot gordon at cox dot net |
+ bgo...@aol.com Bass: NSC Frank Thorne +
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[nospam]

In article <qrc2p5$405$1...@reader2.panix.com>, Brian Gordon

<bri...@panix.com> wrote:

> I spent a lot of years in Silocon Valley, with schedule based releases They
> were all successful. Yhe key was, if it isn't ready drop it for now. It looks
> like Apple doesn't buy into that.

yes they do.

deep fusion was announced for ios 13 but deferred to 13.1, and icloud
drive folder sharing was deferred to the spring.

portrait mode was announced for ios 10 but deferred to ios 10.1,
initially referred to as beta.

long ago, push notifications were announced and deferred by several
months (it's been too long to remember the specifics).

airpods pro were delayed a month or so.

the macbook touchbar was in development for nearly a decade before it
was released.

features that aren't anywhere near ready are not announced at all and
deferred to the following year, possibly the year after, or maybe
canceled.

[Alan Browne]

On 2019-11-23 14:54, Brian Gordon wrote:

> I spent a lot of years in Silocon Valley, with schedule based releases They
> were all successful. Yhe key was, if it isn't ready drop it for now. It looks
> like Apple doesn't buy into that.

Don't make inferences from the BS dropper's posts. That said, Apple
seem to me better now than about 5 years ago where they were trying too
hard making major releases with specific feature promises and not doing
so well fixing past bugs. They seem to have slowed down on the former
resulting in less of the later. This is subjective.

--
"Even with the brain dead, the pig's heart keeps on beating...
sort of like ... pick a Kardashian."
-Anthony Bourdain, Parts Unknown

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 19:54:13 +0000 (UTC), Brian Gordon wrote:

> I spent a lot of years in Silocon Valley, with schedule based releases They
> were all successful. Yhe key was, if it isn't ready drop it for now. It looks
> like Apple doesn't buy into that.

The permanent Usenet record will clearly show...
o It's rare to find another actual _adult_ on Apple-related newsgroups.
<http://tinyurl.com/misc-phone-mobile-iphone>
<http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-mac-system>
<http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-ipad>
<http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-mac-advocacy>
etc.

Like you, I spent decades in high tech San Jose software where, depending
on the company, schedule trumped quality, or quality trumped schedule.

In the case of Apple's clear lack of quality, it has been widely published
that Apple lacks basic quality control procedures, such as checking for old
bugs (witness the proof in the taste of the pudding that, numerous times,
Apple re-shipped bugs they had previously fixed).

In addition, even Google proved that Apple has never once sufficiently
tested iOS, given that Google proved the code couldn't possibly have been
tested even once, where Apple didn't deny in the least that proven fact
(Apple simply complained about "how" Google said it).

These are all well-known facts, which, apologists like Alan Browne
unilaterally claim to be "bullshit", simply because apologists like Alan
Browne prove, by their very posts, to be immune to facts.

And yet, facts they are indeed.

Adults, unlike Alan Browne, actually do two things around basic facts:
a. Adults, unlike Alan Browne, actually _comprehend_ basic facts, and,
b. Adults, unlike Alan Browne, form rational logical assessments of them.

FACTS:
o Former Apple developer explains why the company┬ software is struggling
<https://bgr.com/2018/02/13/ios-new-features-developer-apple-software/>

That article (and many others like it) point to this factual posting:
o How Apple Plans to Root Out Bugs and Revamp iPhone Software
<https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/7x0eif/how_apple_plans_to_root_out_bugs_and_revamp/>

While there is far too many facts and assessments in that one article for
the child-like Apologists like Alan Browne to even _begin_ to comprehend,
actual adults (rare as they are on this newsgroup), will note that Apple
has subsequent to that posting made EXACTLY the kind of changes that
engineer pointed out that are necessary...

o After iOS 13 Disaster Apple Plans to Change its Testing for iOS 14
<https://www.macobserver.com/news/apple-changes-testing-ios-14/>

Of course, despite the child-like apologists immunity to fact, this is well
known fact which I have reported upon many times in the past, e.g.,
o Yet another Astoundingly Huge Massive Indiscriminate iPhone Hack Has Been Going Strong for Two Years! (it never ends)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/rRzsRZin3c4/TH-TRLUSBgAJ>

The main difference between child-like apologists like Alan Browne is
a. Adults comprehend the most basic of the simplest of known facts, and,
b. Adults form rational logical sensible assessments of those facts.

By way of contrast, _everything_ Alan Browne writes, is that of a child.
o Nothing Alan Browne writes, is based on actual facts.

The entire belief system of the apologists, is purely imaginary.
o Just as a young child believes in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny

Where child-like apologists call all facts, bullshit
o Simply because facts instantly DESTROY their imaginary belief systems.

--
Notice apologists like Alan Browne own the belief system of young children,
in that these child-like apologists can _never_ (even once!) back up their
imaginary belief system by even a _single_ fact.