Talk:iPadOS 14
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of IOS 14 was copied or moved into IPadOS 14 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
To-do list for IPadOS 14:
|
Feature Section Expansion
[edit]So to add to the feature section, I suppose I'll be porting content over from the iOS 14 article and modifying it to make it more appropriate for iPadOS 14, if that's ok.Herbfur (talk) 23:19, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Format of release date
[edit]There has been a lot of controversy over the proper wording for the anticipated release date of iOS 14. It is currently fall 2020, which is also how Apple has stated it. However, per MOS:SEASON, seasons should not be used to refer to a particular time of year because the seasons are six months apart in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. September 2020 or any other month is also incorrect per WP:BALL, because Apple has not specified an exact month. Instead, an unambiguous alternative should be used. The only sensible options I can think of would be late 2020 or Northern Hemisphere fall. Abobeck11 (talk) 01:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- Editors, also please note that seasons are not capitalized (unless at the beginning of a sentence or phrase). Abobeck11 (talk) 01:26, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- I think fall 2020 (spring in the Southern Hemisphere) would be the best option. It uses Apple's information while still accounting for differences in seasons in the Southern Hemisphere. Herbfur (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
@Herbfur:, consensus has been reached on the iOS 14 talk page that later this year is the best option. NikonSoup (talk) 05:18, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
No note required if the public and developer betas come out on the same day?
[edit]There are three possibilities for a developer beta:
- the public beta is released on the same day;
- the public beta is released later;
- no public beta is released for that build.
(Yes, Apple have, so far, released a public beta for each developer beta, but, as the saying goes, "past performance is no guarantee of future results".)
The note should definitely be left blank for the third case; leaving it blank for the first case means those two cases can't be distinguished in the table.
(There's also the possibility of a build being released solely as a public beta; Apple doesn't appear to make the build numbers of public betas available, so that's harder to determine.) Guy Harris (talk) 02:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think it's unreasonable to add a note if the public beta was released on the same day. It also reduces ambiguity, like you said. Herbfur (talk) 02:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Constant modification to past tense on release date
[edit]I'm not sure how to deal with this because the point is moot once Apple releases the OS shortly. But all day people have been erroneously modifying this article to list iPadOS as being released, even thought as of shortly after 1pm it has not yet been. Most recently by Admanny. Wondering how to deal with now and in the future. | MK17b | (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not doing anything wrong. Apple says they will release it today, that's more than enough to justify listing it in the updates table. When the update does release THEN we can change tense of release date. Admanny (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm sure we can all wait a few hours before hoisting the trumpets and proclaiming "iOS 13 is dead, long live iOS 14". That also leaves us prepared if Apple says "oops, somebody found a killer problem in the GM seed, it'll take another day" or something such as that. Guy Harris (talk) 17:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm actually gonna step back and apologize to you Admanny - rereviewing your edits, it was mostly other editors that were making erroneous errors. The diff view made it hard to fully understand the change. | MK17b | (talk) 17:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- My larger point about the edit changing does still stand though. Theoretically could lock article if was a larger but not sure if really applicable. | MK17b | (talk) 17:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with you, I've had to revert similar edits also. The article needs to be kept accurate and we're jumping the gun and giving incorrect information if we declare iOS/iPadOS 14 as released now when it still isn't out yet.Herbfur (talk) 18:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Bang! My phone offers it as an update (no, I'm not doing a .0 release), and it's up on the releases page on developer.apple.com. Raise high the trumpets. Guy Harris (talk) 20:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with you, I've had to revert similar edits also. The article needs to be kept accurate and we're jumping the gun and giving incorrect information if we declare iOS/iPadOS 14 as released now when it still isn't out yet.Herbfur (talk) 18:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm sure we can all wait a few hours before hoisting the trumpets and proclaiming "iOS 13 is dead, long live iOS 14". That also leaves us prepared if Apple says "oops, somebody found a killer problem in the GM seed, it'll take another day" or something such as that. Guy Harris (talk) 17:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Jailbreaks
[edit]An IP recently added a note about jailbreaks, which was then reverted as irrelevant. I don't disagree necessarily with reverting that specific addition, but it seems appropriate to have some mention of jailbreaks somewhere in the article. Many readers seeking information about jailbreaks in this specific iOS version would be surprised to see nothing about them listed here at all. It's not my expertise though, and probably merits a discussion with editors more knowledgable than me. — HTGS (talk) 00:50, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- The articles should only contain information that is specifically derived from the software and Apple themselves. Including information coming from external programs that Apple doesn’t support nor encourage wouldn’t be helpful or useful in my opinion. KaitoNkmra23 talk 01:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
The articles should only contain information that is specifically derived from the software and Apple themselves
.- I find this statement particularly troubling. A reliance on primary source material is absolutely counter to Wikipedia policy, as I'm sure you know. And we do not restrict ourselves to covering a subject with regard to what the subject would be comfortable with.
- Discussion here should be around questions of whether coverage of jailbreaking constitutes WP:UNDUE, or whether the information would be helpful to readers. And I believe, for a small subset of readers, this would be crucial information to include. We do not need to include links or instructions to jailbreaks, but simply acknowledgment of their existence. — HTGS (talk) 01:18, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Apologies, that was worded poorly. I still think it’s unnecessary, since there’s also a whole article dedicated to iOS jailbreaking. However, I’d have to get a general consensus on this before making a final decision. If non-primary sources indicate jailbreaks as a feature specifically for the iOS or iPadOS softwares, then I believe we can add them in. KaitoNkmra23 talk 01:38, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Start-Class Apple Inc. articles
- Unknown-importance Apple Inc. articles
- WikiProject Apple Inc. articles
- Start-Class software articles
- Unknown-importance software articles
- Start-Class software articles of Unknown-importance
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Software articles
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists