Talk:iOS 17

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Apple Inc. Stub‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Technology Stub‑class

	Technology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Software: Computing Stub‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90904197/apple-ios-17-craig-federighi-privacy-check-in-lockdown-mode-safari

Please don't change some unspecified thing

Please don’t change this 173.252.3.211 (talk) 10:08, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To what does "this" refer? Guy Harris (talk) 10:25, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok 173.252.3.211 (talk) 10:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t want anyone to change the date cause Apple has announced the full public release date of iOS 17 at wwdc 2023 173.252.3.211 (talk) 14:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apple confirmed at WWDC 2023 that it would be released in fall 2023

Apple confirmed at WWDC 2023 that it would be released in fall 2023. so Please don’t change the date back 173.252.3.211 (talk) 10:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don’t change this

@Prrfan please don’t change the iOS 17 page 173.252.3.211 (talk) 17:31, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PRRfan please don’t change the IOS 17 page 173.252.3.211 (talk) 17:32, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? And why did you choose to revert my change? PRRfan (talk) 18:36, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weird anon behavior

173.252.3.211, who has a history (see above) of odd edits and requests, has now reverted a series of well-founded changes without explanation beyond the edit summary "Fixed." Kindly explain yourself, 173.252.3.211; you may start with any one of the well-explained edits. PRRfan (talk) 19:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose quality

None of our iOS articles stand out as particularly great, and we're starting off the wrong foot here too. It's one thing for old articles to have unfixed issues, but please, let's avoid creating more work down the line if we can:

MOS:OVERSECTION: the article has far too many short sections, which hide how poor the prose is. Prose should feel like an integrated summary, not discrete bits of information. Our article should mention major changes and contextualize them; right now, it's largely a worse version of Apple's detailed changelog. These excess headings encourage the addition of extremely minor changes, the same way tables do. For context, iOS 10 was recently delisted from GA for the same problems I raise here.
MOS:DATED. "now allows" should never be in an article

I'm wondering whether we should start reverting non-cited changes, because these kinds of additions take just as much work to fix, if not more, than just writing from scratch. Windows 10 is what we should be aiming for, not imitating other low-quality iOS articles. DFlhb (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I turned this article into a summary without excessive sections, and the IP is reverting back to the old version,[1][2] which contained copyvio.[3] DFlhb (talk) 13:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your version. So much better to read, it's less of a "list".

By the way, the IP reverted it back. MacOS Weed (talk) 15:35, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm at 3 reverts, and the IP isn't participating in discussion. Will let others decide what to do here and which version is preferable. DFlhb (talk) 15:08, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging people who either participated on the talk page or made major contributions to the article: Guy Harris, Gah4, PRRfan, Hajoon0102: which article structure do you prefer? The current one, or this rewritten one? DFlhb (talk) 06:31, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your rewritten one. PRRfan (talk) 03:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

today

The article says Sept 18th, but it seems that it was out today. At least that is what it told me. Gah4 (talk) 03:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you opted-in to the beta program? The release date is indeed the 18th. DFlhb (talk) 06:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did opt for the beta program, but today it offered one that isn't called beta. It seems to be called RC, or Release Candidate. I think that means it isn't beta, but is offered to beta users. Gah4 (talk) 09:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, RC is the version intended for later public release, but it's only offered to beta users so it can go through final testing. Sometimes there can be an RC2 if the first RC has major issues (it's happened before for iOS). DFlhb (talk) 10:06, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does the latest version support sideloading apps?

There has been a lot of mention in the media about iOS 17 potentially supporting the sideloading of apps. There is no mention of this in the article. Does the latest version currently support it? Félix An (talk) 02:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should RCs be considered as a preview ?

So you probably know about the 3 step update program of apple : first there is a beta, then the RC, then the stable releases. Should the RCs be considered versions or previews ? (for the quick facts box) YWALT.JS (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]