The iPhone Wiki is no longer updated. Visit this article on The Apple Wiki for current information. |
Difference between revisions of "The iPhone Wiki:Community portal"
(→Amendments to Rule 3.7: Yup I like that.) |
(AirPower B431AP) |
||
(62 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | {{see also|Unsolved problems}} |
||
{{Talk Archive}} |
{{Talk Archive}} |
||
− | {{see also|Unsolved problems}} |
||
− | ==The iPhone Wiki's SSL== |
||
− | As a security researcher, I have a bad habit of inspecting every SSL certificate I get in my hands, I couldn't ignore the fact that the SSL Certificate used on The iPhone Wiki is provided by CloudFlare (?). If it is, then you guys better buy (with help from some donations maybe?) a Comodo Positive Certificate. Those free certs provided by Cloudflare are shared, and I heard numerous stories about it being simply circumvented or replaced by man in the middle attacks as these certificates only protect a node kinda giving user the false security illusion, but the origin server remains unprotected unless you apply for the Full SSL feature of Cloudflare that requires you to also buy a certificate for the host (if applies). |
||
− | |||
− | As you can see, on the FREE certificates, the origin is still not encrypted thus rendering breaches in the system. |
||
− | |||
− | This is how Flexible SSL works: [https://scotthelme.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/cloudflare-flxible-ssl.png] |
||
− | |||
− | This article worth reading: [https://info.ssl.com/the-real-cost-of-a-cloudflare-free-ssl-certificate/] |
||
− | [[User:GeoSn0w|GeoSn0w]] ([[User talk:GeoSn0w|talk]]) 19:11, 4 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
− | |||
− | :You seem to have a misconception about what CloudFlare offers on their plans. |
||
− | : * All "levels of SSL" ([https://www.cloudflare.com/a/static/images/ssl/ssl.png Off, Flexible, Full, Strict]) are available on all plans. |
||
− | : * What is only available to Business and Enterprise plans however, is the option to use your own certificate. Free and Pro plans have no choice. |
||
− | : That said, it should be easy enough to get a free valid SSL cert from [https://letsencrypt.org/ Let's Encrypt] to use between your server and CF so that you can switch to Strict SSL - even on a free plan. |
||
− | : |
||
− | : Also, I'm not sure if Saurik has reacted to this already, but I'm neither seeing a CF-issued SSL cert being used on the wiki, nor does theiphonewiki.com resolve to a [https://www.cloudflare.com/ips/ Cloudflare IP]. |
||
− | : I'm seeing a RapidSSL SHA256 cert that looks like it has been issued on the 3. September 2015, and contains only "theiphonewiki.com" and "www.theiphonewiki.com" as common/alternative name. |
||
− | : — [[User:Siguza|Siguza]] ([[User_talk:Siguza|talk]]) 23:10, 4 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
− | Strange, I am seeing a CF signed cert for "graham.ns.cloudflare.com". And is also verified and issued by "Avast! WebShield" (this is kinda misleading because it is generated by my Antivirus), but the CF has no sense to show up in my firefox if you say you use RapidSSL. |
||
− | Actually, I know what CF do and how their shared SSL work, as I use CF myself, and trust me, you can't compare your own cert with the one they provide. Shared certs are not actually yours, they will still point to CF... |
||
− | [[User:GeoSn0w|GeoSn0w]] ([[User talk:GeoSn0w|talk]]) |
||
− | :It sounds like that's your antivirus/security software intercepting your HTTPS traffic. This is generally done with products that contain parental controls to block certain websites from children, but is frowned upon for privacy/security reasons. (For the record, I see the same thing Siguza sees.) --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 06:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
− | |||
− | Actually, I uninstalled the AV just to test, and it still shows the same cert even after browser cleanup.[[User:GeoSn0w|GeoSn0w]] ([[User talk:GeoSn0w|talk]]) |
||
− | |||
− | :To what IP does theiphonewiki.com resolve for you? For the record, I get 54.147.18.44. If someone out there has another valid cert for theiphonewiki.com, then that is quite a problem. — [[User:Siguza|Siguza]] ([[User_talk:Siguza|talk]]) 13:16, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
==iPhone-Elite== |
==iPhone-Elite== |
||
Line 50: | Line 24: | ||
== Email notifications? == |
== Email notifications? == |
||
Is it possible to get emailed when a watchlist page changes? I'd love that feature. [[wikipedia:mw:Manual:Configuration settings#Email notification (Enotif) settings|This looks relevant]]. --[[User:Beej|beej]] ([[User talk:Beej|talk]]) 08:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC) |
Is it possible to get emailed when a watchlist page changes? I'd love that feature. [[wikipedia:mw:Manual:Configuration settings#Email notification (Enotif) settings|This looks relevant]]. --[[User:Beej|beej]] ([[User talk:Beej|talk]]) 08:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC) |
||
− | |||
− | == Mobile Stylesheet == |
||
− | <!-- NOTE: DO NOT ARCHIVE - can be used for anyone to add suggestions for changes on mobile. --> |
||
− | I was thinking recently, if [[User:Geohot|geohot]] agrees to accept it, that I could make a mobile.css file in order to attempt to make a few changes to the site on mobile. This would make it so that it would not be so ugly and if possible, the text might be easier to read. What would everyone think about this? For one thing, I'd like to mobile the "Log out" off the black part of the screen and put it near the "Contributions" button or thereabout. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 10:37, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | :Instead of a mobile stylesheet to hack up the skin more (like the <code>ios6</code> and <code>ios7</code> skins do), I would create a whole new skin. I could write the PHP and JavaScript, and you can write the CSS. --[[User:5urd|5urd]] ([[User talk:5urd|talk]]) 17:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | ::If you mean a skin just for mobile, that would be ok but not sure how you could make it selectable with a mobile device but not on desktop. If you could do this, it could work but personally I think a mobile.css would be easier since it has to be previewed in the iOS simulator (that's the way I do it). I couldn't say I'd edit a page without being an admin (unless it's made that I could). --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 17:35, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | ::I was going to mention that MediaWiki includes a sorta-mobile theme called Chick, but it seems that's [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/Ia6d73c2deb9428d2,n,z long gone]. MW's changed a lot since I used it, but the way it worked was it subclassed MonoBook (so there was no need to duplicate the HTML template) and swapped its CSS for its own ([https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/f/f6/Dantman-Skin-chick.png screenshot]).<br>Come to think of it, whoa, I even wrote my own skin called [https://github.com/kirb/iWiki iWiki]. Was never updated for MW 1.17, which made breaking changes to the skin API. I probably won't have the time to update it, but maybe someone else could? [[User:Thekirbylover|kirb]] ([[User talk:Thekirbylover|talk]]) 09:01, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | :I think this is a great idea, since this is actually a wiki about mobiles. No idea why it hasn't been done already. — '''[[User:Spydar007|<span style="color:black;">Spydar007</span>]] [[User talk:Spydar007|<span style="color:gray;">(Talk)</span>]]''' 15:17, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | ::| There is a mobile pluggin for Media Wiki that will make it look very nice [[User:Mwoolweaver|MWoolweaver]] ([[User talk:Mwoolweaver|talk]]) 07:22, 1 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | :::I completed this a while ago but forgot to comment about it. If anyone has any improvement requests, feel free to list them and I'll take a look. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 11:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Bite-sized editing tasks == |
== Bite-sized editing tasks == |
||
Line 87: | Line 51: | ||
I just added Zdziarski's blog to the wiki (with his permission). I would recommend to take this apart and make multiple sub-articles, like an article for [[BAGI]], another one for [[Dkey]], etc. and on the page [[File System Crypto]] itself, just write the overview, similar to what we have on page 16 of the Sogeti document (wasn't there a newer graphic somewhere?) with some short description. --[[User:Http|http]] ([[User talk:Http|talk]]) 22:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
I just added Zdziarski's blog to the wiki (with his permission). I would recommend to take this apart and make multiple sub-articles, like an article for [[BAGI]], another one for [[Dkey]], etc. and on the page [[File System Crypto]] itself, just write the overview, similar to what we have on page 16 of the Sogeti document (wasn't there a newer graphic somewhere?) with some short description. --[[User:Http|http]] ([[User talk:Http|talk]]) 22:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
||
− | == Renaming [[Factory Firmware]]? == |
+ | == Renaming [[Internal Firmware|Factory Firmware]]? == |
− | It's been brought to my attention that we don't really have anywhere on the wiki to document internal builds of iOS. Considering [[Factory Firmware]] consists of what are internal builds of iOS (with different software), I'd like to propose renaming it to [[Internal Firmware]], to broaden its scope a little more. Well, either that or create a brand new page for internal builds. What does everyone think about this? --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 06:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC) |
+ | It's been brought to my attention that we don't really have anywhere on the wiki to document internal builds of iOS. Considering [[Internal Firmware|Factory Firmware]] consists of what are internal builds of iOS (with different software), I'd like to propose renaming it to [[Internal Firmware]], to broaden its scope a little more. Well, either that or create a brand new page for internal builds. What does everyone think about this? --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 06:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC) |
+ | |||
+ | == New rule proposal: Internal subjects == |
||
+ | As we know, there are internal firmware builds that Apple uses to test their hardware. However, a wiki user reached out to me, concerned that there is incorrect information being added about these firmwares. I have no way to verify this information (and most probably don't either), so I would like to create a rule to require evidence in the form of an image or video for any substantial information about any such Apple internal subjects. This will help prevent false information being spread on the wiki. |
||
+ | |||
+ | <div style="background-color:#FFF; background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0.85); border:1px solid #AAA; padding:1em;"> |
||
+ | Internal software and prototypes are rare to come across, and we welcome documentation about them. However, to maintain informational integrity, we do require evidence to be supplied with any substantial information that you have. For example, if you have a list of applications in an internal firmware, there should be an image or video showing them on the device. Any added information about internal subjects that does not comply with this is subject to removal, with account suspensions possible. |
||
+ | </div> |
||
+ | |||
+ | The above proposal will be edited as necessary during this discussion. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 16:53, 22 October 2017 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Discussion of takedown for Cassandra Fuzzer == |
||
+ | As you may know, the Cassandra Fuzzer, developed by [[Ih8ra1n|iH8Ra1n]] was taken down by [https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/User:IAdam1n iAdam1n]. I ([[Ih8ra1n|iH8Ra1n]]) believe that Cassandra should not have been taken down for the following reasons: |
||
+ | |||
+ | * Information (If someone wants to help with it, for example. ) |
||
+ | |||
+ | * Other vulnerabilities (Read on) |
||
+ | |||
+ | I think that I would be leaving people without some necessary information. Example, Cassandra discovers a vulnerability in MobileSafari. Now, I make a page about said vulnerability. I should probably mention Cassandra found it. Then, people wonder what it is. So, they look for a wiki page and find it was deleted. So, now they wonder what Cassandra is, and they don't know. This, I think, is a problem. Hence, why there should be a wiki page for it. {{unsigned|Ih8ra1n}} |
||
+ | |||
+ | :With all due respect, the [[The_iPhone_Wiki:Ground_rules#Regarding_the_creation_of_pages_for_programs|ground rules]] specifically say that one should not create a page for a program that is upcoming. Moreover, it also states that the creator of a program should not be involved in its page's creation. I don't believe that Cassandra should be added to the wiki until it gains enough of a reputation independent of this place that someone else thinks to add it. [[User:Forestcorgi|Forestcorgi]] ([[User talk:Forestcorgi|talk]]) 00:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | ::You certainly have a good point. I'll have to rewrite it anyway because I erased the phone it was on (iPhone 4) for storage. RIP. [[User:Ih8ra1n|iH8Ra1n]] 10:43 AM, 13 April 2018 (EST) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Merge multiple related pages into one == |
||
+ | This is pretty much to merge existing pages/links on the homepage like evasi0n, pangu, and any other pages that can be merged into a single page. Like some other jailbreaks, each unique version is listed on a single page, whereas we have, for example, the Pangu jailbreaks: Pangu, Pangu8, and Pangu9 that do not. Having three different pages for one variety of jailbreak is a little repetitive going through multiple pages on a certain jailbreak rather than just having it all in one spot. This will make browsing smoother and well as modifying each page, make it more simple/cleaner. For myself, I'd remove the "installed packages" section as, at least for myself, is not so important anymore and just takes up space on the page(s). Only posting here as [[User:iAdam1n|iAdam1n]] told me so :P [[User:Kiddepants|Merculous]] 3:09, 29 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
+ | :Are you talking about just the [[Main Page]] or the actual pages themselves? We certainly wouldn't remove the pages of the actual jailbreaks, these are separate entities with separate version numbers. It's bad enough with pages like [[yalu]] already, which is a mess. I would probably agree with making a [[wikipedia:WP:DP|Disambiguation page]] for things though, and then linking these on the Main Page. — '''[[User:Spydar007|<span style="color:black;">Spydar007</span>]] [[User talk:Spydar007|<span style="color:gray;">(Talk)</span>]]''' 08:24, 30 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
+ | ::I'm not talking about deleting the pages themselves. What I meant was to remove the links to, such as, Pangu8 and Pangu9 on [[Main Page]], but just merging the information from both pages and put them into the Pangu(7) page. We don't need 3 different links for Pangu and can just have all of it on a single page. Along with evasi0n, we can merge the information from evasi0n7 to evasi0n(6). I mean, if you'd look on the [[SemiRestore]] page, I merged information from different pages we have into one, without knowing I should've asked (kinda why I'm asking now). That's pretty much what I'm asking to consider. It'll make the page(s) look more simple and have everything that needs to be there, and save some space on the page (along with making everything look more aesthetic). [[User:Kiddepants|Merculous]] 22:09, 30 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
+ | :::I'm all for creating [[wikipedia:WP:DP|Disambiguation pages]] and linking those instead. — '''[[User:Spydar007|<span style="color:black;">Spydar007</span>]] [[User talk:Spydar007|<span style="color:gray;">(Talk)</span>]]''' 20:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Separate iPad/iPad Air/iPad Pro? == |
||
+ | Going forward, it would ''probably'' make more sense to separate iPad Air and iPad Pro from the regular line of iPads. From the get-go, we had iPad mini separated since it was clearly a different class. We kept iPad Air and iPad Pro tied with the regular line since the regular line's future seemed ambiguous at best, especially when we've had a few years and releases between the 4th and 5th generations of iPad. Apple not only keeps separate pages for the [https://www.apple.com/ipad-9.7/ regular], [https://www.apple.com/ipad-air/ Air], and [https://www.apple.com/ipad-pro/ Pro] models now, but they also [https://support.apple.com/kb/HT201471 categorize them separately]. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 04:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC) |
||
+ | :I had actually been thinking about this recently, and I'm all for it. This isn't a new thing, Apple have always kept them as four separate product lines. They were doing this [https://web.archive.org/web/20190223044324/https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201471 before the introduction of the iPad Air 3], from [https://web.archive.org/web/20151113133619/https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201471 the very start of the first iPad Pro] back in late 2015. It ''definitely'' makes sense. We should have been doing this from the start, so I'm all for it. — '''[[User:Spydar007|<span style="color:black;">Spydar007</span>]] [[User talk:Spydar007|<span style="color:gray;">(Talk)</span>]]''' 07:23, 1 June 2019 (UTC) |
||
+ | --[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 03:25, 12 September 2019 (UTC) |
||
+ | I have done some editing for the iPad Pro OTA Updates section, it looks much more complete now, it still has a ways to go before it's complete. as for the IPSW's, i'm not yet entirely sure on separating the iPad Lines, as it's still easiest to modify the IPSW links when they are in one list. |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Regarding Tsunami Internal == |
||
+ | Recently, there has been a team of people known as ''Tsunami Internal'' interested in documenting Apple internal software. While this, by itself, is good, they have shown a disregard for [[The_iPhone_Wiki:Ground rules|basic rules]] regarding self-promotion and formatting on the site. TheiPhoneWiki is '''not''' a place for promotion or advertising of services, especially considering that the trade of Apple internal information is illegal (whether paid or free). I've just spent a good hour cleaning up articles attributed to them, and here's what I've found: |
||
+ | * They include a line of credit to themselves at the end of each article they write. MediaWiki has built-in attribution tools so collaborators can keep track of who wrote what, making this an unnecessary practice. |
||
+ | * They have edited the '''Main page''' to include a section dedicated to internal software groups (which currently only includes them, and probably will only include them for the foreseeable future). |
||
+ | * They have created a [[Tsunami Internal|wiki page]] for themselves with the sole purpose of self-promotion and advertising. The majority of content on this page is more suited for a User page that is owned by them. |
||
+ | * They have duplicated and modified the original [[Template:Internal_software|Internal software template]] to create their [[Template:Tsunami|own version]], which promotes their services. I'm assuming that they have the intent to use this on pages beyond their own, which would not be acceptable. |
||
+ | We cannot assure the proper upkeep of TheiPhoneWiki if we allow users to create and modify content that does not contribute to the collective knowledge of the site in any way. While they have contributed some information, they have not adhered to our ground rules and have instead decided to use the site as a platform to promote their services. I hope we can do something about this and make sure that TheiPhoneWiki stays objective and true to its users. --Ryan Kovatch 07:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC) |
||
+ | :I know I said I didn't really have an issue with it when you emailed but after reading all what you have put, I have to agree. I'm about to delete their contributions on their own tools etc because redistributing internal content would not be allowed so it cannot be allowed here. Of course their contributions that are just about normal internal tools will not be removed as they are ok but not the ones about their team. I hadn't realised they marked each page with their name either, which is something we do not want. I'm actually going to create a talk topic on their page about it because it cannot be tolerated. When you emailed I assumed it was just they made the pages for their team but having read what you have put here and looked again, I have to agree. Thanks for bringing this up. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 13:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC) |
||
+ | ::Wonderful, thank you! I'll clarify that the person who emailed you was actually my colleague, who admittedly worded it a little stronger than I would have, lol. Your work is much appreciated! --Ryan Kovatch 05:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Beats with Apple wireless chips == |
||
+ | The newer models of Beats headphones contain either the Apple W1 or H1 chip, and appear to have a very similar firmware and update mechanism to the AirPods lineup. Would there be any objections to their inclusion on the wiki? --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 07:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
+ | :Fine by me. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 14:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == macOS Big Sur == |
||
+ | Out of curiosity, what do people think about the possibility of including information about macOS Big Sur on this wiki? Although macOS Big Sur (and Apple Silicon Macs) bring the iOS and macOS platforms closer than ever (including the software update mechanism), there are still distinctions that keep the platforms separate. As this wiki is "The iPhone Wiki" and not "The Apple Wiki" I have been quite against the inclusion of anything not pertaining to iPhones or iOS in the past, though that line is increasingly becoming blurred. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 07:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
+ | :I think we should add Mac info. It’s not like we only add iPhone so I believe all Apple info should be here. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 14:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Siri Remote == |
||
+ | With Apple's "Spring Loaded" event, Apple revealed a new Siri Remote. This new Siri Remote with the circular pad is being referred to as the "2nd generation"[https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJFM3LL/A], despite it technically being the third iteration of the Siri Remote. We should probably rename the Siri Remote with the white circle around the Menu button to avoid confusion, as we have been referring to that as the 2nd generation. Anyone have ideas for monikers to use (e.g. "Siri Remote (Rev A)")? --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 00:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Latest Firmware templates == |
||
+ | With the release of the new major betas, i've run into a problem with the [[Template:Latest_beta_firmware]] page in regard to how it looks on the device lists e.g: [[List of HomePods]] for each individual model with the firmware key links. |
||
+ | |||
+ | with this in mind i propose that we just have the version listed without it duplicated for every model, look at Exhibit A it looks like a complete jumbled mess! |
||
+ | |||
+ | '''=== // BEGIN EXHIBIT A // ==='''(taken from iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (3rd generation) in the [[List of iPad Pros#iPad_Pro_.2812.9-inch.29_.283rd_generation.29|List of iPad Pros]]) |
||
+ | |||
+ | '''Firmwares''' |
||
+ | *Initial firmware: [[PeaceB 16B92 (iPad8,5)|12.1 (16B92)]], [[PeaceB 16B92 (iPad8,6)|12.1 (16B92)]], [[PeaceB 16B92 (iPad8,7)|12.1 (16B92)]], [[PeaceB 16B92 (iPad8,8)|12.1 (16B92)]] |
||
+ | *Latest public firmware: {{Latest firmware|iPad8,5}}, {{Latest firmware|iPad8,6}}, {{Latest firmware|iPad8,7}}, {{Latest firmware|iPad8,8}} |
||
+ | *Latest beta firmware: {{Latest beta firmware|iPad8,5}}, {{Latest beta firmware|iPad8,6}}, {{Latest beta firmware|iPad8,7}}, {{Latest beta firmware|iPad8,8}} |
||
+ | |||
+ | '''// END EXHIBIT A //''' |
||
+ | |||
+ | And i believe we should make it look like this but provide a ref if you want firmware keys as seen in Exhibit B below; |
||
+ | |||
+ | '''// BEGIN EXHIBIT B //''' |
||
+ | |||
+ | '''Firmwares'''<ref name="fwkeys"></ref> |
||
+ | *Initial firmware: 12.1 (16B92) |
||
+ | *Latest public firmware: 14.6 (18F72) |
||
+ | *Latest beta firmware: 14.7 beta 2 (18G5033e) and 15.0 beta (19A5261w) |
||
+ | |||
+ | ''and at the bottom of the page:'' |
||
+ | |||
+ | <references> |
||
+ | <ref name="fwkeys">For firmware decryption keys, see [[Firmware Keys]]</ref> |
||
+ | </references> |
||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | '''// END EXHIBIT B //''' |
||
+ | |||
+ | thoughts on this? --[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 08:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Naming of the new Apple Watch SE == |
||
+ | The question is pretty obvious. Apple doesn't seem to call it "2nd generation" anywhere like the iPhone SE for example. There is one instance though where they call the old SE as "1st generation" under ''Compare all models'' in https://www.apple.com/watch/compare/ . |
||
+ | |||
+ | My opinion is that in no case we should have the devices on the same page ([[Apple Watch SE]]) as they're completely distinct, with a different chip, back glass appearance, as well as device identifiers not starting with the same number. |
||
+ | |||
+ | What are your thoughts? —[[User:Dimitris|<b style="color: #a530ff;">Dimitris</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Dimitris|<b style="color: #ff8726;">Talk</b>]]</sup> ⌚→ 09:47, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :The only idea I have right now is we have [[Apple Watch SE (1st generation)]] and [[Apple Watch SE (2nd generation)]] pages but when we name it on pages, we just use "Apple Watch SE" so it'd be like <code>[[Apple Watch SE (1st generation)|Apple Watch SE]]</code>. I'm hoping that Apple realise and rename at least one of them but who knows. I'll keep my eye out for their naming and keep checking new releases for a bit in DeviceTree. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 13:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :: Got it, that makes sense. Should we make [[Apple Watch SE]] a disambiguation page instead of having it redirect to one of the two? —[[User:Dimitris|<b style="color: #a530ff;">Dimitris</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Dimitris|<b style="color: #ff8726;">Talk</b>]]</sup> ⌚→ 13:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :: '''Update''': Apple Support on Twitter just called it "2nd generation" (https://twitter.com/applesupport/status/1567908890582343681) —[[User:Dimitris|<b style="color: #a530ff;">Dimitris</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Dimitris|<b style="color: #ff8726;">Talk</b>]]</sup> ⌚→ 16:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :::That is interesting. I would do a disambiguation page for SE which lists both models with links. I also noticed that https://www.apple.com/uk/watchos/watchos-9 just lists one SE for both so I guess they can't even decide yet lol. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 16:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :I believe we should just call it the Apple Watch SE (2nd generation), it seems that some of the people who work at apple are just a bunch of idiots. |
||
− | == Amendments to Rule 3.7 == |
||
+ | :--[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 16:48, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
− | I would like to propose some amendments to Section 3.7, "Do not make numerous, consecutive edits." Recently, device renames and page cleanup have been taking place. As of now, I would classify page moves/deletions as edits. In addition to the 50 edits, I wanted to know— how would you feel about adding an additional 10 actions for page deletions? Considering page deletions are an admin-exclusive action, I don't want this amendment to be misconstrued as admin abuse of power. (Yes, us admins are meant to be subject to this rule as well.) |
||
+ | ::The thing is we try to use the official naming here so if Apple don't use it, then we'd be breaking the way we usually do it. We do need to do it for pages because obviously you can't have two pages with the same name, but I guess we'll see what Apple does in the near future. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 16:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :::There is also a line we shouldn't cross in regard to confusion, having two completely different apple watch models with the same name will no-doubt confuse people. |
||
+ | :::so we must append (2nd generation) or the year the model came out (2022) so people will know that "ok this is a newer version". |
||
+ | :::Wikipedia does it and we should to if it comes to it for the sake of legibility. --[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 17:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | :::As long as we're linking to the page for the correct one then it should be fine because when you click it, you know which version it is (can even hover over it to see). --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 18:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | ::::If when linking we put the "(1st/2nd generation)" in <nowiki><small></small></nowiki> it can be a good compromise. —[[User:Dimitris|<b style="color: #a530ff;">Dimitris</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Dimitris|<b style="color: #ff8726;">Talk</b>]]</sup> ⌚→ 20:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
+ | == AirPower is B431AP? == |
||
− | Another amendment I would like to make involves vandalism. Although it hasn't happened on here for quite a while, vandalism can occur on the wiki. As things currently stand, reverting vandalism would technically count as an edit. I don't think that should be the case, so I would like to add some language that does not count reverting vandalism against the edit limits. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 20:03, 22 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
+ | There is [https://www.ebay.com/itm/325342454992 this eBay listing] of a supposed AirPower prototype. The third picture mentions a "B431" at the top, so could this be its internal name or the pic isn't trustworthy enough? —[[User:Dimitris|<b style="color: #a530ff;">Dimitris</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Dimitris|<b style="color: #ff8726;">Talk</b>]]</sup> ⌚→ 11:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
− | :I was actually planning on making a topic on this after we had finished with the device names cleanup. |
||
− | :I propose the removal of the rule entirely. This rule is stupid. I have not found any other wiki anywhere that imposes limits on the number of times a person can edit in a day or hour. It's absurd. Wikis are about collaborative editing. There should not be edit limits. |
||
− | :Whilst I understand that making lots of edits can clog up RecentChanges, this is not a problem when you can change RecentChanges to show the last 2000 edits in the past 90 days. I could make 500 edits in the space of an hour, and this will not be a problem since RecentChanges can show a rather large amount of edits. |
||
− | :The wiki is not ''incredibly'' active; it's the same few people editing. Vandalism is ridiculously unlikely, since everyone has to create an account to edit and that's a silly reason to prevent the number of edits a person can make. The majority of edits these days equate to Firmware and OTA Updates and details on Jailbreak page. These edits often take up more than 20 edits in an hour due to the growing number of devices. The edits to the device names that we are currently doing involve hundreds of edits. To have to watch how many edits we are making and to only be able to do a certain number is just silly. — '''[[User:Spydar007|<span style="color:black;">Spydar007</span>]] [[User talk:Spydar007|<span style="color:gray;">(Talk)</span>]]''' 20:42, 22 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
− | ::The rule was put into place is because the wiki has seen countless instances of "insignificant" edits (i.e. no major content, just adjustments like renaming "iPhone 4 GSM" to "iPhone3,1"), and there were a lot of complaints about this. We're not going down that road again. The main reason other wikis don't have a rule like this is probably because other wikis never deal with floods of edits just to rename one thing on such a frequent basis. On this wiki, a humongous change like this seems to happen every (other) year. (Why? This shouldn't be the case.) '''The rule stays''', but it's open for amendments— we can increase the limit count, for example. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 21:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
− | :::I do think we should increase it. I'd propose either 75 or 100 daily edits and 30 major/minor (30 of each that is) per hour. Especially when we have a new firmware release, it is easy to go over 20 edits and if quick enough, could be done within an hour so I do think we should allow for more. I am with Spydar007 partly though as, although I can see why the rule was useful, we don't get enough editors to really cause an issue with this. If that changed, then we could review it. However, it isn't a make or break for me but I do think removing it would be a fairly good idea due to how few people edit this wiki now. I've also always thought that it would be better to fill Recent Changes on one day with big edits like that are currently taking place and then it be over, than do less edits that take a lot longer. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 10:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
− | ::If that's the reason the rule was put in place, then it should ''definitely'' be removed. This rule does not prevent those edits from being made; it simply prevents the number of edits that can be made in a given time. With the same few editors, no one is going to be renaming "iPhone 4 GSM" to "iPhone3,1", or anything like that. And again, this rule doesn't prevent those edits from being made. I've never seen a large amount of these "insignificant" edits being made in any of the time I have had an account on this wiki. I'd say this is to do with the changing userbase of the wiki, and not anything else. |
||
− | ::If you ''absolutely'' insist that the rule is kept, then it should be changed to allow 50 edits per hour. No daily limits. This allows for plenty of cleanup to be made. Of course, if we start to see people making silly changes, then a nice message on the user's talk page usually suffices, and a general discussion about why the user feels that page or file should be changed or renamed, and not the creation of a rule to allow you to block the user. This rule was added (and from what I can see, with no discussion) on December 12, 2011. I can see no violations of this rule in silly page moves before this date. I simply do not see a need for this rule, and I feel like it hinders the amount of actually constructive edits to the wiki. — '''[[User:Spydar007|<span style="color:black;">Spydar007</span>]] [[User talk:Spydar007|<span style="color:gray;">(Talk)</span>]]''' 11:07, 23 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
− | :::There absolutely was a [[The iPhone Wiki:Community portal/2011#New rule proposal|discussion]]. It's not meant to prevent these types of changes, as they can be necessary; it's meant to keep the list of changes accessible/readable, since an edit that's either questionable or notable (e.g. information about a new OTA package format) can easily be buried among 94 edits of merely renaming "iPod touch 4G" into "iPod touch (4th generation)." That said, taking the feedback into account, I think raising the limits to 50 major/50 minor edits per hour, with a daily limit of 150 edits would make a fair compromise. (Not having the daily limit would mean that you can actually make up all of the last 2,400 edits in one day. Uh… No.) --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 16:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
− | ::::That limit would be awesome. I really like that idea of 50 major/50 minor edits per hour and 150 daily limit. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 16:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 11:11, 14 September 2022
Archives | |
• 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015 • 2016 • 2017 • |
iPhone-Elite
I think we should include all this old stuff before it gets lost: code.google.com/p/iphone-elite/. I mean the wiki articles there. Most infos should be already here, but I'm sure a lot of things are missing too. --http 15:02, 26 June 2012 (MDT)
Boot-args cleanup
We need to clean up the boot-args pages. First the technical part: What I understand is that iBoot loads the kernel. And when loading it, it can pass some parameters to select certain behavior. So this only works with an iBoot or bootrom exploit. I understand that in earlier firmware versions there was simply an iBoot variable, but that doesn't exist or work anymore, now passing theses args requires a different or patched iBoot. There are various parameters in different kernel versions. The description for these arguments is scattered over various places:
- Kernel#Boot-Args A section with the latest boot arguments list. This should be a short introduction and having a link "main article".
- Boot-args (iBoot variable) separate page for boot arguments, but mainly for the iBoot variable that doesn't exist any longer
- Boot arguments (redirect)
- Talk:Restore_Mode describing the iBoot variable problem
- Various pages referencing boot-args, like Research: Re-allowing unsigned ramdisks and boot-args with the 2.* iBoot (here we should have a link on the second title)
- My earlier comment Talk:Kernel#boot-args
- This comment here.
So what do we want to do about this mess? I suggest to move the current Kernel content to the redirect page Boot arguments (or to another new page, maybe boot-args). The current content of Boot-args (iBoot variable) and all other content should get merged into there. Then change all references to this new page and on the Kernel page write just something short with "main article there". What do you think? --http (talk) 21:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- I like Boot Arguments. --5urd (talk) 02:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Easy tasks for new editors
- Finish converting the remaining error codes listed here MobileDevice_Library#Known_Error_Codes into the proper mach_return_t codes they should be displayed as. (convert the negative number listed into hex, strip any leading "FF" so it should be in the format "0xe80000" followed by two numbers) --Dirkg (talk) 22:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Email notifications?
Is it possible to get emailed when a watchlist page changes? I'd love that feature. This looks relevant. --beej (talk) 08:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Bite-sized editing tasks
It seems fun to make a list of relatively easy useful edits that new editors can do who are interested in helping, maybe at The iPhone Wiki:Bite-sized editing tasks or a similar page, and link it from the homepage here. I'd include the following as a start:
- Look at the list at Special:LonelyPages and figure out whether some of those pages should be linked within other pages on the wiki, and then go link them.
- Check the links at Useful Links and remove broken/outdated sites and add relevant new sites (but don't spam your own stuff).
- The iOS version table at SHSH should be listed in reverse-chronological order, with newest versions first instead of oldest versions first.
- If you run into a scam site, add it to the table at Scam Jailbreaks and Unlocks.
- If you're reading an article and some part of it is confusing to you, post a message on the "talk" page (click the "Discussion" tab at the top of the article) explaining your question or what you found confusing, so that other editors can use this as a suggestion for improving the article.
Ideas? Opinions? Britta (talk) 09:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
How to report problems
I saw people concerned on Twitter about the skin! Like iAdam1n said on Twitter, saurik just got a copy of the settings, images, and database from geohot and put them into a new site with an upgraded version of MediaWiki; he's asking geohot for a copy of the skin files. In general if you see problems or have requests for new extensions or other changes, it's totally fine to post them here and I'll see them and ask saurik to check it out. If something is more immediate and doesn't need discussion (like something missing, major errors, mysterious downtime, etc.), you can PM me or saurik on IRC (his IRC server is best, irc.saurik.com). Maybe good to post here too in those cases (if the site isn't down at the time) so other people know he's been alerted. Britta (talk) 18:44, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
More about how to report more immediate problems (or problems that require some level of privacy, such as a major security issue or "Britta has gone rogue") - if you don't use IRC, emailing me is also fine (britta@saurikit.com). Emailing saurik (saurik@saurik.com) won't be seen as quickly, but if you write a meaningful subject line (like "TheiPhoneWiki is giving error 403 upon login right now" or "Britta is putting glitter sparkle GIFs all over TheiPhoneWiki"), it'll likely be seen. Moving to a new server/admin can have some adjustment bumps but they can be fixed! Britta (talk) 03:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Apple internal content on the Wiki
I want to know what people think about having internal content on the Wiki. Some of the current content definitely needs some cleaning up and general editing. Should we publish information about internal firmwares? And is it okay to upload pictures of prototypes? Feel free to ask more questions. --Srb21103 (talk) 05:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- Looking through The iPhone Wiki:Ground rules, it says "No posting of copyrighted material. Anything that could legally get us in trouble should not be posted, ever." I'm not sure what other precedent here has been. Britta (talk) 10:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
JailbreakCon mini-talks
Hi wiki people! I'm working on gathering people to do mini-talks (5-10 minutes) for JailbreakCon in June in San Francisco, and it would be cool to have some more people speaking who contribute to the community in ways other than tweak development. Work other than development is important work too, such as documentation. If anyone who has put some effort into improving TheiPhoneWiki can attend and would like to give a mini talk about working on the wiki, let me know via the contact form on the site. Britta (talk) 00:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
File System Crypto
I just added Zdziarski's blog to the wiki (with his permission). I would recommend to take this apart and make multiple sub-articles, like an article for BAGI, another one for Dkey, etc. and on the page File System Crypto itself, just write the overview, similar to what we have on page 16 of the Sogeti document (wasn't there a newer graphic somewhere?) with some short description. --http (talk) 22:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Renaming Factory Firmware?
It's been brought to my attention that we don't really have anywhere on the wiki to document internal builds of iOS. Considering Factory Firmware consists of what are internal builds of iOS (with different software), I'd like to propose renaming it to Internal Firmware, to broaden its scope a little more. Well, either that or create a brand new page for internal builds. What does everyone think about this? --Dialexio (talk) 06:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
New rule proposal: Internal subjects
As we know, there are internal firmware builds that Apple uses to test their hardware. However, a wiki user reached out to me, concerned that there is incorrect information being added about these firmwares. I have no way to verify this information (and most probably don't either), so I would like to create a rule to require evidence in the form of an image or video for any substantial information about any such Apple internal subjects. This will help prevent false information being spread on the wiki.
Internal software and prototypes are rare to come across, and we welcome documentation about them. However, to maintain informational integrity, we do require evidence to be supplied with any substantial information that you have. For example, if you have a list of applications in an internal firmware, there should be an image or video showing them on the device. Any added information about internal subjects that does not comply with this is subject to removal, with account suspensions possible.
The above proposal will be edited as necessary during this discussion. --Dialexio (talk) 16:53, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Discussion of takedown for Cassandra Fuzzer
As you may know, the Cassandra Fuzzer, developed by iH8Ra1n was taken down by iAdam1n. I (iH8Ra1n) believe that Cassandra should not have been taken down for the following reasons:
- Information (If someone wants to help with it, for example. )
- Other vulnerabilities (Read on)
I think that I would be leaving people without some necessary information. Example, Cassandra discovers a vulnerability in MobileSafari. Now, I make a page about said vulnerability. I should probably mention Cassandra found it. Then, people wonder what it is. So, they look for a wiki page and find it was deleted. So, now they wonder what Cassandra is, and they don't know. This, I think, is a problem. Hence, why there should be a wiki page for it. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ih8ra1n (talk). Please consult this page for more info on how to sign pages, and how to fix this.
- With all due respect, the ground rules specifically say that one should not create a page for a program that is upcoming. Moreover, it also states that the creator of a program should not be involved in its page's creation. I don't believe that Cassandra should be added to the wiki until it gains enough of a reputation independent of this place that someone else thinks to add it. Forestcorgi (talk) 00:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- You certainly have a good point. I'll have to rewrite it anyway because I erased the phone it was on (iPhone 4) for storage. RIP. iH8Ra1n 10:43 AM, 13 April 2018 (EST)
This is pretty much to merge existing pages/links on the homepage like evasi0n, pangu, and any other pages that can be merged into a single page. Like some other jailbreaks, each unique version is listed on a single page, whereas we have, for example, the Pangu jailbreaks: Pangu, Pangu8, and Pangu9 that do not. Having three different pages for one variety of jailbreak is a little repetitive going through multiple pages on a certain jailbreak rather than just having it all in one spot. This will make browsing smoother and well as modifying each page, make it more simple/cleaner. For myself, I'd remove the "installed packages" section as, at least for myself, is not so important anymore and just takes up space on the page(s). Only posting here as iAdam1n told me so :P Merculous 3:09, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Are you talking about just the Main Page or the actual pages themselves? We certainly wouldn't remove the pages of the actual jailbreaks, these are separate entities with separate version numbers. It's bad enough with pages like yalu already, which is a mess. I would probably agree with making a Disambiguation page for things though, and then linking these on the Main Page. — Spydar007 (Talk) 08:24, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about deleting the pages themselves. What I meant was to remove the links to, such as, Pangu8 and Pangu9 on Main Page, but just merging the information from both pages and put them into the Pangu(7) page. We don't need 3 different links for Pangu and can just have all of it on a single page. Along with evasi0n, we can merge the information from evasi0n7 to evasi0n(6). I mean, if you'd look on the SemiRestore page, I merged information from different pages we have into one, without knowing I should've asked (kinda why I'm asking now). That's pretty much what I'm asking to consider. It'll make the page(s) look more simple and have everything that needs to be there, and save some space on the page (along with making everything look more aesthetic). Merculous 22:09, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm all for creating Disambiguation pages and linking those instead. — Spydar007 (Talk) 20:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about deleting the pages themselves. What I meant was to remove the links to, such as, Pangu8 and Pangu9 on Main Page, but just merging the information from both pages and put them into the Pangu(7) page. We don't need 3 different links for Pangu and can just have all of it on a single page. Along with evasi0n, we can merge the information from evasi0n7 to evasi0n(6). I mean, if you'd look on the SemiRestore page, I merged information from different pages we have into one, without knowing I should've asked (kinda why I'm asking now). That's pretty much what I'm asking to consider. It'll make the page(s) look more simple and have everything that needs to be there, and save some space on the page (along with making everything look more aesthetic). Merculous 22:09, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Separate iPad/iPad Air/iPad Pro?
Going forward, it would probably make more sense to separate iPad Air and iPad Pro from the regular line of iPads. From the get-go, we had iPad mini separated since it was clearly a different class. We kept iPad Air and iPad Pro tied with the regular line since the regular line's future seemed ambiguous at best, especially when we've had a few years and releases between the 4th and 5th generations of iPad. Apple not only keeps separate pages for the regular, Air, and Pro models now, but they also categorize them separately. --Dialexio (talk) 04:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- I had actually been thinking about this recently, and I'm all for it. This isn't a new thing, Apple have always kept them as four separate product lines. They were doing this before the introduction of the iPad Air 3, from the very start of the first iPad Pro back in late 2015. It definitely makes sense. We should have been doing this from the start, so I'm all for it. — Spydar007 (Talk) 07:23, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
--DanTheMann15 (talk) 03:25, 12 September 2019 (UTC) I have done some editing for the iPad Pro OTA Updates section, it looks much more complete now, it still has a ways to go before it's complete. as for the IPSW's, i'm not yet entirely sure on separating the iPad Lines, as it's still easiest to modify the IPSW links when they are in one list.
Regarding Tsunami Internal
Recently, there has been a team of people known as Tsunami Internal interested in documenting Apple internal software. While this, by itself, is good, they have shown a disregard for basic rules regarding self-promotion and formatting on the site. TheiPhoneWiki is not a place for promotion or advertising of services, especially considering that the trade of Apple internal information is illegal (whether paid or free). I've just spent a good hour cleaning up articles attributed to them, and here's what I've found:
- They include a line of credit to themselves at the end of each article they write. MediaWiki has built-in attribution tools so collaborators can keep track of who wrote what, making this an unnecessary practice.
- They have edited the Main page to include a section dedicated to internal software groups (which currently only includes them, and probably will only include them for the foreseeable future).
- They have created a wiki page for themselves with the sole purpose of self-promotion and advertising. The majority of content on this page is more suited for a User page that is owned by them.
- They have duplicated and modified the original Internal software template to create their own version, which promotes their services. I'm assuming that they have the intent to use this on pages beyond their own, which would not be acceptable.
We cannot assure the proper upkeep of TheiPhoneWiki if we allow users to create and modify content that does not contribute to the collective knowledge of the site in any way. While they have contributed some information, they have not adhered to our ground rules and have instead decided to use the site as a platform to promote their services. I hope we can do something about this and make sure that TheiPhoneWiki stays objective and true to its users. --Ryan Kovatch 07:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- I know I said I didn't really have an issue with it when you emailed but after reading all what you have put, I have to agree. I'm about to delete their contributions on their own tools etc because redistributing internal content would not be allowed so it cannot be allowed here. Of course their contributions that are just about normal internal tools will not be removed as they are ok but not the ones about their team. I hadn't realised they marked each page with their name either, which is something we do not want. I'm actually going to create a talk topic on their page about it because it cannot be tolerated. When you emailed I assumed it was just they made the pages for their team but having read what you have put here and looked again, I have to agree. Thanks for bringing this up. --iAdam1n (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Wonderful, thank you! I'll clarify that the person who emailed you was actually my colleague, who admittedly worded it a little stronger than I would have, lol. Your work is much appreciated! --Ryan Kovatch 05:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Beats with Apple wireless chips
The newer models of Beats headphones contain either the Apple W1 or H1 chip, and appear to have a very similar firmware and update mechanism to the AirPods lineup. Would there be any objections to their inclusion on the wiki? --Dialexio (talk) 07:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
macOS Big Sur
Out of curiosity, what do people think about the possibility of including information about macOS Big Sur on this wiki? Although macOS Big Sur (and Apple Silicon Macs) bring the iOS and macOS platforms closer than ever (including the software update mechanism), there are still distinctions that keep the platforms separate. As this wiki is "The iPhone Wiki" and not "The Apple Wiki" I have been quite against the inclusion of anything not pertaining to iPhones or iOS in the past, though that line is increasingly becoming blurred. --Dialexio (talk) 07:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
- I think we should add Mac info. It’s not like we only add iPhone so I believe all Apple info should be here. --iAdam1n (talk) 14:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Siri Remote
With Apple's "Spring Loaded" event, Apple revealed a new Siri Remote. This new Siri Remote with the circular pad is being referred to as the "2nd generation"[1], despite it technically being the third iteration of the Siri Remote. We should probably rename the Siri Remote with the white circle around the Menu button to avoid confusion, as we have been referring to that as the 2nd generation. Anyone have ideas for monikers to use (e.g. "Siri Remote (Rev A)")? --Dialexio (talk) 00:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Latest Firmware templates
With the release of the new major betas, i've run into a problem with the Template:Latest_beta_firmware page in regard to how it looks on the device lists e.g: List of HomePods for each individual model with the firmware key links.
with this in mind i propose that we just have the version listed without it duplicated for every model, look at Exhibit A it looks like a complete jumbled mess!
=== // BEGIN EXHIBIT A // ===(taken from iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (3rd generation) in the List of iPad Pros)
Firmwares
- Initial firmware: 12.1 (16B92), 12.1 (16B92), 12.1 (16B92), 12.1 (16B92)
- Latest public firmware: 16.1.1 (20B101), 16.1.1 (20B101), 16.1.1 (20B101), 16.1.1 (20B101)
- Latest beta firmware: 16.2 beta 2 (20C5043e), 16.2 beta 2 (20C5043e), 16.2 beta 2 (20C5043e), 16.2 beta 2 (20C5043e)
// END EXHIBIT A //
And i believe we should make it look like this but provide a ref if you want firmware keys as seen in Exhibit B below;
// BEGIN EXHIBIT B //
Firmwares[1]
- Initial firmware: 12.1 (16B92)
- Latest public firmware: 14.6 (18F72)
- Latest beta firmware: 14.7 beta 2 (18G5033e) and 15.0 beta (19A5261w)
and at the bottom of the page:
- ^ For firmware decryption keys, see Firmware Keys
// END EXHIBIT B //
thoughts on this? --DanTheMann15 (talk) 08:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Naming of the new Apple Watch SE
The question is pretty obvious. Apple doesn't seem to call it "2nd generation" anywhere like the iPhone SE for example. There is one instance though where they call the old SE as "1st generation" under Compare all models in https://www.apple.com/watch/compare/ .
My opinion is that in no case we should have the devices on the same page (Apple Watch SE) as they're completely distinct, with a different chip, back glass appearance, as well as device identifiers not starting with the same number.
What are your thoughts? —Dimitris Talk ⌚→ 09:47, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- The only idea I have right now is we have Apple Watch SE (1st generation) and Apple Watch SE (2nd generation) pages but when we name it on pages, we just use "Apple Watch SE" so it'd be like
Apple Watch SE
. I'm hoping that Apple realise and rename at least one of them but who knows. I'll keep my eye out for their naming and keep checking new releases for a bit in DeviceTree. --iAdam1n (talk) 13:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)- Got it, that makes sense. Should we make Apple Watch SE a disambiguation page instead of having it redirect to one of the two? —Dimitris Talk ⌚→ 13:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Update: Apple Support on Twitter just called it "2nd generation" (https://twitter.com/applesupport/status/1567908890582343681) —Dimitris Talk ⌚→ 16:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- That is interesting. I would do a disambiguation page for SE which lists both models with links. I also noticed that https://www.apple.com/uk/watchos/watchos-9 just lists one SE for both so I guess they can't even decide yet lol. --iAdam1n (talk) 16:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- I believe we should just call it the Apple Watch SE (2nd generation), it seems that some of the people who work at apple are just a bunch of idiots.
- --DanTheMann15 (talk) 16:48, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- The thing is we try to use the official naming here so if Apple don't use it, then we'd be breaking the way we usually do it. We do need to do it for pages because obviously you can't have two pages with the same name, but I guess we'll see what Apple does in the near future. --iAdam1n (talk) 16:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- There is also a line we shouldn't cross in regard to confusion, having two completely different apple watch models with the same name will no-doubt confuse people.
- so we must append (2nd generation) or the year the model came out (2022) so people will know that "ok this is a newer version".
- Wikipedia does it and we should to if it comes to it for the sake of legibility. --DanTheMann15 (talk) 17:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- As long as we're linking to the page for the correct one then it should be fine because when you click it, you know which version it is (can even hover over it to see). --iAdam1n (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- The thing is we try to use the official naming here so if Apple don't use it, then we'd be breaking the way we usually do it. We do need to do it for pages because obviously you can't have two pages with the same name, but I guess we'll see what Apple does in the near future. --iAdam1n (talk) 16:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
AirPower is B431AP?
There is this eBay listing of a supposed AirPower prototype. The third picture mentions a "B431" at the top, so could this be its internal name or the pic isn't trustworthy enough? —Dimitris Talk ⌚→ 11:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)