No iOS 6 for my original iPad? Now, I'm an Angry Bird.

No iOS 6 for my original iPad? Now, I'm an Angry Bird.

Summary: Apple surely has made an oversight by not making iOS 6 available for the original iPad (iPad 1). This might alienate some Apple users and converts, including yours truly.

SHARE:
101
Unsupported
Sorry, iPad 1, you're too old for iOS 6!

To say that I'm unhappy with Apple about the fact that I can't install iOS 6 on my iPad 1, is an understatement. It's not like the thing is seven or eight years old. I bought it just before the iPad 2 came out. And, now I'm angry. I'm very angry. I'm an Angry Bird who wants to have myself flung at the fortified pigs who made this very, very bad decision. You can install iOS 6 on the iPhone 3GS and on the iPhone 4, so why not the iPad 1?

So, now what?

Either I'm stuck with iOS 5.1.1 forever or I jailbreak the damn thing and possibly ruin it.

That's what.

When will Apple stop allowing my iPad 1 access to the App Store or iTunes?

Come on, Apple, how long do I have on this very expensive device that is less than two years old (for me)? How long does anyone have for a device launched in April 2010?

Bad move, Apple. Bad move.

I don't see any compelling features in iOS 6 that would preclude me from using it on my iPad 1. Sure, I don't have a camera or cellular connectivity (My choice) but what I do have is an official iPad and I want it supported. To drop support for it so soon after launch is just short of device homicide. And, it could prevent me from ever buying another Apple anything again.

I had finally convinced myself to like Apple after drooling over the original Macintosh and never getting one. I had come over to the "Dark Side" and even decided that the next computer that I purchase would be a Macbook Air.

But, not anymore.

You want to know why?

Because I don't know how long Apple would continue to support it.

And, guess what else? When my damn contract on my iPhone 4 is up, I'm not renewing it nor am I going to buy a new iPhone. $600 might not be a lot of money for Apple's decision makers but it is for me and I don't have it to waste. $600 would clothe my daughter for an entire school year plus extra left over for activities.

In my opinion, dropping iOS support for the iPad 1 means that Apple no longer cares about its customers and frankly, I'm shocked. It makes me want to take back all of the good things I ever said about Apple, my iPad and my iPhone. Sure, Apple probably doesn't give two hoots in hell about me, my opinion or my unsupported iPad 1, because Apple is going to be the world's first trillion dollar company. My $600 wasted investment means squat to them.

Apple, I have some sage advice for you: Stay focused on the customer or you won't have any. I don't think I'm alone in that feeling now that you've abandoned us.

I wonder if the other 15 million+ buyers of the original iPad would agree?

Do you really want to alienate 15 million customers?

There was a time in your past, Apple, when you were about 90 days from bankruptcy and now you're worth more than $600 billion. But, remember when the US had a $3 trillion surplus when Bill Clinton left office and now we have a $10 trillion deficit? You do the math and take a hint.

15 million is a lot of customers.

It's a lot of unsupported iPads.

It's a lot of pissed off individuals.

At $100 profit per customer, that's $1.5 billion. Small change to you?

It could be opportunity for another company who wants to offer something you don't: Support for your two year old unsupported devices. Sort of an opportunity for someone who wants to make a business out of supporting jailbroken devices with an App Store, new OS releases and updates that will continue the life of this computing platform.

By the way, for all of you who have anything but an iPhone 5, get ready for this: Your devices won't be supported very soon because Apple has changed the interface on the iPhone 5. So, the next generation of iPod and iPad will have the news ones too. And, my friends, that leaves your old devices in an incompatible format.

Awesome.

Think Different.

Planned obsolescence doesn't mean two years. Get a clue, Apple.

Consider me, "Unconverted."

What do you think of Apple's decision to not offer iOS 6 for a two-year-old device? Talk back and let (and Apple) know how you feel.

Topics: Apple, iOS, Mobile OS, Mobility

About

Kenneth 'Ken' Hess is a full-time Windows and Linux system administrator with 20 years of experience with Mac, Linux, UNIX, and Windows systems in large multi-data center environments.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

101 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • What is the reason for not supporting it?

    I mean, the hardware and specs are the same as the iPhone 3GS. Though the iPad does have a much higher resolution (768x1024), so it because the processor would have been unable to cope with the load of a high resolution and the newer iOS?
    addicted2088
    • Yes, Apple did not forget it customers

      Apple does not support iOS 6 for 1st iPad because it has only 256 MB RAM and yet it has more than twice higher resolution comparing to iPhone 3GS.
      DDERSSS
      • But they are the ones making the OS.

        If they really cared about their customers and their products they would have found a way to make it work. The original iPad already supports iOS 5 and to my knowledge the changes aren't so drastic that the iPad 1 simply couldn't run it properly anymore.
        mathiasappel@...
        • Nope

          If microsoft cared about their customers, w8 would run on win xp hardware, if android manufacturers cared about their customers they would upgrade all homeycomb and gingerbread phones to jelly bean. It's the same reason not all features are available on my old 3gs- hard ware changes fast, and so do the requirements. I installed 6 as a test and can confirm it just works; they've cut so many features to make it work that it's realistically 5.2 on the 3gs - it's an update not an upgrade, but it does mean i can keep using newwer apps.

          He fact that they upgraded a phone a year older than the ipad shows they upgraded the tech that could - Don't forget the massive leap from ipad 1 to 2.
          MarknWill
          • im not likely to believe that Microsoft cares alot

            but w8 does run on xp hardware, and for most (1Ghz+, 1Gb+ RAM) does it ok.
            polarcat
          • Hahaha good one

            Just go out, buy a 2002 pc and install it without upgrades- because you can't upgrade a pad - and get back to us yeah?
            MarknWill
          • Come on...

            Are you seriously trying to suggest depreciating hardware that's less than two years old is the same as depreciation 2001 XP-launch hardware that's 11 years old?

            Come on. That's a logical fallacy plain and simple:
            1) MSFT doesn't support 11 year old hardware
            2) AAPL doesn't support 2 year old hardware
            Therefore 3) MSFT are as bad as MSFT

            Either
            1) Something is flawed in my reasoning (if so please be my guest and point it out)
            or 2) You are committing a logical fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apples_and_oranges)

            Which is it??
            jontseng
          • Windows 8

            does run on XP hardware so you might as well drop that one right now....
            12312332123
          • Windows 8 GUI ... sucks!

            Yeah, but Windows 8 is a smartphone OS ... not a real PC OS.
            rAllcorn
          • Win 8

            As others have pointed out, Win 8 runs just fine on a lot of hardware that came with XP. My suspicion with the iPad is that 256 Mb of RAM simply isn't enough to run iOS 6. One of the big differences between a Windows XP box and a tablet (pretty much all tablets, not just the iPad) is that the later are sealed systems that are basically impossible to upgrade. With an older dual-core windows machine, you can add more RAM, drop in a bigger hard drive, swap in a faster video card and you're good to go. Now, with PCs being as cheap as they are, you definitely want to run the numbers before upgrading all those components, but it's definitely a doable proposition (and with the Windows 8 upgrade priced at $40.00 not necessarily an unreasonable one).
            dsf3g
          • Windows 8 works on XP machines.

            Windows 8(W8) actually run on XP hardware, I installed the W8 Consumer Preview on two machines that originally had XP(yrs of manufacture a Dell 2005 and a Sony 2006[speaker soud works but headphone jack does not work didnt spend any time to figure out why was using an iPhone earbuds]).

            I was going to toss these two laptops out, now they are super fast and W8 gave these 2 machines a new lease on life, I am waiting for when the $40 upgrade is available in October to permanently upgrade them, then give them away, because we really want the Microsoft Surface devices, RT for my wife and Pro for me. Will junk the Mini Mac and Wii that we have connected to the TV and get an xBox.
            TD_2003
          • Semantically, those aren't XP machines to me

            Those are Vista-era machines with XP on them. "XP machines" are machines that shipped from 2001-2004, and have 512MB of RAM or less. There's an insane number of those, and they'll never run Windows Vista, 7, or 8.

            If you try to install Windows 8 on any early Windows XP machine, you'll have heartbreak and disappointment. And a doorstop.
            fswgm
          • Semantically and semantically ...

            All machines shipped with pre-installed XP are XP machines. And I can point out, that it is possible to use those real old XP machines with Windows 7 and 8. You cannot use them with Windows Vista. Only real problem that you may face with the old machine, while trying to install Windows 7 or 8 on it, is the Video adapter. In case you cannot change that, you may not be able to install those new OS's on your machine. In some cases it may also work by using the XP driver, but you will not get all the best things out of your card.

            I have installed Window 7 on 1 old hardware from year 2002, and it is working perfectly on it's role as a 4G (LTE) gateway to share the network in my house. That was the fastest and the cheapest way to get a fast connection to my house. Fixed ADSL connection was an option, but it was about 30 € per month and the speed was only 6 MB (that was the physical maximum on my location). That 4G gave me 50 MB connection with less than 20 € per month.

            So it depends what you expect to get by installing the new OS. As in my case the only role for that machine is actinga as a gateway to Internet and it works fine on that role.
            jtvfin@...
          • Another one falls to the dark side

            Another one falls to the dark side
            rAllcorn
          • Wow what a stretch

            WinXP is just a little older the 2 years......apples & oranges
            Eduardo Figueredo
          • Apple Fanboys

            I had to respond to the rants about Microsoft and Google not supporting... The Microsoft not supporting Win8 on XP hardware is ASININE...XP IS 11 years old!!! Google does support it's OS's on most hardware, it's the phone manufacturers who choose not to upgrade or support them.

            Apple seriously mis-stepped on this one. To not support iOS 6 on the original iPad is one of the worst things I've seen companies do. What is Apple saying...if you want to continue to run our stuff...you'll simply need to spend $600-$800 every 2-3 years.

            I've been able to run the same hardware at home and make some minimal changes over the past 6 years and have upgraded from Windows XP to Windows 7 and will upgrade to Windows 8 soon.

            BAD MOVE APPLE!!!
            adam@...
          • False!

            You're wrong about Microsoft and Google.
            1. You CAN Run Windows 8 on WinXP hardware.
            2. It's not Google fault for not having updates for some older Android phones. It's the manufacturer of the phone's fault. They are the ones who decide on whether to release an update for an old phone. The reason for that is that the manufacturer have their own software that is compatible for only for a certain phone. You can update an 1.6 Donut Android to Jelly Bean if its compatible with CyanogenMod's drivers for hardware.

            And not only that. I have an LG Optimus 3D which was released early 2011 and LG haven't made an update to Jelly Bean or at least Ice Cream Sandwich. It's still in Gingerbread.

            Do some research before you even make up your false accusations. Dumbass.
            mjgwapo880
          • Pot calling the kettle black ...

            I have to agree with you on this one ...

            Microsoft us notorious for needed beefier hardware with each OS release. This is mostly due to poor programming practices that (unlike LINUX) require more hardware just to do the same job. Added features, totally re-written GUI with each OS release, and quickly churned out segments of each new OS release, with little or no time taken for tweaking and program efficiency on the hardware.
            rAllcorn
      • I though only MS was evil in creating an OS

        that earlier hardware couldn't use.

        So it's fine for both to do this?
        William Farrel
    • Facts

      Hi,
      I have an original iPad - 64GB, 3G plus wifi. Obviously I would like it to run iOS 6, but Apple no doubt had their reasons for not doing so. The problem is the RAM on the iPad in combination with the screen size. Together they make iOS 6 on the original iPad difficult to implement while keeping a satisfactory user experience.

      Regarding this statement: "But, remember when the US had a $3 trillion surplus when Bill Clinton left office and now we have a $10 trillion deficit? " There was never a "$3 trillion surplus when Bill Clinton left office" and there is not a "$10 trillion deficit now."

      The debt and the deficit are different things, there was $230B claimed surplus with $246.5B in borrowing, so really a $16.5B deficit in Clinton's last year. Even a $230B surplus is not $3 Trillion. Obviously that is much better than a > $1,000 Billion annual deficits for the past 4 years, and better than the ~$300B annual deficits before that.

      And the national debt in 2000 was approximately $5.6 Trillion and $9.6 Trillion in 2008. Now it is slightly above $16 Trillion.

      The debt, deficit and iOS 6 on the original iPad have stubborn facts that are at odds with the conclusion that Apple is abandoning their customers.
      cr1896