Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

User profile for user: Cybrarian4
Cybrarian4 Author
User level: Level 1
40 points

More App Updates via iTunes vs via iPhone

Up until this week when iTunes 12.6.5.3 (for Windows) developed a bug that doesn't allow App updates (which hopefully Apple will fix soon of course! :-) ), I noticed that running app updates via iTunes seemed more comprehensive and more up-to-date than running app updates through the App Store on the iPhone itself. This seems to be another reason why they App Store in iTunes should continue to work.


At first, I thought it was my imagination. When the little red circled number showed up on the App Store on the iPhone alerting me to how many App updates were needed, I noticed that some updates I had already downloaded onto iTunes were not showing on the iPhone. I would run the iPhone app update feature until the iPhone showed there were no more updates needed. But then I would immediately connect the iPhone to iTunes and run the update function. To my surprise, iTunes often updated More Apps on the iPhone, even though the iPhone said all Apps were updated.


Why is this? If the App Store on the iPhone is better, I thought they would have been comparable. But if they discontinue functionality for App updates in iTunes 12.6.5.3, will that mean iPhones will be lagging in the most current and up-to-date App versions?


They need to maintain App Store full functionality in iTunes. The iTunes route is much more comprehensive and up-to-date in App Store updates....that is, when there's not a bug that stops this functionality from working. Also, as my family has at least 6 iPhones that are active, it's more efficient for me to manage and handle updates for all of these through iTunes. I understand that it's also easier for the IT department to manage multiple iPhones with many employees in their organizations if they can use iTunes. Perhaps that's why Apple maintained the 12.6.5.3 version for this long for these businesses, but Apple should also consider its value for the individuals who buy and manage multiple iPhones for their family. We've invested a great deal of money in the Apple technology, so it would be good if Apple kept it easier and efficient for those of us individuals who buy and maintain more than just one iPhone.


Windows, Windows 6

Posted on Feb 9, 2021 7:18 AM

Reply
Question marked as Best reply
User profile for user: turingtest2
turingtest2
User level: Level 10
272,943 points

Posted on Feb 9, 2021 7:33 AM

Once upon a time there were universal apps. All of the resources needed to run the app on different hardware were included in the bundle. This meant that the app you had on your iPhone could be transferred into iTunes, then synced to an iPad. However as the number of devices with different screen sizes grew that meant bigger universal apps taking up space on the device that wasn't needed. App thinning solved this, with each device getting just the resources that is needed, but effectively ruling out device to library transfer. The other gain with thinned apps is delta updates, so each device only gets the changes it needs to convert the build it has into the current one rather than downloading all of the unchanged code. Allowing devices to update themselves automatically should result in smaller amounts of data being downloaded overall, even for six devices, and has no management overhead. You simply let it happen while devices are asleep and on charge. Perhaps if you manually download the latest version and sync the device the app gets updated simply because the copy in the library has a newer download date, not because it is actually any different. You would need to take a detailed before and after comparison of version numbers to be sure.


tt2

View in context

Similar questions

2 replies
Question marked as Best reply
User profile for user: turingtest2
turingtest2
User level: Level 10
272,943 points

Feb 9, 2021 7:33 AM in response to Cybrarian4

Once upon a time there were universal apps. All of the resources needed to run the app on different hardware were included in the bundle. This meant that the app you had on your iPhone could be transferred into iTunes, then synced to an iPad. However as the number of devices with different screen sizes grew that meant bigger universal apps taking up space on the device that wasn't needed. App thinning solved this, with each device getting just the resources that is needed, but effectively ruling out device to library transfer. The other gain with thinned apps is delta updates, so each device only gets the changes it needs to convert the build it has into the current one rather than downloading all of the unchanged code. Allowing devices to update themselves automatically should result in smaller amounts of data being downloaded overall, even for six devices, and has no management overhead. You simply let it happen while devices are asleep and on charge. Perhaps if you manually download the latest version and sync the device the app gets updated simply because the copy in the library has a newer download date, not because it is actually any different. You would need to take a detailed before and after comparison of version numbers to be sure.


tt2

Reply

More App Updates via iTunes vs via iPhone

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.
Learn more Sign up