the idea that something will be running OS X on ARM next year is just silly.
I agree. ARM will not be ready for Macs for several more years, if ever. Also, the idea that Apple would want to use one CPU architecture for some Macs and another architecture for other Macs is beyond silly. Apple would want to make such a transition quickly, as they have always done in the past.
Not likely unless ARM is 64bit by then. All but the cheapest stock models of the macbook air currently ship with 4GB of RAM. I don't see them being stuck at that amount until 2016, nor do I see Apple releasing and encouraging the continued development of 32-bit versions of software after the whole system just transitioned to 64-bits last month.
You're implying there won't be X86 emulators for ARM processors in 2016 when they exist now.
Oh there may be, but emulation and virtualisation are two different beasts (as anyone who ever ran Virtual PC on a pre-Intel machine can tell you). Emulation works, but the performance is incomparable.
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
Isn't the visible part of the OSX filesystem an application - finder?Or is finder and the visible osx filesystem two separate things?
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
The visible file system is a design choice...much like changing the look of the scrollbars.
Merging the 2 OS'es would basically involve merging almost all the code below the UI. They might even try merging the APIs (which are already very similar). This would mean that the same 3rd Party codebase would function across Mac, iPad, iPhone with only the UI needing to be changed.
This would be a dramatic improvement for both devs and customers.
The merge WILL happen, as long as Apple is technically capable of actually doing it. The only remaining question is when will they start.
Why do people assume a merger of iOS and OS X should automatically entail identical UIs? An OS is a lot more than the user interface - they can have a single OS with the same kernel, device drivers, file system, development environment, etc., with a different style of UI depending on device, in very much the exact same way that iOS handles both iPhone and iPad now. There's no reason they can't extend the idea of a universal iOS application to have a different UI for mouse/keyboard interactions too.
1) Those that assume it have no idea what they are talking about. Apple clearly has different UIs for the iPod Touch/iPhone and iPad. They even release different builds for each version of a device within a market category. For example, the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, G4 iPod Touch, and G3 iPod Touch all have different IPSWs for iOS 5.0 despite all having the same UI design from CocoaTouch.
2) Your last sentence refers to a universal application. That's different than a Universal OS that will have the drivers, frameworks, and UIs for all devices. Mac OS is already over 3.5GB just for Macs if you were to add it for all iDevices consider at least another 1GB. But for argument sake lets ignore that and just consider the 3.5GB of Mac OS and assume it also contains all the needed files for the iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad and AppleTV models. Does it really make sense for, say, an iPod Touch user to download 3.5GB just to update their iPod? Not in the least!
3) I can see Apple eventually moving their Xcode SDK to allow for easier code sharing for Mac OS and iOS apps the way they made it easy for iOS for iPhone/Touch and iOS for iPad apps to share code. That is where Apple, the developer and the user would benefit from well designed system, but not from having one bulky OS that will install on all their products.
He doesn't outline anything, so these are valid questions.
But a fully-multitouch desktop OS can easily be done. Its audience is everyone. It's the replacement of the mouse.
Absolutely not. Multitouch works great on a device that you hold in your hands, but I believe that even Steve indicated that touchscreens don't work well on a laptop much less a desktop. The touchpad might be a viable solution for the laptop/desktop world, but there are precious few instances where I would even want to reach up from the keyboard to manipulate something on the screen itself. Today's optical mice and touchpads are much more accurate than manipulating something on the screen directly.
Maybe iOS and OS X merge sometime in the future. If this is the case, I don't see it being the near future.
Multitouch works great on a device that you hold in your hands, but I believe that even Steve indicated that touchscreens don't work well on a laptop much less a desktop.
That's not at all what he said.
He said vertical touchscreens are worthless. They are.
You're implying the only desktop multitouch solution is vertical. That's insane.
Apple could still make software available to both platforms without needing to merge the entire OS. They already have the technology in place to do this; universal binary support and specific UI for appropriate devices and views.
They could create one version of Pages or Numbers that would work across all their devices. There is absolutely no need to merge iOS and Mac OS X to do this.
The core to the two OSes is different which is why you need two different programs.
now could Apple create a unified core with two different faces -- one touch based for iPads etc and the other keyboard/mouse based for the computers -- sure. In fact I think they will. But I don't think we'll see any of it really happening in the next year. That's what I think this guy has wrong. We've seen and will continue to see small UI things like the similar mail program and the whole Launchpad but not a full merging. Maybe we'll get there by OS 11 in a couple of years, maybe it will be longer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga
I read this report. I don't think this guy gets Apple. What is the product? Who is the audience?
Anyone. The advantage to a single core OS is that apps that could run in either environment only have to be bought once. No one is going to object to that. Well maybe developers, they might want the two sales. But if it's what Apple wants, they will get it. ANd the developers will get over it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido
Why would apple axe their most popular computer completely to make it significantly slower, less ergonomic, and less powerful?
That's part of why I don't think it will happen in the next few months like this guy says. I even see them having levels to the system. the ipad/iphone would continue to use a lower level of processor for basically the same tasks it does now and the stronger levels would go to the standard form computers.
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
While there being a million other things like that, that is the most important one. Without a usable file system, there won't be a need to use a computer.
Assume this happens, how would ANY professional work be done on a computer? Programming, Video Editing, Audio Processing, Desktop Publishing... without easy access to files you essentially kill the professional use of a computer. If Apple went this way, I'd be out, after 17 years.
I may be talking about of my butt here, but I don't think Rosetta had as much to do. To run Windows, an emulator has to emulate an entire machine in order to provide a guest OS access to virtual hardware. Rosetta simply had to translate some instructions.
I could see this working in a niche product, but for many users Intel CPU's are a must. The virtulisation market is getting bigger all the time.
It would be incredible stupidity on Apples part to abandon i86 on its Mac OS/X machines. Beyond that Mac OS/X just transitioned to 64 bit only, it is pretty clear Apple is moving Mac OS/X forward not side wise.
In any event I'm not sure why there is so much hysteria over Mac OS/X adopting a few concepts from iOS. For the most part everything adopted improves the Mac user experience. Heck I've adapted to Launch Pad almost instantly.
Further nobody here seems to realize that Lion, like each Mac OS release before it, has improved upon its UNIX under pinnings. Sure the UI got tweaked but Lion has had thousands of little updates or improvements that make it a great platform for power users. Frankly Apple has a much more holistic view of Mac OS than these idiots that only see the GUI surface.
Comments
the idea that something will be running OS X on ARM next year is just silly.
I agree. ARM will not be ready for Macs for several more years, if ever. Also, the idea that Apple would want to use one CPU architecture for some Macs and another architecture for other Macs is beyond silly. Apple would want to make such a transition quickly, as they have always done in the past.
You're implying there won't be X86 emulators for ARM processors in 2016 when they exist now.
Emulators in the past have sucked pretty hard. Don't know how it would work this time around but I would be pretty worried.
This is the most stupid thing I heard all day. I guess they have to come up with something to keep the laughter-of-the-day.
No, iOS won't "fuse" with Mac OS next year.
It's not period. And anyone who thinks otherwise is just being silly, ignorant or retarded.
Er.....have you looked at Lion?
You're implying there won't be X86 emulators for ARM processors in 2016 when they exist now.
Oh there may be, but emulation and virtualisation are two different beasts (as anyone who ever ran Virtual PC on a pre-Intel machine can tell you). Emulation works, but the performance is incomparable.
Er.....have you looked at Lion?
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
This is the most stupid thing I heard all day. I guess they have to come up with something to keep the laughter-of-the-day.
No, iOS won't "fuse" with Mac OS next year.
It's not period. And anyone who thinks otherwise is just being silly, ignorant or retarded.
He said they would merge the 2 OS'es by 2016...
People should try reading the articles before commenting on them.
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
Isn't the visible part of the OSX filesystem an application - finder?Or is finder and the visible osx filesystem two separate things?
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
The visible file system is a design choice...much like changing the look of the scrollbars.
Merging the 2 OS'es would basically involve merging almost all the code below the UI. They might even try merging the APIs (which are already very similar). This would mean that the same 3rd Party codebase would function across Mac, iPad, iPhone with only the UI needing to be changed.
This would be a dramatic improvement for both devs and customers.
The merge WILL happen, as long as Apple is technically capable of actually doing it. The only remaining question is when will they start.
Emulators in the past have sucked pretty hard. Don't know how it would work this time around but I would be pretty worried.
Rosetta was pretty good. RIP.
Why do people assume a merger of iOS and OS X should automatically entail identical UIs? An OS is a lot more than the user interface - they can have a single OS with the same kernel, device drivers, file system, development environment, etc., with a different style of UI depending on device, in very much the exact same way that iOS handles both iPhone and iPad now. There's no reason they can't extend the idea of a universal iOS application to have a different UI for mouse/keyboard interactions too.
1) Those that assume it have no idea what they are talking about. Apple clearly has different UIs for the iPod Touch/iPhone and iPad. They even release different builds for each version of a device within a market category. For example, the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, G4 iPod Touch, and G3 iPod Touch all have different IPSWs for iOS 5.0 despite all having the same UI design from CocoaTouch.
2) Your last sentence refers to a universal application. That's different than a Universal OS that will have the drivers, frameworks, and UIs for all devices. Mac OS is already over 3.5GB just for Macs if you were to add it for all iDevices consider at least another 1GB. But for argument sake lets ignore that and just consider the 3.5GB of Mac OS and assume it also contains all the needed files for the iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad and AppleTV models. Does it really make sense for, say, an iPod Touch user to download 3.5GB just to update their iPod? Not in the least!
3) I can see Apple eventually moving their Xcode SDK to allow for easier code sharing for Mac OS and iOS apps the way they made it easy for iOS for iPhone/Touch and iOS for iPad apps to share code. That is where Apple, the developer and the user would benefit from well designed system, but not from having one bulky OS that will install on all their products.
He doesn't outline anything, so these are valid questions.
But a fully-multitouch desktop OS can easily be done. Its audience is everyone. It's the replacement of the mouse.
Absolutely not. Multitouch works great on a device that you hold in your hands, but I believe that even Steve indicated that touchscreens don't work well on a laptop much less a desktop. The touchpad might be a viable solution for the laptop/desktop world, but there are precious few instances where I would even want to reach up from the keyboard to manipulate something on the screen itself. Today's optical mice and touchpads are much more accurate than manipulating something on the screen directly.
Maybe iOS and OS X merge sometime in the future. If this is the case, I don't see it being the near future.
Multitouch works great on a device that you hold in your hands, but I believe that even Steve indicated that touchscreens don't work well on a laptop much less a desktop.
That's not at all what he said.
He said vertical touchscreens are worthless. They are.
You're implying the only desktop multitouch solution is vertical. That's insane.
Apple could still make software available to both platforms without needing to merge the entire OS. They already have the technology in place to do this; universal binary support and specific UI for appropriate devices and views.
They could create one version of Pages or Numbers that would work across all their devices. There is absolutely no need to merge iOS and Mac OS X to do this.
The core to the two OSes is different which is why you need two different programs.
now could Apple create a unified core with two different faces -- one touch based for iPads etc and the other keyboard/mouse based for the computers -- sure. In fact I think they will. But I don't think we'll see any of it really happening in the next year. That's what I think this guy has wrong. We've seen and will continue to see small UI things like the similar mail program and the whole Launchpad but not a full merging. Maybe we'll get there by OS 11 in a couple of years, maybe it will be longer.
I read this report. I don't think this guy gets Apple. What is the product? Who is the audience?
Anyone. The advantage to a single core OS is that apps that could run in either environment only have to be bought once. No one is going to object to that. Well maybe developers, they might want the two sales. But if it's what Apple wants, they will get it. ANd the developers will get over it.
Why would apple axe their most popular computer completely to make it significantly slower, less ergonomic, and less powerful?
That's part of why I don't think it will happen in the next few months like this guy says. I even see them having levels to the system. the ipad/iphone would continue to use a lower level of processor for basically the same tasks it does now and the stronger levels would go to the standard form computers.
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
While there being a million other things like that, that is the most important one. Without a usable file system, there won't be a need to use a computer.
Assume this happens, how would ANY professional work be done on a computer? Programming, Video Editing, Audio Processing, Desktop Publishing... without easy access to files you essentially kill the professional use of a computer. If Apple went this way, I'd be out, after 17 years.
This is the most stupid thing I heard all day. I guess they have to come up with something to keep the laughter-of-the-day.
No, iOS won't "fuse" with Mac OS next year.
It's not period. And anyone who thinks otherwise is just being silly, ignorant or retarded.
That's not fair to people with autism. My son has it and can still apply logic and reason far better than this analyst.
Rosetta was pretty good. RIP.
I may be talking about of my butt here, but I don't think Rosetta had as much to do. To run Windows, an emulator has to emulate an entire machine in order to provide a guest OS access to virtual hardware. Rosetta simply had to translate some instructions.
I could see this working in a niche product, but for many users Intel CPU's are a must. The virtulisation market is getting bigger all the time.
It would be incredible stupidity on Apples part to abandon i86 on its Mac OS/X machines. Beyond that Mac OS/X just transitioned to 64 bit only, it is pretty clear Apple is moving Mac OS/X forward not side wise.
In any event I'm not sure why there is so much hysteria over Mac OS/X adopting a few concepts from iOS. For the most part everything adopted improves the Mac user experience. Heck I've adapted to Launch Pad almost instantly.
Further nobody here seems to realize that Lion, like each Mac OS release before it, has improved upon its UNIX under pinnings. Sure the UI got tweaked but Lion has had thousands of little updates or improvements that make it a great platform for power users. Frankly Apple has a much more holistic view of Mac OS than these idiots that only see the GUI surface.