Apple's OS X iPhone, Leopard banners show OS split pre-WWDC

[AppleInsider]

Apple has unfurled its customary banners in the run-up to WWDC and is emphasizing the split between OS X iPhone and OS X Leopard in what promises to be a company-defining event.

While no graphics covered with black drapes have yet appeared at the Moscone Center venue that would hint at product announcements, Apple is making it clear that there are now two distinct operating systems under its wings -- an allusion to the diverging paths in its invitation to developers.

On one banner in Moscone's lobby, Apple refers to its conventional Mac operating system as OS X Leopard and touts the software as "the world's most advanced operating system," a claim it has made in the past. However, a second banner hanging overhead also promotes OS X iPhone as "the world's most advanced mobile platform," stressing both the newly-coined name for the software behind the iPhone and iPod touch as well as Apple's belief in its touchscreen software as the start of broader platform rather than just a narrowly-focused adaptation of its code.

Outside, Apple is making its occupation of the San Francisco locale through its more traditional if obvious means: giant Apple logos adorn the main windows, while small pennants and other banners surround the ground floors.

Visit MacNN for even more photos of Apple's early setup process for WWDC.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Bageljoey]

F
r
e
n
z
y

approaching...

[iVlad]

Apple hazzzz best designers.

"OS X iPhone - The Future .... Calling...." -- how clever!!!

[M.O.S.T]

Picture of two bridges ..... Landmark event in more ways than one ....... Two bridges = OSX for Mac and OSX for iPhone/iPod Touch

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by M.O.S.T

<image>
Picture of two bridges ..... Landmark event in more ways than one ....... Two bridges = OSX for Mac and OSX for iPhone/iPod Touch

I'm glad we finally have some closure on the meaning of that image. There have been so many bizarre and profusely incorrect theories as to its meaning for the past few months.

[wilburpan]

I don't want to seem like a troll, since this is my first comment in these forums, but I have been reading AppleInsider for years now. But the usage of photos in this article really galls me.

It's extremely lame to use pictures from MacNN to illustrate this article without clear attribution as to the source. I know there's the "Visit MacNN for even more photos" line, but it should be made clear that the photos used originated from MacNN's website.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by wilburpan

I don't want to seem like a troll, since this is my first comment in these forums, but I have been reading AppleInsider for years now. But the usage of photos in this article really galls me.

It's extremely lame to use pictures from MacNN to illustrate this article without clear attribution as to the source. I know there's the "Visit MacNN for even more photos" line, but it should be made clear that the photos used originated from MacNN's website.

I agree. I don't think adding it would take away from AI content (which I think may be the reason for not adding it or obscuring it), but adds to AI being a respectable source for all things Apple.

Welcome to AI.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by wilburpan

I don't want to seem like a troll, since this is my first comment in these forums, but I have been reading AppleInsider for years now. But the usage of photos in this article really galls me.

It's extremely lame to use pictures from MacNN to illustrate this article without clear attribution as to the source. I know there's the "Visit MacNN for even more photos" line, but it should be made clear that the photos used originated from MacNN's website.

I've said similar things before. It's also copyright infringement unless the source has given permission to use those images.

[bpatton]

:: sighs ::

I'm just hoping to hear something about the rumored (HIGHLY rumored) refresh to the MBP and MB line, regarding a new look. I've had my sights set on a new MBP, to upgrade from my MB, but I don't want to throw 2Gs on the table and Apple release something new on me.

Anyone else care to share light on the refresh? If it even still exists? I saw the previous post with a picture of a possible mysterious Apple shipment, but the arguement that it might just be bundled new iPhones in large boxes seems to be more plausible than new MBs.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by bpatton

I'm just hoping to hear something about the rumored (HIGHLY rumored) refresh to the MBP and MB line, regarding a new look.

Historically, it's way too soon for a refresh.

• http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Portable_Macs

[stellaclose]

I think the other 'landmark' part of this keynote will be they'll announce the license OS X coming in January.

Think about it for a second. They've dropped all reference to Mac in the OS X posters and I think Snow Leopard will be the release for all PC's in January. They dropped a bombshell a few years ago with the move to Intel. This just seems to be a natural progression of the OS for all.

Anyway just my thoughts on this.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by stellaclose

I think the other 'landmark' part of this keynote will be they'll announce the license OS X coming in January.

Think about it for a second. They've dropped all reference to Mac in the OS X posters and I think Snow Leopard will be the release for all PC's in January. They dropped a bombshell a few years ago with the move to Intel. This just seems to be a natural progression of the OS for all.

Anyway just my thoughts on this.

While I don't think so and certainly hope not, your supporting argument is the best I've seen on the topic... and that scares me.

[macinthe408]

In the fourth photo, there's a sweet BMW motorcycle on the left. Let's talk about that instead of Apple stuff...

[city]

Originally Posted by M.O.S.T

Picture of two bridges ..... Landmark event in more ways than one ....... Two bridges = OSX for Mac and OSX for iPhone/iPod Touch

It cost $4 to cross that bridge, so two bridges means will will be paying $8 to use something that should be free.

[mrparet]

As stated previously, you do have a sound arguement. However, Apple had always said that "people who are serious about software should do their own hardware." I'm quoting Steve Jobs directly. In addition, one of the plus sides of the Mac is that Apple builds the entire thing. This is a great attribute. There's less hardware/software conflicts. I also don't see Jobs allowing OS X to be run on the trash Dell calls a computer. It's not going to happen. At least not until after Jobs steps down.

[Wiggin]

Originally Posted by bpatton

:: sighs ::

I'm just hoping to hear something about the rumored (HIGHLY rumored) refresh to the MBP and MB line, regarding a new look. I've had my sights set on a new MBP, to upgrade from my MB, but I don't want to throw 2Gs on the table and Apple release something new on me.

Anyone else care to share light on the refresh? If it even still exists? I saw the previous post with a picture of a possible mysterious Apple shipment, but the arguement that it might just be bundled new iPhones in large boxes seems to be more plausible than new MBs.

Wasn't Intel having problems with the next version of their chipsets? I thought that was going to push delivery until something around the Sept-ish timeframe. I highly doubt Apple would announce a laptop that wasn't going to be shipping for another 2-3 months because it would kill their summer sales.

In any event, even with the originally rumored Intel rollout, it was unlikely Apple would have made announcements at WWDC because Intel wouldn't have been shipping in high enough quantities by then.

Sorry. Just think, you could have been getting great use out of a new Penryn for months now if you would have stopped reading the rumor sites and just bought your laptop when they came out.

[aaarrrgggh]

Regarding the "licensing OS X" talk... it would make absolutely no business sense at this point in time:
-Apple isn't having trouble keeping up with production demands for computers
-The Apple "brand" places value on "cool, elegant, and easy." Licensing detracts from all of these.
-OSX could actually hit double-digit market share quite soon, without other manufacturers "helping out."
-Potential vendors gain more from selling Linux-- it's free!
-Apple's only potential gain out if it is end-users upgrading over time. The likelihood they can derrive profit (or loyalty) out of clones is extremely low.
-The market Apple doesn't compete in is the low-end desktop. In this market, Linux again provides more value than licensed OSX would.
-The Mid-Tower market that actually has some opportunity for Apple can be better served with another kind of innovation; Apple keeping this open for themselves seems more profitable.

The divide is for developers, not for Apple Inc.

[SpamSandwich]

"OS X iPhone"? Whaaaaat?

That name sure limits this as a product (although I didn't actually see this name on any of the photos shown above)... Why not something that could apply to any like product... a name like "OS X Mobile" would at least keep it flexible enough for future (unknown) products.

Ugh! Awful inconsistent naming!!! I just saw the banner on Macrumors...

What makes more sense...

- Mac OS X Leopard
- iPhone OS X Leopard Cub (for example... or Little Leopard, if you like)

...or...

- OS X Leopard
- OS X iPhone ... uh...

[Bergermeister]

Does anyone else see a tablet in the main banner?

http://images.appleinsider.com/08_wwdc_f_6.jpg

In the middle, positioned in front of the MBA?

Or is it just an iPhone?

[tacojohn]

I see this...

[internetworld7]

I can't wait to watch this event online. Apple is truly the most exciting and inspiring company on earth.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by Bergermeister

Does anyone else see a tablet in the main banner?

http://images.appleinsider.com/08_wwdc_f_6.jpg

In the middle, positioned in front of the MBA?

Or is it just an iPhone?

I say it's an iPhone...

[Bergermeister]

Originally Posted by internetworld7

I can't wait to watch this event online. Apple is truly the most exciting and inspiring company on earth.

Time to start going crazy.




JKAJSLkjhas;fyha;kry;aeuyrwpe8yoiqhw4e.;l8547 ehi !~!!!!!!!

[William John]

Originally Posted by wilburpan

I don't want to seem like a troll, since this is my first comment in these forums, but I have been reading AppleInsider for years now. But the usage of photos in this article really galls me.

It's extremely lame to use pictures from MacNN to illustrate this article without clear attribution as to the source. I know there's the "Visit MacNN for even more photos" line, but it should be made clear that the photos used originated from MacNN's website.

The photograph of the two bridges is from Apple, it has been floating around the net since at least March. That no doubt is where MacNN got it. Might ask them about it.

[hypermark]

The biggest issue I have with the naming scheme is that it doesn't solve the mouthful that occurs when you try to explain that iPhone SDK based applications can run on iPhone or iPod. If it was OS X Mobility, you would avoid this confusion.

I blogged on this point back in April. Here is an excerpt:

"The platform is called iPhone SDK but if they execute, there will be as many if not more of these devices running on iPod touch (as iPhones). It is a mouthful to have to write every reference as 'runs on iPhone and iPod touch devices' and it is certainly less crisp, which limits the effectiveness of marketing messages that leverage viral, word of mouth strategies."

Here's the full post if interested.

Sub $200 Wi-Fi Touchscreen iPods by Fall?
http://thenetworkgarden.com/weblog/2...0-wi-fi-t.html

Mark

[Bergermeister]

The image is from Apple:


CNET links to it:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-9959884-37.html

Ars uses it, too:

http://arstechnica.com/journals/appl...from-june-9-13

Basically, it was widely circulate, and, if I recall correctly, was on Apple's homepage for a while. The cnet image actually seems to have a link button on it...

[PG4G]

I'd agree it was a stupid naming idea, but I would like to point out that OS X iPhone is only designed to work on the iPhone setup, which is reproduced on the touch. It is tied to the display size.

I strongly doubt the whole Tablet thing. Its all rumor from people who haven't programed for the iPhone.

Those who have know there is a strong tie between the screen size and the OS.

Any release for another device like it would have to use a Massively Remade version of OS X iPhone.

The touch API's are tied to screen size, and to port them to another screen size takes major OS changes.

You notice that screen size didn't change between the touch and the iPhone. This is why.

And as for the naming, well, its got to do with the fact that the iPod Touch is really just a cropped version of the iPhone anyway. Steve doesn't like it at all.

Think of the touch as an iPhone lite, and it all makes sense.

Nothing else from Apple apart from the iPhone and iPhone lite, and OS X iPhone makes perfect sense.

[admactanium]

i believe the image was sent out by apple in an email invitation to developers to attend wwdc.

[hypermark]

Huh? iPhone is just a copied version of touch? Steve doesn't like it at all?

Reality: Apple doesn't generally build stuff by accident, and they certainly don't roll out high volume products that Jobs isn't 200% behind. Plus, all of this stuff is derivative. iPhone is hugely derived from iPod, and iPod touch is hugely derived from iPhone.

My only point is that if one base of apps is designed to work on the iPhone/Touch class of devices, why not have a naming scheme that is clear that it's an AND?

Bear in mind that 100M iPods have been sold, and many of those customers may never buy an iPhone but also won't likely leave the iPod universe since their memories and their media are already sync'd with the platform.

There is very low awareness with this base that the SDK touches their world - pun intended.

Originally Posted by PG4G

I'd agree it was a stupid naming idea, but I would like to point out that OS X iPhone is only designed to work on the iPhone. It is tied to the display size.

I strongly doubt the whole Tablet thing. Its all rumor from people who haven't programed for the iPhone.

Those who have know there is a strong tie between the screen size and the OS.

Any release for another device like it would have to use a Massively Remade version of OS X iPhone.

The touch API's are tied to screen size, and to port them to another screen size takes major OS changes.

You notice that screen size didn't change between the touch and the iPhone. This is why.

And as for the naming, well, its got to do with the fact that the iPod Touch is really just a cropped version of the iPhone anyway. Steve doesn't like it at all.

[MacTel]

Originally Posted by tacojohn

I see this...

If there is indeed a Snow Leopard in our path and it is mostly security and performance tweaks then Steve should do us all a favor and give it away for free. That is to those that already have Leopard.

[iMat]

My opinion is that this whole iPhone thing is really getting too big. I don't know if it's due to the buzz the iPhone generates. My belief is that Steve is too involved in the iPhone and he might lose focus on the whole "macintosh" part of Apple.

Splitting OSX in "Leopard" and "iPhone" might generate a lot of problems in the long run. Just as the two golden gates in the pic, the OSs would slowly tend to drift apart. This means double the effort for Apple, double the risk of problems and a great risk of inconsistencies.

The same Microsoft was blamed for with WinMob...

I am no programmer, no IT guru nor an advisor. But I am a user of Apple's products (MB (Leopard), iPhone, AppleTV (2.0)). I already see inconsistencies (FrontRow). My guess is that Steve is pushing the iPhone to far and might get burnt.

Simplicity, consistency and design is what I cherish in Apple's computer. Creating two teams for two OSs in the same company is NOT what will make it better, in my modest opinion.
Supporting ONE OS for ALL users has been a strenght for Apple much more than people generally give it credit to. ONE OS allows to move faster, innovate better and create a unique experience.

Splitting OS might generate more problems than what is seems to offer opportunities. But hey... It's Steve's phone and he wants it to shine and achieve that goal of sales figuers he has set. It's SEEMS to me it's more about pride than strategy.

But then again, I am no "guru".

[RolandG]

No coverd up banners this time? This makes earth-shaking announcements higly unlikely...

[Slewis]

Null.

[winterspan]

Originally Posted by PG4G

I'd agree it was a stupid naming idea, but I would like to point out that OS X iPhone is only designed to work on the iPhone setup, which is reproduced on the touch. It is tied to the display size.

I strongly doubt the whole Tablet thing. Its all rumor from people who haven't programed for the iPhone. Those who have know there is a strong tie between the screen size and the OS. Any release for another device like it would have to use a Massively Remade version of OS X iPhone. The touch API's are tied to screen size, and to port them to another screen size takes major OS changes. You notice that screen size didn't change between the touch and the iPhone. This is why. And as for the naming, well, its got to do with the fact that the iPod Touch is really just a cropped version of the iPhone anyway. Steve doesn't like it at all. Think of the touch as an iPhone lite, and it all makes sense.

Nothing else from Apple apart from the iPhone and iPhone lite, and OS X iPhone makes perfect sense.

Well I have unfortunately not had time to dive into the iPhone SDK, but I would *HIGHLY DOUBT* that the user interface APIs in mobile OSX are strongly coupled to the current iPhone's resolution (320x480). I can't think of any legitimate development reason for such a thing, and it would be such an asinine design flaw that I'd have to seriously question the intelligence of the lead developer of iPhone OS. There is just no way in my mind that this could be true. And Besides other possible tablet/MID devices, they surely wouldn't make the assumption that the iPhone's display hardware won't evolve over time.

"Nothing else from Apple apart from the iPhone and iPhone lite, and OS X iPhone makes perfect sense." --- and I don't even know how to reply to this gem of a statement.

Originally Posted by William John

The photograph of the two bridges is from Apple, it has been floating around the net since at least March. That no doubt is where MacNN got it. Might ask them about it.

Originally Posted by Bergermeister

The image is from Apple:
CNET links to it:
Ars uses it, too:
Basically, it was widely circulate, and, if I recall correctly, was on Apple's homepage for a while. The cnet image actually seems to have a link button on it...

You guys have the wrong idea. The poster complaining about AI using MacNN images without citation was referring to all the pics of the Moscone Center on this post. I don't know how you got on the topic of the two-bridge picture...

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by iMat

My opinion is that this whole iPhone thing is really getting too big. I don't know if it's due to the buzz the iPhone generates. My belief is that Steve is too involved in the iPhone and he might lose focus on the whole "macintosh" part of Apple.

Splitting OSX in "Leopard" and "iPhone" might generate a lot of problems in the long run. Just as the two golden gates in the pic, the OSs would slowly tend to drift apart. This means double the effort for Apple, double the risk of problems and a great risk of inconsistencies.

The same Microsoft was blamed for with WinMob...

I am no programmer, no IT guru nor an advisor. But I am a user of Apple's products (MB (Leopard), iPhone, AppleTV (2.0)). I already see inconsistencies (FrontRow). My guess is that Steve is pushing the iPhone to far and might get burnt.

Simplicity, consistency and design is what I cherish in Apple's computer. Creating two teams for two OSs in the same company is NOT what will make it better, in my modest opinion.
Supporting ONE OS for ALL users has been a strenght for Apple much more than people generally give it credit to. ONE OS allows to move faster, innovate better and create a unique experience.

Splitting OS might generate more problems than what is seems to offer opportunities. But hey... It's Steve's phone and he wants it to shine and achieve that goal of sales figuers he has set. It's SEEMS to me it's more about pride than strategy.

But then again, I am no "guru".

So you suggest that Apple throw away the years it spent trimming down OS X and adding code to make a viable mobile OS? That the iPhone and iPod Touch should be canceled?

They've already the hard part. Some have called it impossible, saying Apple can't enter a developed cell phone market. Others said that MS could make Windows a viable mobile OS (WinMobile is not the same as desktop Windows, it was jsut made to look like it on the surface) and so Apple couldn't do it.

It's all relatively smooth sailing from here compared to what was needed to create a whole new platform, including the SDK. And we've seen Macs change to Intel and Mac designs and innards change, and we've even seen new Macs come to fruition.

The Mac line is not dying, in fact, the iPods, the iPhones and Apple Stores all help grow the Mac brand. They are still the powerhouse behind Apple's revenue and will continue to be so for some time.

The fact that Apple has the same core OS running both the iPhone and Macs makes it that much easier for them to develop more and better products in less time. If they really want to trim the fat, they could well by dropping 32-bit and PC support from future Mac OS X builds, which might be something we see come Monday to the chagrin of many people still using older—though not necessarily old—machines.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by winterspan

Well I have unfortunately not had time to dive into the iPhone SDK, but I would *HIGHLY DOUBT* that the user interface APIs in mobile OSX are strongly coupled to the current iPhone's resolution (320x480).

It wouldn't be. They would have the page match the resolution just like with all teh different size monitors they have for Macs, MB and MBPs.

PS: I'm guessing that Apple won't be keeping the 320x480 resolution. While it was a high ppi 18 months ago when it was showcased there are now phone with double the resolution—full VGA—on smaller screens. Even if Apple had planned to use the same screen again, they could have changed up to probably a few months ago if they saw that competition was using better screens. And since Apple will probably only update the iPhone about every 6 months at most and there will be a new competing device coming out every few weeks, I would assume, it's imperative that they go state-of-the-art on this front.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by winterspan

You guys have the wrong idea. The poster complaining about AI using MacNN images without citation was referring to all the pics of the Moscone Center on this post. I don't know how you got on the topic of the two-bridge picture...

AI usually doesn't post the main article page images on the forum post, so if you found this article directly through the forum you could get lost. It's happened to me a few times.

[ALPICH]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

I say it's an iPhone...

I just put my iPod Touch on my MBA and it looks nothing like that poster. My Touch is tiny compared to the posters perspective. Even in the poster it looks like it is towards the back of the MBA and leaning on it.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by ALPICH

I just put my iPod Touch on my MBA and it looks nothing like that poster. My Touch is tiny compared to the posters perspective. Even in the poster it looks like it is towards the back of the MBA and leaning on it.

The poster clearly shows the device in front of the MBA. The image link below is a much clearer view.

Just as a reference, Apple has never put up easily visible posters several days before an event that revealed secrets about a device's look.

• http://www.roughlydrafted.com/wp-con...6/img-0629.jpg

[ALPICH]

Originally Posted by solipsism

The poster clearly shows the device in front of the MBA. The image link below is a much clearer view.

Just as a reference, Apple has never put up easily visible posters several days before an event that revealed secrets about a device's look.

• http://www.roughlydrafted.com/wp-con...6/img-0629.jpg

I stand corrected. And thanks. I was getting all excited by a tablet pc. However I did see something interesting to the side of the poster. Is it a finger print in a yellow square with an iPhone next to it?