or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › ARM-powered Apple tablet called 'iPhone on steroids'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ARM-powered Apple tablet called 'iPhone on steroids' - Page 4

post #121 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

It seems Samsung have been mass producing new 64GB moviNAND chips since December.

I wonder who for?

Source

I thought the 3-bit NAND was having some problems with corruption.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #122 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

BTW, where's Ireland? He keeps insisting that a tablet will run something he's been calling "Mac OS X Touch" or something. Where does that fit in? I've never been exactly clear what he imagines that to be, but I get the impression he's agitating for more Mac OS and less iPhone.

That's the impression I've been getting from him too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage

Putting Mac OS X on a tablet is like putting a steering wheel on a motorcycle.
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage

Putting Mac OS X on a tablet is like putting a steering wheel on a motorcycle.
Reply
post #123 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Out of control? That doesn't sound good.

Some how I envision Regis Philbin gesticulating wildly over his iSlate. Eeewwww.
post #124 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfmartin67 View Post

Interesting rumor...

Apple seems to bet on the iPhone / App Store momentum.

More thoughts on my blog.

State your thoughts here.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #125 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeagol View Post

Dual A9 processor + video conferencing + multi-tasking + solid input system + new tablet OS = Instant purchase

plus:

blu-ray
firewire
matte screen
post #126 of 156
Apple doesn't need an "iPhone OS" to have a device that has the same multitouch functionality as the iPhone. It's an "iPhone OS" because it's a phone not because it's touch. The touch tech can be ported to OS X and already is as we all know.

Could it be the other way around? The full touch capabilities although present in the iPhone first were meant for all desktop systems. iPhone is a handy testing ground for "iSlate" and all other machines.
post #127 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

Apple doesn't need an "iPhone OS" to have a device that has the same multitouch functionality as the iPhone. It's an "iPhone OS" because it's a phone not because it's touch. The touch tech can be ported to OS X and already is as we all know.

In fact I think it's the other way around. The full touch capabilities although present in the iPhone first were meant for all desktop systems. iPhone is a handy testing ground for "iSlate" and all other machines.

Hmmm, in terms of the naming conventions discussed earlier in the thread, the iPhone OS already is OS X. What you want is touch gestures baked into the "Mac OS."

I don't think that's going to happen, because as far as Apple is concerned, the "Mac" is by definition a fairly traditional desktop/laptop machine. Touch devices are the next thing, and the OS naming will follow suit-- all of it part of OS X, of course.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #128 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Out of control? That doesn't sound good.

That tablet sounds "BAD"!!
post #129 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

Apple doesn't need an "iPhone OS" to have a device that has the same multitouch functionality as the iPhone. It's an "iPhone OS" because it's a phone not because it's touch. The touch tech can be ported to OS X and already is as we all know.

Could it be the other way around? The full touch capabilities although present in the iPhone first were meant for all desktop systems. iPhone is a handy testing ground for "iSlate" and all other machines.

iPhone OS running on the iPod touch which is kind of punches a hole in that (phone) argument. It is named iPhone OS because the iPhone is the most prominent device currently using the OS.

While touch technology is coming into OSX, it is still primarily designed around a cursor. It seems much more natural for a tablet to use iPhone OS is its jumping off point. Furthermore, a tablet makes the perfect testbed for eventually bringing a lot more touch technology into OSX (or more likely OSXI) has it as a screen much more similar in size to existing macs.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #130 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by alectheking View Post

I was suspicious of the lack of Iphone OS updates, it was odd. Now it is coming all together.

I really don't believe that rumour. Do we really expect iPhone OS 3.2 to be the tablet OS?
At most I'd expect iPhone OS 4.0. The other option is that Snow Leopard, iPhone OS 4.0, and iSlate OS 1.0 will share the same underlying foundations (and iSlate will look MUCH more like the iPhone OS than MacOSX).
post #131 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Yes, but how about the easy UI AND the choice to run what apps you want? from wherever you want?
We can have cake and eat it too,

I used to think the original Mac should have been Apple IIe (2e) compatible. But there is value in forcing a new interface paradigm. Remember how many people stuck with DOS on Windows too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

One has to ask themselves, why hasn't any of the many great iPhone apps made it to OS X?
<snip>
It's because Apple is going to a closed UI for the masses, and OS X as we know it will be "for Pro's only" and eventually discontinued from lack of software availability in favor of the new closed iSlate/iPhone UI.

I'd like to see iPhone apps easily ported to the Mac.

But IF you are right and Apple truly wants to push a closed app store system, then that would almost guarantee that they'd make the iPhone apps run on OSX. Right? Yet you're saying that's why they don't do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

No not now, first the iSlate takes over the MacBooks then the MBP's eventually, it could take years.

Do you really think the iSlate will be so successful that MacBooks and MBPs will really be unnecessary?
post #132 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by tumme-totte View Post

It would be disappointing to have a 10 inch screen which can't run at least Mail, iCal, Safari and a few more basic apps. And then I mean the Mac OS full featured versions. If I can run all apps such as iWork and iLife and maybe even Word, Excel and so on that would be a bonus.

Personally, I expect that the 10inch slate will run Mail, iCal, Safari, iWork, iLife....
It'll be versions specifically redesigned to work smoothly and effectively on a touch screen without keyboard.

If the current apps were just allowed on as is, we would miss our keyboard and mouse. That's no good for Apple.
post #133 of 156
Let's not fool ourselves here, folks. This "tablet" device is simply going to be a new "OOOO, AAAHH!" way for Apple to sell EVEN MORE apps and an extended array of iTunes content. The device has been designed to be nothing more than a conduit for more easy content revenue. Remember...this is all about delivering that "cheap for Apple" to produce content and producing the devices that will draw the customer in.

Let me sum it all up, the way I see it.

1) No recent updates to iPhone OS? Why? Too many references to the tablet that Apple didn't want leaked. Apple quietly holds off until the imminent "whole number" revision.

2) The tablet's OS is going to be a custom version of the iPhone OS - the OS will recognize which device it's being run on and either enable or disable features accordingly. The iPhone OS as it stands would not support all of the new gestures and capabilities of the new tablet - therefore a rewrite to support the tablet...viola...iPhone OS 4.0!

3) If you remember right, Apple just recently bought property and built a huge data center in North Carolina. Have you wondered what that is for? I guarantee it'll be tied to the content that will be offered up for this tablet as well as how it's delivered.

4) Revenue from iTunes and the App Store is just too damn easy for Apple. Let somebody else create the content, maintain control over that content, host the content on your own servers to help you maintain that control, create a new, super-hyped device to deliver the content to, take a 30% cut of everything...and then sit back and watch the money ROLL IN!!!

5) Apple knows that so far NetFlix is the dominant force in streaming video content into the home living room right now. Don't you think they want a piece of that? But we're talking Apple and Steve Jobs here. Apple doesn't want a piece of it...they want to DOMINATE in that market much like they eventually did with the music industry with the introduction of the iPod and iTunes. If anybody knows how to take complete, dominant control of an entire market in a short time frame - it's Steve Jobs. Apple will also be using their top position in digital content delivery to take advantage of the so-far mostly untapped market of interactive newspaper, magazine and "print media" subscriptions.

Huge East Coast data center + iTunes Store + App Store + LaLa acquisition + tablet = EXPANDED BUSINESS MODEL!

Older existing iPhones + brand new iPhone 4G + iPod touch + new iSlate device = LOTS OF WAYS TO CONSUME ALL OF THIS DIGITAL MEDIA!

Apple won't give the iSlate (or whatever it's going to be called) device a full blown version of OS X. No, Apple's too smart and business savvy for that. That's what they have the portable notebook products for! They're not going to eat into their own sales...they're going to CREATE new sales by expanding their portable product line with something they have more control over.

Is the picture starting to get a little clearer now?

"iOS 5 is the best phone we've ever made..." - Phil Schiller - Special Event September 12, 2012

Reply

"iOS 5 is the best phone we've ever made..." - Phil Schiller - Special Event September 12, 2012

Reply
post #134 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Yes, but how about the easy UI AND the choice to run what apps you want? from wherever you want?

No body has explained to me what is wrong with the current selection of apps in app store. A hundred thousand apps is a lot to choose from.
Quote:

We can have cake and eat it too, it's just Apple isn't going to allow it, unless you jailbreak your iSlate and shut yourself out of any future updates/App Store.

Well you point out one problem with Jailbreaking. The fact is you can't have your cake and eat it too. Currently the security model doesn't allow for that. Mind you I'm not saying app store is perfect but the security model offered does encourage developers. One thing Apple could consider is a Python or Ruby interpeter. The idea being to allow for the install of slow apps to provide an alternative to the free apps on app store.
Quote:
One has to ask themselves, why hasn't any of the many great iPhone apps made it to OS X?

There are many answers to that question but I have a few for you. One is that app store is ideal for the small time developer. The effort required to market and distribute Mac OS/X apps is massive in comparison.

Likewise there are fewer losses associated with theft on the iPhone. The sad fact is many developers would loose a considerable amount of income to piracy of software on the Mac.

A third thing to consider is the vast difference in available hardware. Manybapps get tied to iPhone by virtue of the hardware they use.

That is three off the top of my head.
Quote:
Why hasn't Apple made a DA that runs the same Apps as the iPhone so you can use the same programs on your Mac and your iPhone?

Apple has made duo compilers before, for PPC and Intel, one click compiles for either, so it's no sweat for them and the App developers.

Technically you are probably right. However from the marketing and customer support stand point it would help if the two platforms where clearly distinguished.
Quote:
It's because Apple is going to a closed UI for the masses, and OS X as we know it will be "for Pro's only" and eventually discontinued from lack of software availability in favor of the new closed iSlate/iPhone UI.

It's the future and it's closed.

That is highly reactionary. First you don't have to buy Apple hardware. Second you don't know yet how closed the tablets archetecture is. Third computer users have vastly differet needs than tablet/iPhone users. Lastly I'd really like to see an app store for Mac OS/X. It would open the platform to small time developers, in a way that they could actually make money.


Dave
post #135 of 156
Well, having been viewing OS as the set of programs serving some use case and being generally accustomed to cross-platform development, I admittedly failed to realize the pretty much religious excitement towards ARM. Port is being under way since the iPod of forgotten generation.

iPhone OS



Mac OS

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #136 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

No body has explained to me what is wrong with the current selection of apps in app store. A hundred thousand apps is a lot to choose from.

Have you ever used a fart app on the desktop? Or maybe a sound effects board? The apps are poor quality. They have maybe 10 PSP-quality games out of over 40,000 games.

Asking that question is like asking why people still go to the Cinema or watch TV when Youtube has hundreds of millions of videos. Not all content is created equal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

One is that app store is ideal for the small time developer. The effort required to market and distribute Mac OS/X apps is massive in comparison.

Likewise there are fewer losses associated with theft on the iPhone. The sad fact is many developers would loose a considerable amount of income to piracy of software on the Mac.

The app store was actually noted as having a 75-90% piracy rate:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...e-opening.html

The competition to drive app prices to rock bottom means little profit per app and unless a small-time developer puts out some money on advertising, the app gets lost in a sea of 120,000+ apps that are impossible to navigate using Apple's tools.

Apple needs to have a premium app store section so we can at least see what apps the big developers are making. Apple simply charges $1,000 to host in that section and the problem is solved. If an app generates enough revenue from the junk pile, the developer can pay the $1,000 and move up to the premium section.
post #137 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin;1549571

The app store was actually noted as having a 75-90% piracy rate:

[url


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/6988942/Apples-App-Store-has-lost-450-million-since-opening.html[/url]

Super dubious numbers there, though, piling speculation on estimates on assumptions.

Quote:
The competition to drive app prices to rock bottom means little profit per app and unless a small-time developer puts out some money on advertising, the app gets lost in a sea of 120,000+ apps that are impossible to navigate using Apple's tools.

How is that different (or worse) than no App Store, and developers trying to generate interest on the internet at large? At least the App Store puts everything at one URL, from there you can do what everyone has always done when seeking new software-- pay attention to what's getting talked about, check out the offerings of developers you know and trust, take the advice of friends, look at reviews, etc.

I really don't get this "Because the App Store is big its impossible to find anything" idea. The internet is much bigger, but somehow we make do hunting down stuff.

Quote:
Apple needs to have a premium app store section so we can at least see what apps the big developers are making. Apple simply charges $1,000 to host in that section and the problem is solved. If an app generates enough revenue from the junk pile, the developer can pay the $1,000 and move up to the premium section.

Again, the "big developers" are likely to have channels outside the App Store to advertise their wares-- just like every other software developer not on the App Store does.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #138 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Super dubious numbers there, though, piling speculation on estimates on assumptions.

I think it's more that it paints the wrong picture. They are trying to say that it's a pirate's paradise instead of saying that the only people willing to use the apps are the ones who steal them because the apps aren't good enough that people want to buy them. Some people like to try before buying too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I really don't get this "Because the App Store is big its impossible to find anything" idea. The internet is much bigger, but somehow we make do hunting down stuff.

I counted under 5000 Mac apps on Apple's own site (for a 10 year old platform) and they are much easier to navigate. 127,000 widget-like apps for a 3 year old platform just isn't workable.

I've given up on the App Store because I'm not really looking for a particular app. I want to see what apps are on there and getting good reviews but you can't search the highest rated apps. Apple continually recommends apps that are rated 2/5. Why would an app be listed as popular if it's rated 2/5? Surely it means that loads of people are downloading it and think it's junk so they shouldn't recommend it.

I can't find new apps because the old ones persist in the top ratings simply because that's the only list most people can reach.

The App Store won't be a strength for the slate unless Apple make it work better.
post #139 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I think it's more that it paints the wrong picture. They are trying to say that it's a pirate's paradise instead of saying that the only people willing to use the apps are the ones who steal them because the apps aren't good enough that people want to buy them. Some people like to try before buying too.

Heh. No offense, but that seems like an unwarranted conclusion perched atop the pile of dubious premises.

Quote:
I counted under 5000 Mac apps on Apple's own site (for a 10 year old platform) and they are much easier to navigate. 127,000 widget-like apps for a 3 year old platform just isn't workable.

But no one, that I know of, would limit themselves to searching Apple's site to identify software that they might be interested in running on their Mac.

Quote:
I've given up on the App Store because I'm not really looking for a particular app. I want to see what apps are on there and getting good reviews but you can't search the highest rated apps. Apple continually recommends apps that are rated 2/5. Why would an app be listed as popular if it's rated 2/5? Surely it means that loads of people are downloading it and think it's junk so they shouldn't recommend it.

I can't find new apps because the old ones persist in the top ratings simply because that's the only list most people can reach.

The App Store won't be a strength for the slate unless Apple make it work better.

I guess we just have different shopping habits, then. I don't go onto Amazon with no particular product in mind and get frustrated because I can't figure out what's good, or because there are too many items. I generally have some idea of what I'm looking for, and use external sources to narrow it down. Then I can do a pretty specific search.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #140 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Inform us as to what changed to make typing on a 10 piece of glass with either your hands held out in front or bending over to look at half a display that isnt covered by a virtual keyboard more viable than a physical keyboard in a natural palm resting position with the larger than 10 display set naturally in front of our eyes?

It's funny that you ask that. After all this speculation, and people buying into it before they even know what it is, I've been pondering this very question. The only way I can get my brain to stop going around in circles is to tell myself that Apple has figured out how to make the tablet form factor work differently.

Some of my brain's proposed solutions:
  • Interactive 3D holograms hovering above the surface of the tablet, and you just leave it laying horizontally on a table.
  • Eye position sensors and blink to click...
  • Shake it and hope it does what you want (like a Magic 8 ball.)

Seriously though, I think they have figured it out with touch gestures and the iPhone OS. I also have a feeling that there will be position sensors and gesture abilities on the back of the device as well as the front. I still don't see how this will be more efficient than using a laptop for office-type tasks, so I disagree with MacTripper about the MB replacement projections.
post #141 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by technohermit View Post

The only way I can get my brain to stop going around in circles is to tell myself that Apple has figured out how to make the tablet form factor work differently.

It's likely that most tablet designers have, until now, taken the idea of a regular laptop and looked at how to squeeze those functions into the tablet form factor. This has resulted in a general mismatch of appropriate form for the desired task, and often directly the wrong software for the tablet.

Apple could, through stepping back significantly, ask the question "what would work well on a tablet?". They're good at that question.

Perhaps they have 3 lists:
"1. perfect use of a tablet!",
"2. yeah, that's doable", and
"3. NO, this needs a laptop!".
Previous tablets have worked for all 3 classifications. Apple MIGHT just do #1 brilliantly, and prevent #2 or #3.... a very focussed tablet. They may focus on #1 but allow #2... and they'll still get criticism for not doing #3.

My guess - if you need to use the onscreen keyboard more than 20% of your usage time, then it's not a product Apple wants to release.

Quote:
Seriously though, I think they have figured it out with touch gestures and the iPhone OS. <snip> I still don't see how this will be more efficient than using a laptop for office-type tasks....

If they ask the right question (and throw out things liberally) they can come up with quite a good, unique answer.

And I think you're right that for the "office type" tasks as we understand them, this WILL NOT be more efficient. Unless there are entirely different ways of doing office tasks that we haven't thought of. (Quick, we need a productivity expert who retired before computers set our expectations!)
post #142 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

plus:

blu-ray
firewire
matte screen

None of those make solid sense in a tablet. The exception might be FireWire but even that is a stretch. The thing that blows my mind is your request for Blu-Ray. Just how do you expect to put such a disk in a tablet that is lees than a 1/2" thick?

All in all I don't think you have a chance with any of those.


Dave
post #143 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

I really don't believe that rumour. Do we really expect iPhone OS 3.2 to be the tablet OS?

No! Frankly nobody has said that, but the OS will be derived from it in a sense. The reality is iPhone OS as we know it came from a tablet OS project that got put on ice so that iPhone could be done.
Quote:
At most I'd expect iPhone OS 4.0. The other option is that Snow Leopard, iPhone OS 4.0, and iSlate OS 1.0 will share the same underlying foundations (and iSlate will look MUCH more like the iPhone OS than MacOSX).

This is what has really pissed me off about your post. Mac OS and iPhone OS already share or have much in common. Many of the APIs and Frameworks are exactly the same. Others are slightly trimmed for size. The only major difference is the framework for user apps and a system interface that hides much of the underlying Unix foundation. Finally many legacy APIs have been dropped on iPhone OS.

I don't wish to sound hostile but I keep hearing this refrain and frankly it is wearing. It is not like Apple hides information about the OS'es. When you talk about underlying foundation to many of us that implies that part of the OS under the user interface. In the case of iPhone it is the depth of the support that has attracked many to the platform. There really isn't another platform with such a fully featured OS in a cell phone. It is very much UNIX in the palm of your hand.

Well UNIX in the sense that the kernel and many other parts come directly from Mac OS. Currently iPhone OS is a little short on features to be officially called UNIX.

In the end I'm tired of this Mac OS / IPhone OS debate Which is a waste of time. It is a given that what ever drives the tablet will have a different visual interface. That simply due to the larger screen and more capable hardware. For Apple the bigger issue would be how you market the device and avoid consummer confusion, that requires that the device be in one family or the other. An ARM based device clearly requires something derived from iPhone OS in that case.


Dave
post #144 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Have you ever used a fart app on the desktop?

Nope! I'm perfectly capably of producing my own gas
Quote:
Or maybe a sound effects board? The apps are poor quality. They have maybe 10 PSP-quality games out of over 40,000 games.

I don't know about that the few games I've downloaded are pretty innovative. On the other hand I'm not a big time gamer.
Quote:

Asking that question is like asking why people still go to the Cinema or watch TV when Youtube has hundreds of millions of videos. Not all content is created equal.

I've never said all contact is created equal. The point is there is a wide variety available for iPhone and some of it is very good.
Quote:
The app store was actually noted as having a 75-90% piracy rate:

That doesn't condemn the fact that app store works very well for many developers.

It does say a lot about the state of morality in this day and age.
Quote:
The competition to drive app prices to rock bottom means little profit per app and unless a small-time developer puts out some money on advertising, the app gets lost in a sea of 120,000+ apps that are impossible to navigate using Apple's tools.

Low prices are a good thing. With something like 75 million devices out there you only need to capture a small percentage of users ever year to do very nicely.

As to advertising and marketing that is pretty much expected of any business. It certainly isn't Apples job to take on all marketing needs. There are two approaches to app store, you are either there to make money or you are not. If you want to make money you are in business and need to work on success like any other business.
Quote:
Apple needs to have a premium app store section so we can at least see what apps the big developers are making.

That is simply ignorant.
Quote:
Apple simply charges $1,000 to host in that section and the problem is solved. If an app generates enough revenue from the junk pile, the developer can pay the $1,000 and move up to the premium section.

You seem to have a misplaced sense of responsibility. Apple is a distributor of apps for developers. It is not Apples place to market, price an app nor develop customers. That is the app developers responsibility. It is great that they feature an app from time to time, provide search tools and the like but their ability is limited.

In any event this whine about the pricing of apps on app store is totally stupid. Price your app and market it accordingly. Either you find a group of users willing to invest in that app or you don't. In any event it is pretty clear that if you successfully deliver an app, that attracks a strong user base, you will be very successful even with low pricepoints.


Dave
post #145 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

But no one, that I know of, would limit themselves to searching Apple's site to identify software that they might be interested in running on their Mac.

No but desktop apps require more development effort and have to either be more substantial or very good at a few tasks to be viable desktop apps so the rubbish ones get weeded out pretty fast or simply don't exist. Small apps are replaced by a widget. iphone apps typically only do what a widget does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I guess we just have different shopping habits, then. I don't go onto Amazon with no particular product in mind and get frustrated because I can't figure out what's good, or because there are too many items. I generally have some idea of what I'm looking for, and use external sources to narrow it down. Then I can do a pretty specific search.

Hardware is different from software though as there are pretty well-defined categories and brands as well as price brackets and the objects fulfill specific needs. The majority of the time when I browse, there's a task that only a specific product will satisfy. Say I need a toaster for example. I check the category for kitchen appliances then toasters and list the models by price. Then check the features, brands and reviews and weigh it up.

With software, there are categories but they are usually only defined for games and it's very much hit or miss and with such an overwhelming amount of poor software, good usable apps get lost in there. Suffice to say, few people are impressed with the App Store offerings so I don't see them being a big sell for the slate. I couldn't care less about running any of the App Store apps on my desktop; the same is not true in reverse.

Let's say the slate comes out at $499 and you buy it and it does the core functions very well. Then you start doing a job that requires you to upload pictures, even make adverts on eBay. All of a sudden, the slate can't do your core tasks. That can apply to any number of software functions. That uncertainty doesn't exist on a full-featured system.
post #146 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

No! Frankly nobody has said that, but the OS will be derived from it in a sense. The reality is iPhone OS as we know it came from a tablet OS project that got put on ice so that iPhone could be done.

I'm not sure if you're actually disagreeing with me. In fact while I have no problem understanding what you're saying in your post I don't get why you're saying it to me, it doesn't seem to respond to what I've said.

My comment was that the OS that the tablet will use, whatever it's named, is going to be a significant release. I see iPhone OS 3.2 as a much smaller jump, and can't imagine it would have code for the 'iSlate'. To me, that'll make the Slate OS named iPhone OS 4.0 or iSlate OS 1.0 or something similar, NOT iPhone OS 3.2.

There is rumor that DOES SAY iPhone OS 3.2 has been delayed because it has too many references to the iSlate within it. That (and the comment made by the poster I was replying to) was what I didn't agree with.

Then again, perhaps we are about to GET the next iPhone OS, 5 months early. That's still no reason not to have released bug fixes for the last couple of months.

Quote:
This is what has really pissed me off about your post. Mac OS and iPhone OS already share or have much in common. Many of the APIs and Frameworks are exactly the same. Others are slightly trimmed for size. The only major difference is the framework for user apps and a system interface that hides much of the underlying Unix foundation. Finally many legacy APIs have been dropped on iPhone OS.

Yep agreed totally. So what pisses you off about my post?

edit: On rereading what I wrote - I said that it's possible iPhone OS 4.0, Snow Leopard, and iSlate 1.0 will share the same foundations different interfaces. You may have misread that. Note that this was in contrast to the implication that the slate would run iPhone OS 4.0 directly (which I believed the rumour implied). It's a given that the iPhone and Snow Leopard are both based on OSX.

Quote:
I don't wish to sound hostile but I keep hearing this refrain and frankly it is wearing. It is not like Apple hides information about the OS'es. When you talk about underlying foundation to many of us that implies that part of the OS under the user interface. In the case of iPhone it is the depth of the support that has attracked many to the platform. There really isn't another platform with such a fully featured OS in a cell phone. It is very much UNIX in the palm of your hand.

Well UNIX in the sense that the kernel and many other parts come directly from Mac OS. Currently iPhone OS is a little short on features to be officially called UNIX.

Yep, agreed. Again, I didn't say anything about that. You have read something into my post that I simply didn't say (or think).

Quote:
In the end I'm tired of this Mac OS / IPhone OS debate Which is a waste of time. It is a given that what ever drives the tablet will have a different visual interface. That simply due to the larger screen and more capable hardware.

Of course. But it will have a name.

And back to my original point from which this sprang - I don't think that the lack of recent updates to the iPhone OS are evidence that we are about to see a major upgrade of the iPhone OS that has all the tablet functionality built in. And thus they delay until they've announced the slate.

However, there is a flaw to my logic. It's possible that iPhone OS 3.2 has sync functions that refer to syncing to the tablet in some way, so Apple has held off on its release. Still that seems like a bad reason to delay a minor release with some important bug fixes to reception, it implies that really stuffed up the timing of something.

Quote:
For Apple the bigger issue would be how you market the device and avoid consummer confusion, that requires that the device be in one family or the other. An ARM based device clearly requires something derived from iPhone OS in that case.

I would think it'll share much much more with the iPhone than with the Mac.

I really don't get why you're pissed off and hostile.
Perhaps misdirected? But if it is at me, please explain a whole lot better what you think I've said.
post #147 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

With software, there are categories but they are usually only defined for games and it's very much hit or miss and with such an overwhelming amount of poor software, good usable apps get lost in there. Suffice to say, few people are impressed with the App Store offerings so I don't see them being a big sell for the slate. I couldn't care less about running any of the App Store apps on my desktop; the same is not true in reverse.

I agree that the App store needs to categorize better. And showcase the higher rating apps in some way. But the apps are quite functional and useful in many ways. The more expensive apps seem to be much more functional too.

Quote:
Let's say the slate comes out at $499 and you buy it and it does the core functions very well. Then you start doing a job that requires you to upload pictures, even make adverts on eBay. All of a sudden, the slate can't do your core tasks. That can apply to any number of software functions. That uncertainty doesn't exist on a full-featured system.

What happens if you don't think of the slate as a "PC" at all though?

If you think of the slate as a laptop (without a keyboard), then it'll look pretty limited. Then again, if you think of a laptop as a slate (with a keyboard) the laptop can also look pretty limited.

I assume you're criticising the app store model itself, rather than slate though. In that Apple controls what can and can't be released, AND they provide the only method of searching through apps.

Apple will have no choice (for now). They have to stop all inappropriate mouse/keyboard-centric apps - they'll be heavily criticised for doing it, but the more they force new interface paradigms on developers and users the more they'll be able to chart the course of a new type of device (and stop it falling back into the "almost a PC" (previous tablet) realm). They need total control to do that - though I don't like the fact they can deny certain apps for little reason.
post #148 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockarollr View Post

Let's not fool ourselves here, folks. This "tablet" device is simply going to be a new "OOOO, AAAHH!" way for Apple to sell EVEN MORE apps and an extended array of iTunes content. The device has been designed to be nothing more than a conduit for more easy content revenue. Remember...this is all about delivering that "cheap for Apple" to produce content and producing the devices that will draw the customer in.

Let me sum it all up, the way I see it.

1) No recent updates to iPhone OS? Why? Too many references to the tablet that Apple didn't want leaked. Apple quietly holds off until the imminent "whole number" revision.

2) The tablet's OS is going to be a custom version of the iPhone OS - the OS will recognize which device it's being run on and either enable or disable features accordingly. The iPhone OS as it stands would not support all of the new gestures and capabilities of the new tablet - therefore a rewrite to support the tablet...viola...iPhone OS 4.0!

3) If you remember right, Apple just recently bought property and built a huge data center in North Carolina. Have you wondered what that is for? I guarantee it'll be tied to the content that will be offered up for this tablet as well as how it's delivered.

4) Revenue from iTunes and the App Store is just too damn easy for Apple. Let somebody else create the content, maintain control over that content, host the content on your own servers to help you maintain that control, create a new, super-hyped device to deliver the content to, take a 30% cut of everything...and then sit back and watch the money ROLL IN!!!

5) Apple knows that so far NetFlix is the dominant force in streaming video content into the home living room right now. Don't you think they want a piece of that? But we're talking Apple and Steve Jobs here. Apple doesn't want a piece of it...they want to DOMINATE in that market much like they eventually did with the music industry with the introduction of the iPod and iTunes. If anybody knows how to take complete, dominant control of an entire market in a short time frame - it's Steve Jobs. Apple will also be using their top position in digital content delivery to take advantage of the so-far mostly untapped market of interactive newspaper, magazine and "print media" subscriptions.

Huge East Coast data center + iTunes Store + App Store + LaLa acquisition + tablet = EXPANDED BUSINESS MODEL!

Older existing iPhones + brand new iPhone 4G + iPod touch + new iSlate device = LOTS OF WAYS TO CONSUME ALL OF THIS DIGITAL MEDIA!

Apple won't give the iSlate (or whatever it's going to be called) device a full blown version of OS X. No, Apple's too smart and business savvy for that. That's what they have the portable notebook products for! They're not going to eat into their own sales...they're going to CREATE new sales by expanding their portable product line with something they have more control over.

Is the picture starting to get a little clearer now?

A great post that goes very much in line with my thinking. Most of the people here concentrate on the wrong reasons for not having a proper OS on the Tablet, such as 'horrible user experience" etc. As if Apple were really thinking about the User as their uber-priority. The real reason for having an iPhone-like OS on the Tablet is going to be business-based.
The great things for the great, the abysses for the profound, the thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.
Reply
The great things for the great, the abysses for the profound, the thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.
Reply
post #149 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by nasdarq View Post

Most of the people here concentrate on the wrong reasons for not having a proper OS on the Tablet, such as 'horrible user experience" etc. As if Apple were really thinking about the User as their uber-priority. The real reason for having an iPhone-like OS on the Tablet is going to be business-based.

Absolutely Apple's main priority is to make things good for their business. At the moment introducing innovative and different takes on devices are the things that make Apple stand out.

But making the user the focus of design is a very large part of the success of their business. Other companies simply do not take the extra time to make things right for the user, or decide they've done that far earlier than Apple does.

Apple knows that making this thing entirely focussed on a new user experience, one that matches what a tablet can do well (instead of matching what people do on laptops) is necessary to be a success and will make them money. They also know they have huge amounts of content they want us to buy - and it seems these 2 goals fit well together ... and thus a product is born.

Apple is not a noble company doing only the right thing. Like I'd like to see them let devices like Palm Pilot sync to iTunes (and even sell content to them!) but they don't. It's one reason I'm glad there's a big ecosystem of competition who can help drive things forward in different ways to Apple.
post #150 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by nasdarq View Post

A great post that goes very much in line with my thinking. Most of the people here concentrate on the wrong reasons for not having a proper OS on the Tablet, such as 'horrible user experience" etc. As if Apple were really thinking about the User as their uber-priority. The real reason for having an iPhone-like OS on the Tablet is going to be business-based.

Im not following your logic. Besides the fact that Apples products have always first focused on the consumer side of things, businesses have users. If Apple is going to make a tablet that people want (ie: try to sell a whole lot and make barrels of money) they need to make it work the way they made the iPod and iPhone interfaces work, by making it easy for the consumer to use. This means catering to the input and output of the device, not shoehorning Windows or shmearing a mobile OS designed for a screen 1/9th the size and 1/4 th the performance into a tablet device.

These are just dumb.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #151 of 156
Yeah, I'm not really grasping the distinction between "making a product that people really like because it's easy and fun to use so they'll buy it" and "making a product based on business criteria."

Is it possible that you think that Apple is going to design a Slate around some notion of profiting from media sales, while remaining indifferent to the quality of the user experience? Because I assure you, those to things are not even different, much less mutually exclusive.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #152 of 156
TUAW guys got it right (1) (2). It's rather hybrid OS (most probably compiled for ARM platform; although, a couple of other options isn't unpossible), which yields the maximum revenue on the target market.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #153 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockarollr View Post

Let's not fool ourselves here, folks. This "tablet" device is simply going to be a new "OOOO, AAAHH!" way for Apple to sell EVEN MORE apps and an extended array of iTunes content.

Apple makes the most of its money from hardware sales, pretty much weakens your argument right off.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #154 of 156
Well. As soon as we're set right up in figuring out the anticipated image of future Tablet OS, basing upon its target use case, we can predict where the distinction between Tablet and iPhone OS may actually lay:
  • Obvious native system-wide PDF and printing support,
  • Unrestricted multitasking,
  • Light productivity applications (design-related ones as a must) with backing frameworks,
  • Full and native iChat support,
  • ...

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #155 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

Absolutely Apple's main priority is to make things good for their business. At the moment introducing innovative and different takes on devices are the things that make Apple stand out.

But making the user the focus of design is a very large part of the success of their business. Other companies simply do not take the extra time to make things right for the user, or decide they've done that far earlier than Apple does.

Apple knows that making this thing entirely focussed on a new user experience, one that matches what a tablet can do well (instead of matching what people do on laptops) is necessary to be a success and will make them money. They also know they have huge amounts of content they want us to buy - and it seems these 2 goals fit well together ... and thus a product is born.

Apple is not a noble company doing only the right thing. Like I'd like to see them let devices like Palm Pilot sync to iTunes (and even sell content to them!) but they don't. It's one reason I'm glad there's a big ecosystem of competition who can help drive things forward in different ways to Apple.

Of course, they have to make a profit and do so at the best cost possible. True is also that they care about the user experience more, on average, than many other gadget companies. My preoccupation was precisely with the people on these boards that sometimes seem to forget that Apple owes their success to their business thinking, first and foremost.
The great things for the great, the abysses for the profound, the thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.
Reply
The great things for the great, the abysses for the profound, the thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.
Reply
post #156 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Im not following your logic. Besides the fact that Apples products have always first focused on the consumer side of things, businesses have users. If Apple is going to make a tablet that people want (ie: try to sell a whole lot and make barrels of money) they need to make it work the way they made the iPod and iPhone interfaces work, by making it easy for the consumer to use. This means catering to the input and output of the device, not shoehorning Windows or shmearing a mobile OS designed for a screen 1/9th the size and 1/4 th the performance into a tablet device.

These are just dumb.


I absolutely prefer the bottom photo to the top one
The great things for the great, the abysses for the profound, the thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.
Reply
The great things for the great, the abysses for the profound, the thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › ARM-powered Apple tablet called 'iPhone on steroids'