Tim Cook admits Apple may further converge iOS & OS X, Macs could run on ARM CPUs - Page 2

I apologize.

I am seeing a lot of points here including this response causing me to pause and re-evaluate my position.

I don't know if you read Daring Fireball but John Gruber got a private event last week and said this:
I wholeheartedly believe that is the absolutely correct way to view this.

Intel wishes -- but highly unlikely that Apple would transition iOS to intel, for numerous reasons.

Intel have hardly won any favours with Apple by actively promoting and subsidising competition OEMs for MacBook Air.

Apple would be foolhardy to put themselves at the mercy of Intel.

Once Intel were monopoly sole supplier to Apple they would doubtless return to their old ways of exploiting their monopoly by overcharging.

One of the reasons Intel has failed to gain market share from ARM in the mobile sector is that OEMs are very reluctant to put themselves at the mercy of Intel's monopoly price exploitation. With ARM chips there is huge competition amongst numerous different chipmakers.

For years Intel have been announcing how they were going to start stealing mobile market share from ARM, all of which boasts have failed to materialise. Intel always claim they are catching up/overtaking ARM battery saving capabilities comparing their next generation of Intel chips with ARM's current chips. The problem for Intel is that ARM are not standing still but continuously upgrading their chip capabilities. In their pipeline ARM have 32/64 Bit multi-core chips (8 core and possibly 16 Core) 22 and 28 nano chips! Dream on Intel!

If Apple were to migrate to Intel that would mean Apple sacrificing their own chip design capabilities, recently enhanced by their Israeli Flash memory design capabilities. Why on each would Apple throw away the huge competitive advantage of being able to design their own chips to gain maximum efficiency with their OS software?

Far more likely is that Apple will migrate Macs to ARM Chips - Apple designed 64 Bit, 8 Multi-Core, 22 or 28 nano, with super efficient Flash.......sounds juicy to me!

Me confused?

But does this mean that every developer needs to develop a full MacOS app and then add the IOS elements before they can sell it through the App Store?

I think you are confusing what 'is possible' with what 'is practical'. Its like the lean forward and lean back argument vis a vis computers and telly. Its about context. To have a fully fledged word processing app on an iPhone or iPad I don't think makes sense. Its like the truck v the car argument. You don't need a crane, a trailer and 30" wheels on your daily car.

Th short list of AI posters that you thought might point that out.

Exactly!

Perhaps it should be IOS across the board. The 'I' should stand for Internet with a capital 'I'. Then we would have: IOS small, med, large and XL for the ITV.

Amen brother! ZFS? HFS+ is so antiquated.... Is it just me or does it seem like mountain lion is not going to bring ANY imporovements over lion or even snow leopard? Even lion was a very small step forward I think. I really dont think autosaving was made the best possible way in lion. It just made me uncomfiortable about my documents because I modify many times documents but need the old document aswell..

The day I cant use the terminal is the last day on os X for me. Not use bsd or linux software or java software. It absolutely makes no sense why they would take away this possibility but it may come someday if we dont fight it back. I wont swollow dumbing down os X with no alternatives. I think Lion has a lot of features i dont use or care of.... The istallation is a nightmare compared to snow leopard from a preinstalled image. I cant even make a deasent universal installer image nowadays which took 2 minutes and a few clicks earlier. I think lion is still going to bite me in ways if i like to reinstall a system...

And addressbook? What the fuck happoned with that one in lion???!!! Pig bastards!!!

We're beginning to see the first implementations of a new kind of file management:

Simply stated: Why should the [average] user know or care where his files are (and when/how they are saved/versioned/backed up...). We have computers that can do all that.

1) The OS (Lion) has versioning

2) Modern apps have autosaving

3) iCloud will evolve from an option [to store files] to the default

4) cross-device sync is already in place for many apps

5) some apps, like FCP X, use a built-in SQL db as part of their file structure -- future versions will allow collaboration by combining of these "individual" dbs into a cloud/server based multiuser collaboration db -- you can't change the Title on Clip 3 in Project B because Bill is editing that Title -- though, you can add video effects or edit sound...


You don't need to take it with you -- if you can access it from anywhere...


...think iTunes match -- each of our computers and iDevices have access to 16,177 items (I just checked). These are stored across 5 computers, and all accessible on any iDevice from iCloud -- wherever we are.

I prefer OS-X, or xOS, for that matter, to Mac OS. I was using it because the X eol is getting ever nearer. aOS, perhaps? though that would get al messed up with IOS. I suspect there are a lot of names and version being bandied about at Apple these days.

Have you ever wanted to upload a picture to a website using your iPhone or iPad? You can't do it without a special app specifically for that website. That is why Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, etc. sites that use a lot of uploaded photos had to have their own app. I don't think iOS/iCloud file methodologies are necessarily an improvement over traditional file management. I would rather have access to the file system in addition to cloud storage.

You should make your post stupid proof, because it makes no sense.

No features are being removed from ML, it isn't being dumbed down. Features are being added, which leverages the innovations and usage patterns from the mobile space, providing tighter integration of data between platforms and seamless syncing. I don't see how you can't understand that most people will largely benefit from this. You want stupid proof? Go look at Windows 8.

What is that new icon next to Spotlight?

AGREED - nail meet hammer

99% of people have no idea what you're taking about. These are the people Apple are making products for and the market they are appealing to- not you. Anyway, keep your panties on. Terminal isn't going away anytime soon. To a clear-headed person that realizes now everyone in the world is like them, Apple is making all the right moves. There will always be people like you who don't agree, but that doesn't mean you should expect Apple to cater their product decisions and strategy to the niche market you're in.

In what way are they dumbing down OS X? Surely, improving and standardizing the UI across several device classes is strengthening the OS -- not dumbing it down. As are, automatic versioning, backup restart, location services, AirPlay, Core Media APIs...

I can still do all the things I could do with every prior version of OS X (Rosetta excepted) -- and a whole lot more (a lot of that is due to iOS features being rewritten and reported to OS X).

I..what..can't process... *head explodes*

I think this is the first time in my history on the internet where I have read such a statement. I'm not even joking.

That is how you access Notifications. It looks just like it does on iOS with the gray cloth background except that instead of sliding done from the top it slides the desktop over from right to left to reveal your notifications.

The one significant change I like about Notifications on ML over iOS is that it slides the desktop over to reveal Notifcations behind the desktop. Whereas on iOS the Notifications come in front of the desktop. This is significant and I think wrong in iOS because that background should indicate what is underneath, not on top. Perhaps that's me niggling but I think it's an important differentiation.

I don't like the term merging as I see no reason for the two OS,s to become one. However there are many features missing from the Mac. People should see this as increasing functionality and data sharing.


The more integrated the two platforms become the more likely people will give up their laptops in favor of a desktop and an iOS devices or two. It isn't a family resemblance that we are looking for but the transparent access to data. In fact I'd go so far as to say that Apple would be better off if the corresponding apps didn't look too much alike.

I will need to check it out. However in just the last few minutes of reading about Mountain Lion I've been suitably impressed. Many of the improvements are exactly what I'm looking for.

It makes sense because the "converged" OS will have a common code base.

You do not need to have extra UIs (and other components -- either Mac or Touch) on any device that does not use them.

Think about an app like Mail that runs on an iPhone and an iPad (as well as a Mac and a Web browser). The Same code presents a different UI depending on the device it runs.

Apple is fully capable of modularizing UIs and other OS capabilities so that only required code can be downloaded and used on the target device.

Hilarious how pcmag has much more positive impressions from 10.8 than most Apple fansites. This almost reads like Apple PR:


Some of you need to get some perspective and realizes how cynical you've become with anything to do with Apple, imposing your own xenophobic personal needs/wants and completely missing the big picture. And this rebuked much of the concern-trolling here:


Amazing how everyone is bitching about the baseless 'iOSification' of OSX, yet Microsoft is slapping a tablet/phone interface as the default for a desktop.

If anything we will have a far more powerful OS with these added features. Note the word added, it isn't like they are taking away anything.


At this point I've seen nothing to indicate standardizing of the UI other than the scrolling fix. Rather what i see is the addition of many new features. Features are not Ui's. I suspect that this is where many are confused, some of these features would have made it to the Mac even if iOS didn't exist.

Yeah I'm not sure how any of those could be indicators of a dumbed down OS. Rather they should be seen as additional capability or modernization of old features.

Yeah that whole lot more is what is being missed by many. I guess if your life revolves around your web browser you can't grasp the value of these features. It looks like you and I on the other hand are more of the mindset of what is taking Apple so long.

Pray do explain to us what comprises the "big picture".

I'm still confused by this though? "I assume I was only short list of name, too."

You are talking about two completely OS philosphies. It's one thing to have iOS for iPhone/Touch and iOS for iPad create universal apps because the code base is so similar. That's just an app with the same basic, primary I/O foundation that is CocoaTouch.

Mac OS X uses Aqua and even though Apple is trying to make them look familiar they still act like a desktop OS app, not an embedded OS app that can't be windowed or resized. It's really just an iOS UI coating over Mac OS X Aqua, but it's not pulling CocoaTouch onto Mac OS and dropping Aqua, hence it's not a converging OS... jut converging aspects within the OS.

And that's just some minor surface points. That isn't even the core ways in which the OS functions. iOS doesn't need drivers for all those Mac ports on the side. It doesn't need drivers for USB connected printers and hard drives. There is a world of difference in the core of the OS that was stripped away to make iOS because it's not needed and never will be.

Bottom line: Apple hasn't dropped the Mac or dumbed it down. What they've done is add continuity between iOS and Mac OS which makes sense as their iOS devices are used by a lot more people than Macs. This isn't Apple dropping the Mac, this is Apple focusing on the Mac. Expect some major Mac HW updates as they are clearly readying to take the platform to a whole... 'nother... level.

Oops, iPhone autocorrect and my lack of proofreading. I meant to write, "I assume I was on the short list of name, too." in regards to those who you think might point out your longstanding HDTV wish.

I consider knowing where my files are to be very important. This allows for the use of the file system to organize the files according to project or other factors. One thing that I've quickly grown to hate about iOS is the inability to organize files. If you get past a certain number of files Pages and Numbers just suck on the iPad.

If only that where true! Every app using iCloud needs to maintain a local copy for when iCloud isn't around. More so the apps need to be able to sync data files upon reconnection.

Yeah I'm thinking I don't like that concept at all. It isn't that I don't like the concept of iCloud for sharing across devices, it is a good concept. The problem is you won't always have access to that cloud storage. Apps need to transparently deal with this issue and that means always having a local copy of everything on iCloud.

Testing is normal for such a large company. If Intel was just sitting on this, that would be one thing. I'd like to see how the two compare a couple years from now. By that I mean chip for chip at that time, not what Intel makes today versus what ARM might be able to make later years later. Some of the math posted on this in the past has been particularly bad.


The major flaw with this logic is that you don't know how these factors would look if you required a chip that would perform comparable to the current Air. At this point we still don't have much beyond speculation and hype, so it's not really a guarantee at this point.



In terms of pricing, power consumption, performance, etc. ARM's current competition in that area has involved atom chips. Should you wish to scale up an ARM chip to be appropriate for an OSX based machine, you'd no longer be looking at such a cheap price, and you are unlikely to see the price charged by Apple fall due to this.

Agree completely!


Maybe the proper way to look at it is that Apple is dumbing-up OS X -- so that it can make [non-computer] users comfortable with their [iDevice] apps running on the desktop. *


Just imagine how difficult it will be for someone who is proficient on an iPad to sit down and use a mouse for the first time...

Remember *

No, No, No... Don't look at the mouse -- look at the little cursor on the screen...

No, I don't know why they call it a cursor... you can call it the little arrow, if you feel more comfortable...

No, I don't know why the little arrow becomes a little glove -- maybe it means the computer is cold...

No, No, If you roll the mouse to the end of your desk... just lift up the mouse and move it to the middle of your desk.

No, the cur- eh, little arrow will remember where it was, and not follow you to the middle of the desk...

No, trust me, it'll remember...

Oh, there you go... I should have been more clear... Lift up the mouse and don't set it down until you get to the center of the desk...

Don't set it down, yet!

OK, take a moment to stop crying... now roll the little arrow over that little button...

OK, Now click the button...

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear -- press down on the mouse so that the little arrow presses the button...

No, I don't know why you can't just reach and press the button with your finger...

Well, no, they don't call it "click and point" -- it just doesn't make sense that way...


* Apologies to Bob Newhart.


There is some standardizing of the UI -- some touch gestures on trackpads, MagicMouse and MagicPad...

But, I should have been more specific -- the "look and feel" standardization -- some in the OS and the desktop, but mostly in the look and feel of the basic apps. It will be nice (less unsettling) to be able to run Calendar or Contacts on a Mac or an iDevice and not need to make the mental adjustment because the app looks and works differently.

It isn't so much an ARM issue as it is a SoC issue. Apple won't switch to Intel on iOS devices until. It can build exactly what it needs into a SoC. this will only become more important in the future.

Now you may say that Intel could do SoC and that may be true, but right now there are huge hurdles to breach at Intel.

As to TB it is simply a question of how much of the IP Apple owns or is willing to license. There is no technical reason keeping TB off ARM.

But you or I nor most here are not typical users

I do not believe that Apple will remove needed function (like control of where your files go) for sophisticated users.

They will just hide it from view for the typical user who does not need it -- like ~/Library in Lion.


iCloud is a 1.0 release... I believe with a little expansion of capability it will satisfy the needs of most users -- those who can't surf, mail, socialize without an Internet connection.


For the more sophisticated user, I believe there needs to be an intermediate device between the local devices and the cloud. The primary function of this device would be to stage your files between local storage and the cloud.

When you create a file, the device creates a local backup and change backups ala TimeMachine -- and periodically uploads that to the cloud.

Based on infrequency of reference, the file may eventually migrate to the cloud. Six months from now, when you need to work on those files again they migrate back to local storage.

I believe this would give you the best of both worlds:

1) Local access to all the files you currently (or plan to) use.

2) Everything available on the cloud

3) Mobile access to either the local store or the cloud


The staging device(s) would be an A6 running iOS built into a RAID like the Pegasus.

As to the file system vs no file system: iOS is admittedly limited [poor] -- but OS X isn't much better... there needs to be something in between and better... and I'm thinking the long-term solution includes an SQL db to help you navigate and access files... Like porn -- I can't define it -- but I'll know it when I see it.

They are not dumbing down Mac OS X. Everything that was there is still there. They are merely borrowing naming conventions and UI elements from iOS.

iOS WILL NOT replace OS X. iOS doesn't even support virtual memory. iOS is OS X for devices with very limited resources and will remain as such and Mac OS X will continue to be designed for systems with many, many more (unlimited) resources.

What I think will eventually happen, is Apple releasing a new of line computers that are very similar in user experience as current iOS devices, but make use of a keyboard and (trackpad). Not meant to replace Macs, but meant for people who aren't comfortable with tablets, but also don't necessarily need a super-powerful computer either. I believe that's why they released full-screen mode with Lion. This is the start of transitioning developers towards this type of application design.

Interesting quotes... makes me glad we don't have:
OSX home
OSXhome premium
OSX ultimate
OSX training
OSX mobile
OSX xp

The evolution of the former Mac interface is gradual, feature driven and seems to be done with a tremendous amount of thought.
Having a CEO that vaguely speaks of the direction of company is a positive overall. While mystery is more exciting, business likes to know what is coming, and looks as if Cook may be able to retain the theatrical excitement created by Apple as well as indicate to business what is going to happen... which is... we just sold more iOS devices then Mac OS devices over the last 30 years, we are going to kick MS butt from here on out, get on board, all your employees want Apple products.

Apple hates professionals.

That's good to hear. I think TB would be great on an iPad for lots of uses.

In any event, should Apple wish to use TB on ARM, they should be able to do it for less than the competition -- even if they must license part of the technology from Intel.

It's possible, but I see the potential of dedicated computer space in a house or apartment becoming less common going forward.



My understanding is that TB is owned by Intel, and Apple simply owns mini displayport which doesn't have an associated licensing fee, although it's only appeared on a few displays at most outside of Apple branded units. I'm kind of surprised they mentioned this at all considering where ARM is at today. It's still far enough out it's difficult to extrapolate where ARM will be in a few years or what it would be like if scaled up to be suitable as a laptop replacement. The issue is that most people seem to just draw tangents on performance growth rather than trying to analyze a greater portion of the trend in performance acceleration. This would probably make more sense if I drew up a nice graph..... maybe later.

Somehow I don't think it would be an automatic rejection if leaving thunderbolt behind was the only snag. Apple has randomly ditched things in the past.


I'm not sure current infrastructure would hold up to these kinds of bandwidth requirements.





Apple provided a connector and debuted it on their machines. They don't seem to own any of it seeing as their mini displayport can be circumvented. Neither of these things seem to carry an associated licensing fee.

Anand makes a solid argument as to why iDevices won't get TB.

• http://www.anandtech.com/show/5425/w...e-anytime-soon

Even I didn't realize the max transfer rate was "that" low.

Good read!

Thx for the link!