It's annoying when AI writers try to sound all high-falutin' because they use a word or phrase they heard banged around on the internet without having any fucking clue what it means.
Talk about high-falutin! It's annoying when people can't understand how language works, and incorrectly and pedantically think that only one definition can be applied to a word or term.
This is obviously used in a different manner, that is made clear by the text and supported by the definitions of the words.
PS: I like how you use "Google" as a verb. Funny how language evolves and some choose to evolve with it, but only selectively.
Talk about high-falutin! It's annoying when people can't understand how language works, and incorrectly and pedantically think that only one definition can be applied to a word or term.
This is obviously used in a different manor, that is made clear by the text and supported by the definitions of the words.
PS: I like how you use "Google" as a verb. Funny how language evolves and some choose to evolve with it, but only selectively.
Sure language evolves. And sometimes a mistake repeated often enough becomes the new word (such as 'peruse').
But the word or phrase has to be repeated to become the new norm. It doesn't become the new definition because one person says so--that's just a mistake. And if you Google or Wikipedia (yes, I verbified them, as millions before me have) for the phrase, you'll have a hard time finding it used in any other way.
But I guess you do as you say, as you have redefined 'manor' to mean 'manner' in your post above.
Apple is a great example of a business that actively seeks to out-innovate itself. It did it with the iPod Mini (replacing it w/ the Nano) and now it is on the cusp of doing it again ( replacing Desktops and Laptops w/ iOS devices). I don't think it will happen in the next year, but I can tell you as VP of IT for our company of 70 people, and as a web developer for the last 14 years, I have been actively pushing most of our corporate infrastructure (core apps etc...) to the cloud, so that in the next few years, it becomes easy to replace our systems w/ smaller systems.
How I envision it going is that Apple in merging the 2 OS's as mentioned in the article, bring parity to them in Core Services, only needs to add the classic OS X UI layer as a toggle to iOS (w/ iOS elements integrated naturally). Then when I bring my iPhone into work, I plug into a dock of sometime (or even just wireless) and it will talk to my keyboard, mouse and big monitor, it switches to the classic OS X UI, rather than the one I see when I undock my phone as a phone.
Will this work for myself actually, um no (I have an Octo-Mac Pro w/ 16GB RAM that I push to the limits daily) but for most of my office, who web surf, use our corp apps (soon to be web-based) and email (already in gApps), and use a few features of Word and Excel, I could nearly push them to an iPhone that docked today. So in a few years when iPhone 6 launches with nearly the power of the slower Core2 Duos Dell systems we have now, it would totally be feasible to push my userbase over, and I wouldn't have to supply systems anymore :-) Just the monitor/mice/keyboards which last forever, it is the systems which get outdated fast.
Granted we are a rather nimble smaller company, but I see this enabling us to be all the more nimble, and literally have our systems always with us, be it as a phone similar to how an iPhone is today, or in the office docked up (finally Apple will have a decent dock-able portable :-) ).
Now to comment on the native apps vs. web apps. I think where Apple is headed, and I would be inclined to agree, is they are pushing the web to be cloud-data storage, but app use as native. In the older days (and in many ways still is), data was stored at my house, or at my office, and w/o a VPN etc... I couldn't access it. All this cloud talk as been all about doing away w/ such restrictions on data access. But where everyone thinks it should go is as web apps.
Sure they work and look roughly similar regardless of the platform, they have the same issue as Java apps (which I hate) because they don't "feel" right. Sure I can get at the data, but gApps is horrid (nicer in a few ways, but generally built by geeks, not designers/UI experts) compared to many native Mac apps. But instead, we now have a device that is always on/around us, it has the app (iPhone, iPad, Mac, Windows, etc...), but the data is stored remotely. Sure you can use the web-app if you must, but most native apps on iPhone are so much better (as evidenced by the success of the App Store), that why even bother w/ the web app version if you have a local app that can handle the cloud data. As just one example, I want my Quicken data accessible anywhere I want, pulled from the cloud (from some server) not just stored locally and sync'd constantly or whatever between all my devices, but get rid of the idea of the "data lives locally" and instead look at it as it is temporarily stored locally, but lives cloud-side. Now where ever I am, I have access to my data store, with whichever device I want, and it all just works :-)
Those are some of the ideas running through my head as I read this and other articles on iPhone, and where it is headed.
Why would they drop a platform with costs in the thousands for the highest end models, for a device that sells for $299?
Don't assume that future versions of touch screen devices will be limited in features and price. The newer high end iPad type devices will have the same capabilities of todays Mac Books and more features than are available now. That is how technology changes. Things get better and better. Those devices with better capability and greater capacity will cost plenty of money. You can bet on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Sorry, but this is just a ridiculous scenario based on an utter lack of understanding of all relevant issues.
The iOS and OS X are evolving. Right now the capabilities are being merged. In a couple of years OS X or OS XI (whatever they call it then) will be fully capable of running iOS apps.
The keyboards and track pads will be dumped for touch screens but the units will still connect to extension keyboards for those who want that feature. Just like todays iPad and iPod Touch.
?Grand Central on iOS means multicore iPads and iPhones.
It would be a nice rumor to spreand; why nobody talk about this ?
Bappo
I was intrigued, too. But at least for those of us who didn't attend WWDC, there's precious little info about the multiple processing capabilities of the graphics part of today's A4; audio processing might similarly be shuttled this way to utilize a specialized codec chip.
Maybe there's already some multiprocessing goodness going on, or able to, once OS4 is turned on. Lots of unknowns here.
Anyway, Apple doesn't talk in public much about features that might be useful in a future product. Devs gotta know about 'em but that's as far as I think you'll see Apple go.
Hate to burst your economic bubble, but they do, and will continue to, make plenty of money from consumers with Macs.
....Hate to burst your view of the future bubble, but you'll note that it includes a Mac Pro in your closet, which may just as easily, and far more likely, be an iMac, Mac Mini, or MacBook on your desktop.
I didn't say it didn't... most of you people don't see _my_ Life... 3 kids, a wife, 3 jobs under one roof. I would love a house with 3 iPads, a couple iPhones, a Mini/TV media center, and a central 'data center' (print/backup/storage/rendering/compilation) for my house.... a couple keyboards, and a 20mb/sec service line to the world. Total cost... a heck of a lot less (TCO) than 8+ computers (5 personal, 3 work, 1 media, 1 backup, 1 spare).
I've been in this business since paper tape as a portable medium... I've been watching this progression for years... I never bought into the 'personal computer' to begin with (big iron guy), and Jobs' first flirtation with Mac OS X (NextSTEP) was on a diskless workstation. His goal was and is to take most of the technology away from the point of access, and move it back... at that time... to the data center... now... to the cloud.
'Personal' computers cost time and effort, that most consumer neither want to spend or do spend (see all the poorly configured/supported Window boxes out there)> Web and interaction should be on consumer grade devices based on your lifestyle (phone, pod, pad, laptop), but for efficiency, having a central 'center' for computing and media that is where all the management for the household is.
So, I see Apple moving more to a Mac Mini Stackable server environment, adding cores and disks as you need... with a big pipe to NorthCarolina where Apple serves up media, books (my university textbook sent to me whereever I'm at.
The personal 'device' is just a caching Netstation. Your 'home' computer is a local cache (iTunes library), the Net is the source. Media Center.
Guys... don't think about the past... think about the future... connect the dots that Apple has laid out for you.
As that happens... Mac OSX and systems like that will move back to be less consumer, and more 'appliances' and 'utility' (like your furnace, TV, washer), and your iOS will be your personal interface into the information net of your house business and world.
The 'Personal Computer' model was an anomaly... driven by antiquated delivery system for the mainframe. Look 5 years into the future... The difference between that and 1975 with VT52 terminals and DEC KL10s is a lot smaller than differences between managing a PC LAN and scaling it up to 6 billion people (the Microsoft and Sun Models).
So that said, I think most people will have a consumer web interface, and every household will have a couple house data centers (mac pros scaled into Mini chassis). The iMac is the developers workstation. Businesses will be on a similar model, but using the web interface connected to their datacenter (cloud). That's about it.
The concept of PC will move back to being a virtual computing engine in the Grand Central Cloud.
Stating feature parity doesn't mean that all features and aspects as similar.
I love this forum. Sometimes, especially, because people argue over the meaning of words and twist them up into pretzels.
------------------
Main Entry: 1par·i·ty
Pronunciation: \\ˈper-ə-tē, ˈpa-rə-\\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural par·i·ties
Etymology: Latin paritas, from par equal
Date: 1608
1 : the quality or state of being equal or equivalent
-------------------
Parity \\Par"i*ty\\, n. [L. paritas, fr. par, paris, equal: cf. F. parit['e]. See Pair, Peer an equal.]
1. The quality or condition of being equal or equivalent; a like state or degree; equality; equivalence; close correspondence; analogy; as, parity of reasoning. "No parity of principle." --De Quincey. [1913 Webster]
Equality of length and parity of numeration. --Sir T. Browne. [1913 Webster]
-------------------
par·i·ty 1 (pr-t)
n. pl. par·i·ties
1. Equality, as in amount, status, or value.
2. Functional equivalence, as in the weaponry or military strength of adversaries: "A problem that has troubled the U.S.-Soviet relationship from the beginning has been the issue of parity" (Charles William Maynes).
3. The equivalent in value of a sum of money expressed in terms of a different currency at a fixed official rate of exchange.
4. Equality of prices of goods or securities in two different markets.
-------------------
Plenty of others out there for anyone wanting to know how the word is defined in various dictionaries.
I've seen allot of people trying to make this argument valid, but it will always be the case that a desktop will be more powerful and upgradeable than any portable; period. There will always be a need to add cards for video, audio and IT upgrades. So if it's possible to put 4 cores in an iPad, the assumption must be that desktops won't evolve as well?
Desktops aren't going anywhere. It's a must that we can add (for example) Avid, Black Magic, AJA and Protools hardware to our workstations. It's also a must that we have superfast drive standards like dual channel SATA and fiber channel for uncompressed HD and 4k (now moving to 8K ) editing. Hardware support is essential no matter what Apple marketing wants the prosumer to believe. By virtue of form factor, portables will never be upgradeable and the hardware will never be as powerful as a desktop. I couldn't even imagine what an ipad with 32GB's of RAM and 32TB of storage would look like, but it would be a really funny mockup for any ambitious soul out there. and in the future desktops will probably be the first quantum computers and support TB's of RAM and PB's of some new superfast storage solution portables will have to catch up again and again. Not a problem though, because we will have "quantum macs". ... Or something like that anyway.
I contend that the tablet market Apple has recent popularized and made viable will show an increase in desktop sales. Anecdotally, I know of several people who have been longtime notebook users moving to an iPad and iMac/Mac Pro for their next purchase.
I contend that the tablet market Apple has recent popularized and made viable will show an increase in desktop sales. Anecdotally, I know of several people who have been longtime notebook users moving to an iPad and iMac/Mac Pro for their next purchase.
I agree. The iOS devices have been a better "reason" to switch to Apple desktops than the mini/ cube ever could have been.
... The 'Personal Computer' model was an anomaly... driven by antiquated delivery system for the mainframe. ...
Actually, no it wasn't. It was driven by the desire of some people to own their own computing power. A computer that was theirs to do as they wanted with it, when they wanted to, and to be in control of the computer and their data. The factors that made that desirable then, are, if anything, even more relevant now.
Then there's this talk of, "everything will be all touch screen and you'll just plug in a keyboard when you want to do 'serious' work." Well, first of all, you don't want to spend half an hour wiping all the finger prints off the screen before you can get down to that serious work. More importantly, that portable touchscreen device will never match the desktop device, not in screen real estate, not in computing power, not in the OS features that that computing power enables. Yes, portable touchscreen devices will advance to be quite powerful computers. At the same time, desktop devices will advance to be equally more powerful, and will always be ahead of the performance curve because they don't have the same power limitations, don't need to be miniaturized, heat isn't as important, etc., etc.
If I can access my data through the cloud, or through my own personal home or my company's private corporate cloud, why would I want to limit myself to the capabilities of my portable device. Wouldn't I rather sit down at my more powerful desktop machine, access the data I need over the network and take advantage of it's superior capabilities to be more productive than I could be on my necessarily smaller-screened, less capable tablet.
Sure there are some people who just use their computers as home entertainment systems, and maybe they'll be doing nothing but all touch screen computing at home, maybe even some of them at work. But there will always be things for which the power and ergonomics of a portable touch screen device are inadequate or inappropriate.
Those of us who don't think that desktops as a different class of system are going away aren't limited in our vision of the future. What limits one's vision of the future is to get caught up in touch screen hysteria so that you can't see anything else but that as the future. You limit your vision of the future by thinking that all we need to do is juice up an iPad with a couple more cores and full on multitasking and we'll have all the computing power any person would ever need. If that's how you see the future, how much RAM do you think you'll need with that?
I think the App Store's success over web apps pretty much shows how much Apple needs to worry about this particular "nightmare scenario". People simply prefer native apps over web apps.
People also want the option/ability to do work if they're NOT connected to the web. And also the feeling of control and security that your stuff and your work is WITH you, not floating around on some server somewhere.
Your argument makes no sense to me. It's not a one or the other situation here. In fact, Apple has gone out of their way to make the PC a necessary part of your digital lifestyle. All your iDevices are simply accessory satellite devices to your PC.
Even the iPad, which many talk about replacing the PC requires a PC to even use the first time. This was done on purpose as it's clearly designed to complement, not substitute.
I know some can only see things in black or white, but the Mac is a very important part of Apple's business and will continue to be so for a very long time.
Absolutely. The iPad and iPhone/iPod touch are satellites which free you from your desk/office/workstation.
I find it a bit stunning that so many people don't get that part of the iOS ecosystem.
That is one way you can interpret it, but you need to realize that language often has more than one definition and evolves more quickly than technology. English, in particular, is a funny language that way. You can use a very select and pedantic view of the word parity but the article is not incorrect as stated.
Can you provide a reliable source which defines the term in the way it was used by AI?
I know some can only see things in black or white, but the Mac is a very important part of Apple's business and will continue to be so for a very long time.
That itself is black or white.
The Mac is destined to fade. The portable devices are currently the main focus.
Comments
Google "feature parity". Jeez.
Or even Wikipedia.
It's annoying when AI writers try to sound all high-falutin' because they use a word or phrase they heard banged around on the internet without having any fucking clue what it means.
Talk about high-falutin! It's annoying when people can't understand how language works, and incorrectly and pedantically think that only one definition can be applied to a word or term.
This is obviously used in a different manner, that is made clear by the text and supported by the definitions of the words.
PS: I like how you use "Google" as a verb. Funny how language evolves and some choose to evolve with it, but only selectively.
Talk about high-falutin! It's annoying when people can't understand how language works, and incorrectly and pedantically think that only one definition can be applied to a word or term.
This is obviously used in a different manor, that is made clear by the text and supported by the definitions of the words.
PS: I like how you use "Google" as a verb. Funny how language evolves and some choose to evolve with it, but only selectively.
Sure language evolves. And sometimes a mistake repeated often enough becomes the new word (such as 'peruse').
But the word or phrase has to be repeated to become the new norm. It doesn't become the new definition because one person says so--that's just a mistake. And if you Google or Wikipedia (yes, I verbified them, as millions before me have) for the phrase, you'll have a hard time finding it used in any other way.
But I guess you do as you say, as you have redefined 'manor' to mean 'manner' in your post above.
How I envision it going is that Apple in merging the 2 OS's as mentioned in the article, bring parity to them in Core Services, only needs to add the classic OS X UI layer as a toggle to iOS (w/ iOS elements integrated naturally). Then when I bring my iPhone into work, I plug into a dock of sometime (or even just wireless) and it will talk to my keyboard, mouse and big monitor, it switches to the classic OS X UI, rather than the one I see when I undock my phone as a phone.
Will this work for myself actually, um no (I have an Octo-Mac Pro w/ 16GB RAM that I push to the limits daily) but for most of my office, who web surf, use our corp apps (soon to be web-based) and email (already in gApps), and use a few features of Word and Excel, I could nearly push them to an iPhone that docked today. So in a few years when iPhone 6 launches with nearly the power of the slower Core2 Duos Dell systems we have now, it would totally be feasible to push my userbase over, and I wouldn't have to supply systems anymore :-) Just the monitor/mice/keyboards which last forever, it is the systems which get outdated fast.
Granted we are a rather nimble smaller company, but I see this enabling us to be all the more nimble, and literally have our systems always with us, be it as a phone similar to how an iPhone is today, or in the office docked up (finally Apple will have a decent dock-able portable :-) ).
Now to comment on the native apps vs. web apps. I think where Apple is headed, and I would be inclined to agree, is they are pushing the web to be cloud-data storage, but app use as native. In the older days (and in many ways still is), data was stored at my house, or at my office, and w/o a VPN etc... I couldn't access it. All this cloud talk as been all about doing away w/ such restrictions on data access. But where everyone thinks it should go is as web apps.
Sure they work and look roughly similar regardless of the platform, they have the same issue as Java apps (which I hate) because they don't "feel" right. Sure I can get at the data, but gApps is horrid (nicer in a few ways, but generally built by geeks, not designers/UI experts) compared to many native Mac apps. But instead, we now have a device that is always on/around us, it has the app (iPhone, iPad, Mac, Windows, etc...), but the data is stored remotely. Sure you can use the web-app if you must, but most native apps on iPhone are so much better (as evidenced by the success of the App Store), that why even bother w/ the web app version if you have a local app that can handle the cloud data. As just one example, I want my Quicken data accessible anywhere I want, pulled from the cloud (from some server) not just stored locally and sync'd constantly or whatever between all my devices, but get rid of the idea of the "data lives locally" and instead look at it as it is temporarily stored locally, but lives cloud-side. Now where ever I am, I have access to my data store, with whichever device I want, and it all just works :-)
Those are some of the ideas running through my head as I read this and other articles on iPhone, and where it is headed.
Why would they drop a platform with costs in the thousands for the highest end models, for a device that sells for $299?
Don't assume that future versions of touch screen devices will be limited in features and price. The newer high end iPad type devices will have the same capabilities of todays Mac Books and more features than are available now. That is how technology changes. Things get better and better. Those devices with better capability and greater capacity will cost plenty of money. You can bet on that.
Sorry, but this is just a ridiculous scenario based on an utter lack of understanding of all relevant issues.
The iOS and OS X are evolving. Right now the capabilities are being merged. In a couple of years OS X or OS XI (whatever they call it then) will be fully capable of running iOS apps.
The keyboards and track pads will be dumped for touch screens but the units will still connect to extension keyboards for those who want that feature. Just like todays iPad and iPod Touch.
?Grand Central on iOS means multicore iPads and iPhones.
It would be a nice rumor to spreand; why nobody talk about this ?
Bappo
I was intrigued, too. But at least for those of us who didn't attend WWDC, there's precious little info about the multiple processing capabilities of the graphics part of today's A4; audio processing might similarly be shuttled this way to utilize a specialized codec chip.
Maybe there's already some multiprocessing goodness going on, or able to, once OS4 is turned on. Lots of unknowns here.
Anyway, Apple doesn't talk in public much about features that might be useful in a future product. Devs gotta know about 'em but that's as far as I think you'll see Apple go.
Hate to burst your economic bubble, but they do, and will continue to, make plenty of money from consumers with Macs.
....Hate to burst your view of the future bubble, but you'll note that it includes a Mac Pro in your closet, which may just as easily, and far more likely, be an iMac, Mac Mini, or MacBook on your desktop.
I didn't say it didn't... most of you people don't see _my_ Life... 3 kids, a wife, 3 jobs under one roof. I would love a house with 3 iPads, a couple iPhones, a Mini/TV media center, and a central 'data center' (print/backup/storage/rendering/compilation) for my house.... a couple keyboards, and a 20mb/sec service line to the world. Total cost... a heck of a lot less (TCO) than 8+ computers (5 personal, 3 work, 1 media, 1 backup, 1 spare).
I've been in this business since paper tape as a portable medium... I've been watching this progression for years... I never bought into the 'personal computer' to begin with (big iron guy), and Jobs' first flirtation with Mac OS X (NextSTEP) was on a diskless workstation. His goal was and is to take most of the technology away from the point of access, and move it back... at that time... to the data center... now... to the cloud.
'Personal' computers cost time and effort, that most consumer neither want to spend or do spend (see all the poorly configured/supported Window boxes out there)> Web and interaction should be on consumer grade devices based on your lifestyle (phone, pod, pad, laptop), but for efficiency, having a central 'center' for computing and media that is where all the management for the household is.
So, I see Apple moving more to a Mac Mini Stackable server environment, adding cores and disks as you need... with a big pipe to NorthCarolina where Apple serves up media, books (my university textbook sent to me whereever I'm at.
The personal 'device' is just a caching Netstation. Your 'home' computer is a local cache (iTunes library), the Net is the source. Media Center.
Guys... don't think about the past... think about the future... connect the dots that Apple has laid out for you.
As that happens... Mac OSX and systems like that will move back to be less consumer, and more 'appliances' and 'utility' (like your furnace, TV, washer), and your iOS will be your personal interface into the information net of your house business and world.
The 'Personal Computer' model was an anomaly... driven by antiquated delivery system for the mainframe. Look 5 years into the future... The difference between that and 1975 with VT52 terminals and DEC KL10s is a lot smaller than differences between managing a PC LAN and scaling it up to 6 billion people (the Microsoft and Sun Models).
So that said, I think most people will have a consumer web interface, and every household will have a couple house data centers (mac pros scaled into Mini chassis). The iMac is the developers workstation. Businesses will be on a similar model, but using the web interface connected to their datacenter (cloud). That's about it.
The concept of PC will move back to being a virtual computing engine in the Grand Central Cloud.
What is old is new again.
Proud Owner of NeXTCube S/N 5186.
Why would they drop a platform with costs in the thousands for the highest end models, for a device that sells for $299?
Desktop = floppy disk.
Case Closed.
Stating feature parity doesn't mean that all features and aspects as similar.
I love this forum. Sometimes, especially, because people argue over the meaning of words and twist them up into pretzels.
------------------
Main Entry: 1par·i·ty
Pronunciation: \\ˈper-ə-tē, ˈpa-rə-\\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural par·i·ties
Etymology: Latin paritas, from par equal
Date: 1608
1 : the quality or state of being equal or equivalent
-------------------
Parity \\Par"i*ty\\, n. [L. paritas, fr. par, paris, equal: cf. F. parit['e]. See Pair, Peer an equal.]
1. The quality or condition of being equal or equivalent; a like state or degree; equality; equivalence; close correspondence; analogy; as, parity of reasoning. "No parity of principle." --De Quincey. [1913 Webster]
Equality of length and parity of numeration. --Sir T. Browne. [1913 Webster]
-------------------
par·i·ty 1 (pr-t)
n. pl. par·i·ties
1. Equality, as in amount, status, or value.
2. Functional equivalence, as in the weaponry or military strength of adversaries: "A problem that has troubled the U.S.-Soviet relationship from the beginning has been the issue of parity" (Charles William Maynes).
3. The equivalent in value of a sum of money expressed in terms of a different currency at a fixed official rate of exchange.
4. Equality of prices of goods or securities in two different markets.
-------------------
Plenty of others out there for anyone wanting to know how the word is defined in various dictionaries.
I love this forum. Sometimes, especially, because people argue over the meaning of words and twist them up into pretzels.
-------------------
Plenty of others out there for anyone wanting to know how the word is defined in various dictionaries.
Gotta love when a someone tries to disprove your point but instead proves it.
Desktop = floppy disk.
Case Closed.
I've seen allot of people trying to make this argument valid, but it will always be the case that a desktop will be more powerful and upgradeable than any portable; period. There will always be a need to add cards for video, audio and IT upgrades. So if it's possible to put 4 cores in an iPad, the assumption must be that desktops won't evolve as well?
Desktops aren't going anywhere. It's a must that we can add (for example) Avid, Black Magic, AJA and Protools hardware to our workstations. It's also a must that we have superfast drive standards like dual channel SATA and fiber channel for uncompressed HD and 4k (now moving to 8K
Desktops aren't going anywhere.
I contend that the tablet market Apple has recent popularized and made viable will show an increase in desktop sales. Anecdotally, I know of several people who have been longtime notebook users moving to an iPad and iMac/Mac Pro for their next purchase.
I contend that the tablet market Apple has recent popularized and made viable will show an increase in desktop sales. Anecdotally, I know of several people who have been longtime notebook users moving to an iPad and iMac/Mac Pro for their next purchase.
I agree. The iOS devices have been a better "reason" to switch to Apple desktops than the mini/ cube ever could have been.
... The 'Personal Computer' model was an anomaly... driven by antiquated delivery system for the mainframe. ...
Actually, no it wasn't. It was driven by the desire of some people to own their own computing power. A computer that was theirs to do as they wanted with it, when they wanted to, and to be in control of the computer and their data. The factors that made that desirable then, are, if anything, even more relevant now.
Then there's this talk of, "everything will be all touch screen and you'll just plug in a keyboard when you want to do 'serious' work." Well, first of all, you don't want to spend half an hour wiping all the finger prints off the screen before you can get down to that serious work. More importantly, that portable touchscreen device will never match the desktop device, not in screen real estate, not in computing power, not in the OS features that that computing power enables. Yes, portable touchscreen devices will advance to be quite powerful computers. At the same time, desktop devices will advance to be equally more powerful, and will always be ahead of the performance curve because they don't have the same power limitations, don't need to be miniaturized, heat isn't as important, etc., etc.
If I can access my data through the cloud, or through my own personal home or my company's private corporate cloud, why would I want to limit myself to the capabilities of my portable device. Wouldn't I rather sit down at my more powerful desktop machine, access the data I need over the network and take advantage of it's superior capabilities to be more productive than I could be on my necessarily smaller-screened, less capable tablet.
Sure there are some people who just use their computers as home entertainment systems, and maybe they'll be doing nothing but all touch screen computing at home, maybe even some of them at work. But there will always be things for which the power and ergonomics of a portable touch screen device are inadequate or inappropriate.
Those of us who don't think that desktops as a different class of system are going away aren't limited in our vision of the future. What limits one's vision of the future is to get caught up in touch screen hysteria so that you can't see anything else but that as the future. You limit your vision of the future by thinking that all we need to do is juice up an iPad with a couple more cores and full on multitasking and we'll have all the computing power any person would ever need. If that's how you see the future, how much RAM do you think you'll need with that?
Feature parity?! I don't think so. Use your built-in dictionary.
When iOS has automated memory management with garbage collection, then we'll be a little closer.
Apple is moving iOS closer to OS X and that's a good thing. But it's not parity.
iOS IS OS X!
What's with AI lately? It's becoming more and more like MacDailyNews, which is fanboyism in the worst extreme.
At least it's not the same moronic Teabagging idiocy of MDN!
I think the App Store's success over web apps pretty much shows how much Apple needs to worry about this particular "nightmare scenario". People simply prefer native apps over web apps.
People also want the option/ability to do work if they're NOT connected to the web. And also the feeling of control and security that your stuff and your work is WITH you, not floating around on some server somewhere.
Your argument makes no sense to me. It's not a one or the other situation here. In fact, Apple has gone out of their way to make the PC a necessary part of your digital lifestyle. All your iDevices are simply accessory satellite devices to your PC.
Even the iPad, which many talk about replacing the PC requires a PC to even use the first time. This was done on purpose as it's clearly designed to complement, not substitute.
I know some can only see things in black or white, but the Mac is a very important part of Apple's business and will continue to be so for a very long time.
Absolutely. The iPad and iPhone/iPod touch are satellites which free you from your desk/office/workstation.
I find it a bit stunning that so many people don't get that part of the iOS ecosystem.
This is obviously used in a different manor...
Could that also be used in a shed, shack, pied-a-terre, quonset hut, pup tent, barn, teepee, chalet or yurt, too?
Could that also be used in a shed, shack, pied-a-terre, quonset hut, pup tent, barn, teepee, chalet or yurt, too?
LOL I corrected it. iOS autocorrect can't fix my lack of proofreading forum posts.
That is one way you can interpret it, but you need to realize that language often has more than one definition and evolves more quickly than technology. English, in particular, is a funny language that way. You can use a very select and pedantic view of the word parity but the article is not incorrect as stated.
Can you provide a reliable source which defines the term in the way it was used by AI?
I know some can only see things in black or white, but the Mac is a very important part of Apple's business and will continue to be so for a very long time.
That itself is black or white.
The Mac is destined to fade. The portable devices are currently the main focus.
This is an evolving process, not an either/or.