It's just going to be something related to the highly overrated "cloud" integration.
It will be a privacy nightmare as everything you do will be mirrored on a server and
you can just think of it as a touch-enabled, mobile me with social networking features, including built in camera usage during chats, allowing for OS level data sharing and file sharing on the spot. you can share emails, contacts lists, graphics files, word docuements, a view of your installed apps, etc. etc. integrated into the OS as a standard component, no separate service.
Nothing revolutionary. just an amalgam of a bunch of fads, wrapped up into one OS with HTTP features on all the time.
Of course, it will look cool and be cool and your privacy will go out the window.
Maybe the 'revolutionary' feature will be a consistent user interface.
Actually, you might be onto something, because what if you could remotely access stuff from wherever, using your 3G iPad to do it? And you could do all this without paying for MobileMe, having access to media files, documents, etc. And you could even configure it so that it would 'share' those external hard drives hosted by your Airport Extreme and convert them to the right files for your iPad on the fly. It would be way slicker than your average media hosting solution and it would work everywhere, because it would work over HTTP Sort of like Front Row, except over the Internet and it would work on whatever computer or iPad or iPhone/iPod Touch and have access to access documents besides simply media on whatever drive you wanted.
I trust you understand what a very, very small subset of OS X is available there.
He probably should have linked to Darwin which is free open source GNU licensed OS. A lot of similarities to OS X as they share a common lineage, BSD. The underlying kernel and libraries are virtually the same as all other flavors of Unix. The OS X user interface is the main distinguishing difference of OS X. That part isn't open source.
how would you like to be one of the apostles for the second coming?
do you want to work on a project that will literally reset the calendar to the year 1?
can you program world peace?
apple is working on programming the answer to life, the universe and everything - the unified theory, and it's going to have brightly colored, rounded jolly-rancher style buttons. it will be available through iTunes and would like to use your current location. are you a revolutionary programmer who can revolutionize the revolutionary incremental update to our software?
I am imagining it and it sounds awful. Not only do I have to wait for FCP to load but now I have to wait for it to download first? and I have to have the internet wherever I go? what if I'm in the field? what a waste.
No, you visit the URL to get the latest version. When they make an update, you don't have to think about downloading a package release, it just adjusts the code as needed. Say that there's a bug in one very small part of the app, visiting the URL will get the update without thinking about it.
The system would cache the compiled binary or encrypted source so online access is not needed. It also execute locally and edits/stores content locally. Chrome OS uses the cloud and I agree with you that's not a good solution. This would be the next iteration of webapps.
All apps are compiled from code. Some code is easier than others. Code like C/C++/Objective-C are harder and slower to develop with than PHP/Python/PHP/Javascript but they don't really need to be because they can all do pretty much the same things.
Websites use the latter languages because they have rapid application development and testing times, the former are used for native apps due to performance and code security. If you had something to give you both then you end up with webapps that can be distributed from a URL that run locally, compile and run as fast as any website loads but that execute as fast as a native app.
Code security is essential for proprietary products but that's why it needs to be protected at the OS level. Apple can feed it straight into the core of the OS as encrypted code and compile it on-the-fly. This also dynamically optimizes code for every single platform the best way it can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer
On the third hand, this might bring about a lessening of software piracy - good news for consumers with (hopefully) associated price drops.
Yes, exactly because if they feed the code from a URL in an encrypted form then it's way harder to take that encrypted code and recompile it on another platform. They'd have to actually rip out the compiled binaries from their locations and reinsert them or hack the OS and gain access to the codebase somehow. It could be disastrous if the source code leaked onto the web in some ways but y'know, people are stealing binaries all the time so I don't think it would be that big of a deal and visiting the URL by accident would detect the modification and wipe it out.
It makes the OS more streamlined too. Right now, they bundle all sorts of apps on the OS like iWork with as many GBs of templates. Same with iPhoto. Instead, they can just have URL links in the dock. If you actually use a template, click on the template and it downloads. No need to waste space for stuff you never use like with the printer drivers.
Instead of having 40 templates you don't like and bundle all 1GB of them, have an online selection of 400 and just download the one you pick. It's only going to be 5MB or so each.
Not to mention, you can setup your work machine like your home machine by emailing yourself a set of URLs and just visit them at work with your access details. It will install all the apps you need.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
Adobe is testing the waters with this "module" type of approach, by hooking in Flash to Photoshop Extensions (see Kuler, PainterWheel, additional Live Services, etc.), as well as Air. However, they are struggling dearly with Flash, and still haven't given in to the fact that they will almost without a doubt have to recode that piece of their puzzle from scratch.
Yeah, it's funny how it took an about turn. The big app developers are now realizing that the codebases are unwieldy and struggle to add anything interesting in their products to justify the upgrades and anything they do add, it's the little core additions. Like content-aware modifications in CS5. That is one of the most useful things I've ever seen and yet it's one little algorithm in a codebase with millions of lines of code.
Apple likes innovation and modular components are the best way to deliver them because a developer who wants to make an algorithm like the content-aware code doesn't have to concern himself with how to make the CS5 app to run it. That's someone else's problem. This is one flaw to the modular approach - it's relying on other people to pick up rest of the pieces and drive it in a direction you are happy with. With monolithic apps, one company has absolute control.
The good thing about modularity is that it opens up the development industry to anyone and everyone to make a profit. It needs this new language though so it all works together.
A lot of people have said this but I just can't see it. Out of all the big players Apple has produced less web apps than anyone. They've built safari to support them but thats where it ends.
Apples business is based around building consumer products that will last up to 3 years to then be replaced. The newer revenue streams are all about selling through a closed environment where they control everything with the Mac turning into the devices that keeps everything in sync. Making a major update that someone how makes web apps even better just doesn't make sense.
What I could see though is at some point Apple doing a U-Turn on HTML5 and saying it's just not moving fast enough then making iOS a browser plug in. They could then make an out of browser experience so iOS apps could run on Windows. Kind of in a similar way that Silverlight runs out of browser on Windows/Mac and is also powering Windows Phone 7.
My bet is Apple wants to move to a multi-layered file system which integrates flash storage, local hard disk storage, and network storage all in the file system.
Basically, writes to the file system will first be written to flash storage and then later, copied to hard disk storage which would be mirrored to the cloud (network storage).
This would allow you to "log into" your data on any Mac connected to the cloud, but having the local flash and hard disks will "cache" the data for very fast local operation.
This would be the first OS where all data is stored in the cloud.
My idea is pretty much the same thing, some sort of revolutionary, awesome "cloud" os. I would love it to be called MAC CLOUD 9 , because that just sounds coool lol. But everything is moving to the cloud, and that would be cool.
Jensonb is on the right track I think. At first blush, yeah, touch integration. But when reading what the qualifications need to be, it has to be something different.
It might be the whole adverts in the OS thing.
The whole adverts in the OS thing... Oh no... I hope not! I think there is enough advertising in the world, We dont need it anywhere else.
I hope it is stuff to do with Multitouch to be honest, lIke Multitouch iMacs and Displays on Desktop. We don't need anymore ads!
Entire OS X kernel is open source as are all UNIX tools.
Right. All the stuff that was open source when NeXT begin using it remains so. But to be clear, there's a bit more to OS X than a relative handful of FOSS components. So while it's true that the small subset of FOSS components in OS X remains FOSS, most of the code base is simply not FOSS.
Right. All the stuff that was open source when NeXT begin using it remains so. But to be clear, there's a bit more to OS X than a relative handful of FOSS components. So while it's true that the small subset of FOSS components in OS X remains FOSS, most of the code base is simply not FOSS.
Actually, that's not true. The only thing that is not open source are GUI layer on top of the kernel, and applications that come with the OS including finder and essential services. iLife apps of course are not open source either.
Kernel itself XNU is open source (Mach/BSD) and all the UNIX tools (well over 1000), the file systems including HFS+, all pro development tools including XCode etc are open source.
That's a lot more than Microsoft, where nothing is open source. Not the Windows NT kernel, not NTFS, not a single application included with the OS, not a single development tool.
Seriously, (not that I wouldn't want that in 10.7) though I think they'll be doing a lot of GUI changes. I think you'll see the desktop/finder and spaces redesigned to work more like iOS.
Is it really that much of a stretch to think that they might just be asking for someone with their own fantastic, amazing and revolutionary idea to come work with the Mac OSX 10.5.7 team?
They are not revealing what the new feature is, for obvious reasons, so why can't they be setting the stage for new ideas, period. Ideas that are 100% NIH, which is often how great ideas become great products.
I read the first few lines of this article and came to the same conclusion.
This should get interesting. I like the open nature of OS configurations as we have them...but a new day is coming. I will go out on a limb and state for the record that I think the iOS, for better or for worse, is the future of consumer computing, and possibly enterprise desktop computing.
The revenue options/revenue streams are not like anything the industry has ever experienced to date and I'm sure they're working hard on Apple's lead to bring those options to the desktop where everyone truly live and works.
JB
I read the first few lines and thought this was more not really insightful of anything. Don't all companies advertise all job descriptions this way, "work for us, opportunity of a lifetime, wow the competition." These aren't usually clues into a specific project, more methods to try & draw in talent. Sorry but I doubt very much the ad is referencing an actual revolutionary feature, especially since Apple is known for introducing multiple revolutionary features in all their OS upgrades. Doing something with web to me doesn't sound all that revolutionary.
Comments
It's just going to be something related to the highly overrated "cloud" integration.
It will be a privacy nightmare as everything you do will be mirrored on a server and
you can just think of it as a touch-enabled, mobile me with social networking features, including built in camera usage during chats, allowing for OS level data sharing and file sharing on the spot. you can share emails, contacts lists, graphics files, word docuements, a view of your installed apps, etc. etc. integrated into the OS as a standard component, no separate service.
Nothing revolutionary. just an amalgam of a bunch of fads, wrapped up into one OS with HTTP features on all the time.
Of course, it will look cool and be cool and your privacy will go out the window.
I trust you understand what a very, very small subset of OS X is available there.
No one said it had to be a large amount of code
Maybe the 'revolutionary' feature will be a consistent user interface.
Actually, you might be onto something, because what if you could remotely access stuff from wherever, using your 3G iPad to do it? And you could do all this without paying for MobileMe, having access to media files, documents, etc. And you could even configure it so that it would 'share' those external hard drives hosted by your Airport Extreme and convert them to the right files for your iPad on the fly. It would be way slicker than your average media hosting solution and it would work everywhere, because it would work over HTTP
I trust you understand what a very, very small subset of OS X is available there.
He probably should have linked to Darwin which is free open source GNU licensed OS. A lot of similarities to OS X as they share a common lineage, BSD. The underlying kernel and libraries are virtually the same as all other flavors of Unix. The OS X user interface is the main distinguishing difference of OS X. That part isn't open source.
do you want to work on a project that will literally reset the calendar to the year 1?
can you program world peace?
apple is working on programming the answer to life, the universe and everything - the unified theory, and it's going to have brightly colored, rounded jolly-rancher style buttons. it will be available through iTunes and would like to use your current location. are you a revolutionary programmer who can revolutionize the revolutionary incremental update to our software?
.apply now.
I am imagining it and it sounds awful. Not only do I have to wait for FCP to load but now I have to wait for it to download first? and I have to have the internet wherever I go? what if I'm in the field? what a waste.
No, you visit the URL to get the latest version. When they make an update, you don't have to think about downloading a package release, it just adjusts the code as needed. Say that there's a bug in one very small part of the app, visiting the URL will get the update without thinking about it.
The system would cache the compiled binary or encrypted source so online access is not needed. It also execute locally and edits/stores content locally. Chrome OS uses the cloud and I agree with you that's not a good solution. This would be the next iteration of webapps.
All apps are compiled from code. Some code is easier than others. Code like C/C++/Objective-C are harder and slower to develop with than PHP/Python/PHP/Javascript but they don't really need to be because they can all do pretty much the same things.
Websites use the latter languages because they have rapid application development and testing times, the former are used for native apps due to performance and code security. If you had something to give you both then you end up with webapps that can be distributed from a URL that run locally, compile and run as fast as any website loads but that execute as fast as a native app.
Code security is essential for proprietary products but that's why it needs to be protected at the OS level. Apple can feed it straight into the core of the OS as encrypted code and compile it on-the-fly. This also dynamically optimizes code for every single platform the best way it can.
On the third hand, this might bring about a lessening of software piracy - good news for consumers with (hopefully) associated price drops.
Yes, exactly because if they feed the code from a URL in an encrypted form then it's way harder to take that encrypted code and recompile it on another platform. They'd have to actually rip out the compiled binaries from their locations and reinsert them or hack the OS and gain access to the codebase somehow. It could be disastrous if the source code leaked onto the web in some ways but y'know, people are stealing binaries all the time so I don't think it would be that big of a deal and visiting the URL by accident would detect the modification and wipe it out.
It makes the OS more streamlined too. Right now, they bundle all sorts of apps on the OS like iWork with as many GBs of templates. Same with iPhoto. Instead, they can just have URL links in the dock. If you actually use a template, click on the template and it downloads. No need to waste space for stuff you never use like with the printer drivers.
Instead of having 40 templates you don't like and bundle all 1GB of them, have an online selection of 400 and just download the one you pick. It's only going to be 5MB or so each.
Not to mention, you can setup your work machine like your home machine by emailing yourself a set of URLs and just visit them at work with your access details. It will install all the apps you need.
Adobe is testing the waters with this "module" type of approach, by hooking in Flash to Photoshop Extensions (see Kuler, PainterWheel, additional Live Services, etc.), as well as Air. However, they are struggling dearly with Flash, and still haven't given in to the fact that they will almost without a doubt have to recode that piece of their puzzle from scratch.
Yeah, it's funny how it took an about turn. The big app developers are now realizing that the codebases are unwieldy and struggle to add anything interesting in their products to justify the upgrades and anything they do add, it's the little core additions. Like content-aware modifications in CS5. That is one of the most useful things I've ever seen and yet it's one little algorithm in a codebase with millions of lines of code.
Apple likes innovation and modular components are the best way to deliver them because a developer who wants to make an algorithm like the content-aware code doesn't have to concern himself with how to make the CS5 app to run it. That's someone else's problem. This is one flaw to the modular approach - it's relying on other people to pick up rest of the pieces and drive it in a direction you are happy with. With monolithic apps, one company has absolute control.
The good thing about modularity is that it opens up the development industry to anyone and everyone to make a profit. It needs this new language though so it all works together.
"truly amaze everyone."
ummm... What part of OS X an engineer can drink away?
May it something have to do with cloud computing?
A lot of people have said this but I just can't see it. Out of all the big players Apple has produced less web apps than anyone. They've built safari to support them but thats where it ends.
Apples business is based around building consumer products that will last up to 3 years to then be replaced. The newer revenue streams are all about selling through a closed environment where they control everything with the Mac turning into the devices that keeps everything in sync. Making a major update that someone how makes web apps even better just doesn't make sense.
What I could see though is at some point Apple doing a U-Turn on HTML5 and saying it's just not moving fast enough then making iOS a browser plug in. They could then make an out of browser experience so iOS apps could run on Windows. Kind of in a similar way that Silverlight runs out of browser on Windows/Mac and is also powering Windows Phone 7.
My bet is Apple wants to move to a multi-layered file system which integrates flash storage, local hard disk storage, and network storage all in the file system.
Basically, writes to the file system will first be written to flash storage and then later, copied to hard disk storage which would be mirrored to the cloud (network storage).
This would allow you to "log into" your data on any Mac connected to the cloud, but having the local flash and hard disks will "cache" the data for very fast local operation.
This would be the first OS where all data is stored in the cloud.
My idea is pretty much the same thing, some sort of revolutionary, awesome "cloud" os. I would love it to be called MAC CLOUD 9 , because that just sounds coool lol. But everything is moving to the cloud, and that would be cool.
-or-
http://windows8themes.org/pics/Windo...creenshot2.jpg
A new OS built with HTML5 from the ground up!
Well ... That would be Jolicloud:
http://www.jolicloud.com/blog/
"A Simpler, Customizable Launcher Entirely Built in HTML5"
Jensonb is on the right track I think. At first blush, yeah, touch integration. But when reading what the qualifications need to be, it has to be something different.
It might be the whole adverts in the OS thing.
The whole adverts in the OS thing... Oh no... I hope not! I think there is enough advertising in the world, We dont need it anywhere else.
I hope it is stuff to do with Multitouch to be honest, lIke Multitouch iMacs and Displays on Desktop. We don't need anymore ads!
Where can I download the source for OS X?
In case you don't know how to use Google, here it is
http://www.opensource.apple.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_...ting_system%29
Entire OS X kernel is open source as are all UNIX tools.
In case you don't know how to use Google, here it is
http://www.opensource.apple.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_...ting_system%29
Entire OS X kernel is open source as are all UNIX tools.
Right. All the stuff that was open source when NeXT begin using it remains so. But to be clear, there's a bit more to OS X than a relative handful of FOSS components. So while it's true that the small subset of FOSS components in OS X remains FOSS, most of the code base is simply not FOSS.
Right. All the stuff that was open source when NeXT begin using it remains so. But to be clear, there's a bit more to OS X than a relative handful of FOSS components. So while it's true that the small subset of FOSS components in OS X remains FOSS, most of the code base is simply not FOSS.
Actually, that's not true. The only thing that is not open source are GUI layer on top of the kernel, and applications that come with the OS including finder and essential services. iLife apps of course are not open source either.
Kernel itself XNU is open source (Mach/BSD) and all the UNIX tools (well over 1000), the file systems including HFS+, all pro development tools including XCode etc are open source.
That's a lot more than Microsoft, where nothing is open source. Not the Windows NT kernel, not NTFS, not a single application included with the OS, not a single development tool.
Seriously, (not that I wouldn't want that in 10.7) though I think they'll be doing a lot of GUI changes. I think you'll see the desktop/finder and spaces redesigned to work more like iOS.
Is it really that much of a stretch to think that they might just be asking for someone with their own fantastic, amazing and revolutionary idea to come work with the Mac OSX 10.5.7 team?
They are not revealing what the new feature is, for obvious reasons, so why can't they be setting the stage for new ideas, period. Ideas that are 100% NIH, which is often how great ideas become great products.
Just a thought....
I read the first few lines of this article and came to the same conclusion.
This should get interesting. I like the open nature of OS configurations as we have them...but a new day is coming. I will go out on a limb and state for the record that I think the iOS, for better or for worse, is the future of consumer computing, and possibly enterprise desktop computing.
The revenue options/revenue streams are not like anything the industry has ever experienced to date and I'm sure they're working hard on Apple's lead to bring those options to the desktop where everyone truly live and works.
JB
I read the first few lines and thought this was more not really insightful of anything. Don't all companies advertise all job descriptions this way, "work for us, opportunity of a lifetime, wow the competition." These aren't usually clues into a specific project, more methods to try & draw in talent. Sorry but I doubt very much the ad is referencing an actual revolutionary feature, especially since Apple is known for introducing multiple revolutionary features in all their OS upgrades. Doing something with web to me doesn't sound all that revolutionary.