Apple seen merging iOS, Mac OS X with custom A6 chip in 2012

1457910

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post


    which is why I clairifed what was meant by the term "niche."



    No shortsightedness here.



    mobile devices are not "taking over computing." they are simply used much more frequently for menial and casual tasks. Are they taking over the "little things?" sure. It's simply more convenient.



    but for actual computing, be it typing a document, graphic design, video editing, audio work, financial systems, etc. a "real" computer is required.



    Mobile devices with added power are great because of this fact: They are GAINING features.



    Desktops and notebooks are great because they are also always GAINING capabilities, which they already have in spades over mobile devices.



    Apple is currently on a trend of artificially introducing a convenience by dumbing down the Mac, which is ridiculous. They are missing the boat here. sure, there will be some things that makes sense to crossover. then do that. but don't cripple the mac, just so the marketing team can put the money making iPhone next to the MBP on the website homepage...



    Mobile device will always be a device that we use for the convenient little things. It makes sense that we use them more and certain things are integrated. But they will never be a replacement for a desktop or notebook.



    People buy a laptop and keep it for many years. People replace their phone every year or so. that's how Nokia sold so many handsets and it is also selling tons of iPhones.



    the sales are not due to a better OS or a trend in taking over computing. They are due to different dynamics in how various devices, however integrated, are used, discarded, and purchased.



    The Mac should always be the definitive, "you can do anything, do it right, and do it easily" platform. Mobile devices may be used a lot (especially where phone calls are concerned... - or casual gaming, or fun apps, etc, but they will always be a "niche" in terms of real computing.



    there are some benefits to a hyper mobile platform and there are some to a station, mobile or otherwise. the point is that , while the mobile is being upgraded, it is a horrible thing to cripple the superior platform just to make the mobile platform look better, which is most certainly the trend here. And FCP X is just the beginning. "hey, let's take the iPhone version of iMovie, sell it on the Mac and call it Final Cut Pro!" no thanks.



    (And yes, I am aware that FCP X is far greater than the iOS iMovie. LOL.. But it is an obvious bow to that software and it's platform and is also an obvious warning sign of what happens when apple engineers follow that philosophy.



    TL;DR

    I was walking in the opposite direction during the revolution and now I can't even see it from here.
  • Reply 122 of 186
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,826member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jukes View Post


    Rosetta wasn't an emulator, it was a dynamic binary translator. And I agree that it was quite good.



    On the other hand, emulating or translating x86 correctly is orders of magnitude more difficult than what Rosetta had to do with with power pc for lots of reasons including variable length instructions implicit instruction registers, correct interrupt handling, the sheer number of instructions, etc. Particularly as Apple continues to support and use complex extensions to the x86 instruction set.



    Transmeta used custom hardware to accelerate x86 translation in their chips and they just couldn't keep up with Intel's process advances. Maybe Apple could graft on a hardware translation accelerator to the A6, but I imagine that Intel owns most of the patents that they would need, given that they purchased Transmeta's IP. Also, Apple wouldn't get an x86 license so probably couldn't do such a thing even if it were unencumbered.



    All things are possible over a period of 10 years, but i doubt we'd see Apple trying to translate x86 on a lowish power ARM cpu.



    The other thing people need to realize here is that when Apple went from PPC to Intel there was a huge jump in integer performance. It is no surprise that Intel could emulate/translate PPC code so well. The intel hardware had like 3x the performance of PPC.



    Now with ARM everything is reversed, they simply don't have the performance.
  • Reply 123 of 186
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tbsteph View Post


    And people have been panning Windows 8 for merging traditional Windows with touch screen capabilities claiming it can't be done successfully.



    And even Apple, Steve Jobs himself, complained that trying to have the same OS on mobile touch-based devices and traditional computers was a bad idea. They bragged that the iOS was "built from the ground up" for mobile touch devices.



    How is putting a mobile touch device OS on a traditional computer any better than putting a traditional computer OS on a mobile touch device? The argued from the very beginning that these are two different uses and deserve to have different OSes (even if the OSes share similar foundations).



    So either they were right and now, starting with Lion, they choose to ignore their own advice. Or they were lying through their teeth when they said that a mobile device should have a different OS than a traditional computer.



    Personally, I think they were right in the first place; and they are now going down a bad path. But then again, I use my devices for more than checking my FB page and playing Angry Birds.
  • Reply 124 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post


    which is why I clairifed what was meant by the term "niche."



    No shortsightedness here.



    mobile devices are not "taking over computing." they are simply used much more frequently for menial and casual tasks. Are they taking over the "little things?" sure. It's simply more convenient.



    but for actual computing, be it typing a document, graphic design, video editing, audio work, financial systems, etc. a "real" computer is required.



    Mobile devices with added power are great because of this fact: They are GAINING features.



    Desktops and notebooks are great because they are also always GAINING capabilities, which they already have in spades over mobile devices.



    Apple is currently on a trend of artificially introducing a convenience by dumbing down the Mac, which is ridiculous. They are missing the boat here. sure, there will be some things that makes sense to crossover. then do that. but don't cripple the mac, just so the marketing team can put the money making iPhone next to the MBP on the website homepage...



    Mobile device will always be a device that we use for the convenient little things. It makes sense that we use them more and certain things are integrated. But they will never be a replacement for a desktop or notebook.



    People buy a laptop and keep it for many years. People replace their phone every year or so. that's how Nokia sold so many handsets and it is also selling tons of iPhones.



    the sales are not due to a better OS or a trend in taking over computing. They are due to different dynamics in how various devices, however integrated, are used, discarded, and purchased.



    The Mac should always be the definitive, "you can do anything, do it right, and do it easily" platform. Mobile devices may be used a lot (especially where phone calls are concerned... - or casual gaming, or fun apps, etc, but they will always be a "niche" in terms of real computing.



    there are some benefits to a hyper mobile platform and there are some to a station, mobile or otherwise. the point is that , while the mobile is being upgraded, it is a horrible thing to cripple the superior platform just to make the mobile platform look better, which is most certainly the trend here. And FCP X is just the beginning. "hey, let's take the iPhone version of iMovie, sell it on the Mac and call it Final Cut Pro!" no thanks.



    (And yes, I am aware that FCP X is far greater than the iOS iMovie. LOL.. But it is an obvious bow to that software and it's platform and is also an obvious warning sign of what happens when apple engineers follow that philosophy.



    The mistake with your reasoning is that you are defining the needs/solutions of today and using that to extrapolate the needs/solutions of the future.



    The smallest iPhone 1 is much more of a "real" computer (whatever that is) then the one which was used to put a man on the moon.



    And, iOS is much more of a "real" OS!
  • Reply 125 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msimpson View Post


    Is it OK to call a fellow commenter a pompous windbag?



    I can handle a few insults. I probably deserve it for one thing or another. My intent wasn't to be a jerk or make anyone feel bad but to try and encourage some understanding for others.

    Pompous windbag here, over and out.

    Edit: I really don't understand people's unwillingness to reassess their use of one simple word. It would make things a bit easier for developmentally disabled people and their families. And it costs you nothing. No charges will appear on your bill.
  • Reply 126 of 186
    I can't believe that Apple is stupid enough to replace OSX with an IOS blend. I detest most of the IOS system to the point where i no longer use My iPod touch except as a GPS guidance system. Most of the IOS features in Lion are good only because they can be turned off.



    I have arthritis in my hands and I am not alone. The multifinger motions are painful. I even use a mouse on my laptop.

    Apple seems to be so fascinated by the success of IOS hardware that they have lost track of the fact that most computer users have big screens and don't need adaptations to run apps on a screen under 12 inches. If this prediction is correct, I can see Apple Producing touch screen computers and declaring the mouse era dead.



    I cannot envision buying Mac software That is an IOS clone. When that day comes my OS will become Linux
  • Reply 127 of 186
    jblongzjblongz Posts: 147member
    Mac OSX will NEVER see anything weaker than Sandy Bridge!
  • Reply 128 of 186
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JBlongz View Post


    Mac OSX will NEVER see anything weaker than Sandy Bridge!



    Mind elaborating on that?



  • Reply 129 of 186
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    More like 2020 for the culmination of these trends, and the idea that something will be running OS X on ARM next year is just silly.



    Something already does if you believe the rumors.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    And is it really worthwhile at all to speculate about something that might happen in the computer industry 10 years or more from now? No one in 1999 had any idea what the computer landscape of today would look like although I'm sure you could find lots of folks back then who would tell you they did.



    If you state that it is impossible to predict the state of the computer industry 10 years from now it's hard to argue against that. But I wonder, what paradigm shifts did I mis the last 10 years?



    J.
  • Reply 130 of 186
    "Apple is looking to merge its iOS and Mac OS X operating systems into one unified platform for applications and cloud services as soon as next year"



    Exactly what problem is this attempting to solve? What is driving this?
  • Reply 131 of 186
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charley2 View Post


    ... If this prediction is correct, I can see Apple Producing touch screen computers and declaring the mouse era dead.



    The mouse era may be at an end, but like it's predecessor, the keyboard, it will survive for a long time.



    J.
  • Reply 132 of 186
    jukesjukes Posts: 213member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post


    Something already does if you believe the rumors.







    If you state that it is impossible to predict the state of the computer industry 10 years from now it's hard to argue against that. But I wonder, what paradigm shifts did I mis the last 10 years?



    J.



    Umm... say maybe the widespread (hopefully temporary) end of frequency scaling and the corresponding shift to parallel architectures like multicore processors and GPUs? Even though this wasn't exactly unpredicted in the research community it wasn't common AppleInsider-level knowledge.
  • Reply 133 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post


    The mouse era may be at an end, but like it's predecessor, the keyboard, it will survive for a long time.



    J.



    Don't need none of that fancy-schmancy stuff...



    A "real" computer pro can do anything with 8 bit switches and a toggle
  • Reply 134 of 186
    rhyderhyde Posts: 294member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post


    Rosetta and the 68K emulator on PowerMacs were quite good actually. I don't know how you can say they "sucked pretty hard."



    Actually, the 68K emulator was largely responsible for the abysmal file I/O performance in all the later versions of Mac OS. It was never rewritten from 68K assembly IIRC.
  • Reply 135 of 186
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The other thing people need to realize here is that when Apple went from PPC to Intel there was a huge jump in integer performance. It is no surprise that Intel could emulate/translate PPC code so well. The intel hardware had like 3x the performance of PPC.



    Now with ARM everything is reversed, they simply don't have the performance.



    It isn't difficult to emulate the x86 instruction set if there is no need for it.



    J.
  • Reply 136 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post


    TL;DR

    I was walking in the opposite direction during the revolution and now I can't even see it from here.



    Now, That's funny!
  • Reply 137 of 186
    yuusharoyuusharo Posts: 311member
    Let me ask a simple question - why would Apple invest so much with Intel in Thunderbolt technology if they knew they were abandoning the platform a mere few years later? That makes absolutely no sense. Thunderbolt *requires* an Intel processor, and Intel's Sandy Bridge chips are extremely power-efficient and only getting better.



    It makes perfect sense that OS X and iOS will eventually merge together, but if anything, I see Apple pulling a Windows 8, having a version of each OS running on their respective x86 and ARM platforms. I just can't see Apple transition everything over to ARM when ARM itself has so much catching up to do just to match current desktop speeds, while Intel and AMD continue to push the limits of x86 even further. I call BS on this analyst.
  • Reply 138 of 186
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jukes View Post


    Umm... say maybe the widespread (hopefully temporary) end of frequency scaling and the corresponding shift to parallel architectures like multicore processors and GPUs? Even though this wasn't exactly unpredicted in the research community it wasn't common AppleInsider-level knowledge.



    Didn't mis that, I would use other words to say the same though.



    J.
  • Reply 139 of 186
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Don't need none of that fancy-schmancy stuff...



    A "real" computer pro can do anything with 8 bit switches and a toggle



    Connecting wires is sufficient I would say.



    J.
  • Reply 140 of 186
    rhyderhyde Posts: 294member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post


    It isn't difficult to emulate the x86 instruction set if there is no need for it.



    J.



    And therein lies the problem: there is a need for it. One of the main reasons the Mac has steadily gained in popularity over the past several years is its chameleon-like abilities to run *any* OS running on an Intel chip (for me, that's Mac OSX, Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD). Even if someone never *intends* to run Windows on the machine, knowing they can if they have to is a big safety blanket and convinces a lot of people to buy Macs rather than go with a Windows box.



    If some new Apple laptop/whatever product lost this ability, I suspect it would not become amazingly popular as a general-purpose computing device, even if it ran all of the iOS/Tablet/iPhone/iWhatever software.



    On two different topic paths:



    1) Maybe an A6 processor would contain both ARM and X86 ISAs and would be capable of running both instruction sets natively. That sort of thing has been done before and most of the transistors on a CPU these days are cache; adding an ARM ISA to an x86 chip wouldn't be that hard.



    2) Everyone seems to be assuming that "merging iOS and OSX" means that OSX becomes iOS. You could still merge them and wind up with something that is more like OSX, eh?
Sign In or Register to comment.