USB storage is relatively cheap. Add removable memory to the Iphone.
See, these things will never happen.
The idea is to replace a computer. It makes most sense for businesses since at least you are replacing a laptop and a business phone.
Except you're not! You're just moving it! Why can't the future of iOS replace a traditional computer on its own? We're not using a mouse ten years from now.
If there is no demand for it, no. Plus USB storage is already cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except you're not! You're just moving it
You are in the example I provided. Instead of buying and supporting 2 devices I can do the same functions with one, it is more cost effective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Why can't the future of iOS replace a traditional computer on its own? We're not using a mouse ten years from now.
I don't think the IOS is meant to do that. Yes it does what it does pretty well. But it is not built to be a desktop PC replacement. Touch technology is nice, but it is not meant to be productive (yet). Yes we can send emails, and fill up basic spreadsheets and maybe one day we'll type faster on a touchscreen, but you can't effectively multitask, run specialized software and be generally efficient. The industry will be using a mouse in 10 years.
If there is no demand for it, no. Plus USB storage is already cheap.
I don't understand what demand has to do with anything. And what does reiterating that accomplish?
You are in the example I provided. Instead of buying and supporting 2 devices I can do the same functions with one, it is more cost effective.
Some of the same functions, more complicated and with much greater restriction.
I don't think the IOS is meant to do that. Yes it does what it does pretty well. But it is not built to be a desktop PC replacement.
That's what OS XI will be for.
Touch technology is nice, but it is not meant to be productive (yet). Yes we can send emails, and fill up basic spreadsheets and maybe one day we'll type faster on a touchscreen, but you can't effectively multitask, run specialized software and be generally efficient.
Ha! You're joking. This is totally wrong.
The industry will be using a mouse in 10 years.
Good luck with that. Microsoft might be, but the industry's leaders won't.
1.- I don't understand what demand has to do with anything. And what does reiterating that accomplish?
2.- Some of the same functions, more complicated and with much greater restriction.
3.- That's what OS XI will be for.
4.- Ha! You're joking. This is totally wrong.
5.- Good luck with that. Microsoft might be, but the industry's leaders won't.
1.- If Apple's costumers created a high demand for removable storage they'd add it.
2.- There shouldn't be. I think we are not talking about the same things here.
3.- So then IOS will not be doing it like you were suggesting earlier.
4.- Are you suggesting that a IOS device is at least equally efficient as a full fledged desktop? IOS devices don't even support multiple monitors (hallmark of multitasking and efficiency across most industries - there is even studies about this). There is no Autocad support (most used CAD software across multiple industries). Can they run full versions of professional photo editing, website building, graphic intensive games and other specialized software? Many (if not most) of the new Desktop Personal Computers do. Atm IOS devices may be able to replace internet stations, but that's about it.
5.- The Tech industry is not the only industry out there. For example, the Aerospace and Manufacturing industries are not going touch anytime soon. Btw Win 8 is touchscreen as well.
Let's just agree to disagree and celebrate our right to have opinions.
2.- There shouldn't be. I think we are not talking about the same things here.
You can't run OS X on ARM without compromises that the people for whom this device would be intended wouldn't be willing to accept.
3.- So then IOS will not be doing it like you were suggesting earlier.
No, it won't be doing what you were suggesting.
4.- Are you suggesting that a IOS device is at least equally efficient as a full fledged desktop?
I am suggesting that for a growing number of purposes, people would be better served with an iOS device than another computing source. As time passes, eventually the stated benefits of a keyboard and mouse will apply to too few people to bother continuing to make product.
IOS devices don't even support multiple monitors (hallmark of multitasking and efficiency across most industries…
Two eyes, one cursor, one application at a time. You can only DO one thing at once, which is why iOS operates the way it does. As touch pervades the desktop, your needs will be filled, and better than a mouse could ever have done it.
There is no Autocad support
You pitch this as though it's an inherent flaw of the platform, unable to ever be changed for any reason. AutoCAD is next to meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It will be on them, not Apple, to support the products people use going forward.
Can they run full versions of professional photo editing, website building, graphic intensive games and other specialized software?
Again, you're operating under the assumption that now = forever.
Also, yes, for all of these, anyway.
Atm IOS devices may be able to replace internet stations, but that's about it.
This isn't 2007. Take a gander at modern iOS devices.
5.- The Tech industry is not the only industry out there. For example, the Aerospace and Manufacturing industries are not going touch anytime soon.
Who says? What's your evidence of that? We have posters here who use iPads on their respective companies' factory floors. Sort of puts a hole in that theory.
Btw Win 8 is touchscreen as well.
And look how well they're doing.
Let's just agree to disagree and celebrate our right to have opinions.
Look, I'm not discounting the idea of a docking, portable device. I sort of like the idea, and would like to see some companies at least throw up concepts of what it could become. I'm discounting your idea of having two OS on one machine. It's crazy, inefficient, and renders far too many compromises to be worth selling to a consumer or professional. And Apple wants consumers and professionals.
You can't run OS X on ARM without compromises that the people for whom this device would be intended wouldn't be willing to accept.
No, it won't be doing what you were suggesting.
I am suggesting that for a growing number of purposes, people would be better served with an iOS device than another computing source. As time passes, eventually the stated benefits of a keyboard and mouse will apply to too few people to bother continuing to make product.
Two eyes, one cursor, one application at a time. You can only DO one thing at once, which is why iOS operates the way it does. As touch pervades the desktop, your needs will be filled, and better than a mouse could ever have done it.
You pitch this as though it's an inherent flaw of the platform, unable to ever be changed for any reason. AutoCAD is next to meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It will be on them, not Apple, to support the products people use going forward.
Again, you're operating under the assumption that now = forever.
Also, yes, for all of these, anyway.
This isn't 2007. Take a gander at modern iOS devices.
Who says? What's your evidence of that? We have posters here who use iPads on their respective companies' factory floors. Sort of puts a hole in that theory.
And look how well they're doing.
Look, I'm not discounting the idea of a docking, portable device. I sort of like the idea, and would like to see some companies at least throw up concepts of what it could become. I'm discounting your idea of having two OS on one machine. It's crazy, inefficient, and renders far too many compromises to be worth selling to a consumer or professional. And Apple wants consumers and professionals.
1.- ARM is not the only processing platform. Make a new Kernel.
4.- It may not be a flaw, but Personal Computers do support most of those applications. Until IOS can match support then we can say that IOS is a viable replacement for Personal Computers.
5.- You are saying that they currently can, and I am saying they courrently can't replace PCs other than Interner stations.
6.- I work on both of those Industries. Having an Ipad to view PDFs (drawings) is not considered adopting touch technologies at large. They had Internet stations that were replaced by Ipads and I already agreed to that.
They are not adopting it anytime soon because the current technology works, and they will not fix what is not broken (Because it costs tons of money). The lifecycle of the software they use is long to minimize training and certification costs. CATIA for example, which is the main 3D software that major OEMs (Boeing, Airbus, Tesla, and other automotive and Aerospace leaders) use. CATIA V5 (about $14k a seat for the cheapest config. + a yearly fee) came out in 1998, CATIA V6 came out in 2008 and it has not been implemented by OEMs yet! Even if CATIA V7 was Touch technology, it'd take many, many years to be adopted, if ever. Suppliers follow what OEMs get, so no hope there either. And smaller design houses (Say MasterCAM's) don't have the power to push touch technology even if they wanted.
Heck, a company recently I contracted with (2000+ employees with a several hundred engineers) still uses Win XP, Office 2007 (recently upgraded) and Acad 2004.
Another heck, some companies already invested into Space Mouses, they are not going to waste all of that money/training to go touch with stylus (assuming there was such software).
All in all, those industries are not going Touch anytime soon.
7.- Idk, I dislike Win 8.
8.- It may use more storage, but a well done Kernel should handle the transition well. I am not advocating running a VM.
1.- ARM is not the only processing platform. Make a new Kernel.
So design completely new hardware for a completely new product and completely rewrite BOTH of your operating systems for the SOLE PURPOSE of building a device that can run both of them for an absolutely minuscule niche?!
4.- It may not be a flaw, but Personal Computers do support most of those applications. Until IOS can match support then we can say that IOS is a viable replacement for Personal Computers.
Except not everyone uses every single piece of software ever written for every industry. Your argument isn't one. iOS is a perfectly valid computing platform and a hugely viable replacement for hundreds of millions of people. ALREADY. And growing.
5.- You are saying that they currently can, and I am saying they courrently can't replace PCs other than Interner stations.
Yes, you're totally wrong, and I'm right. That's the gist of it.
6.- I work on both of those Industries. Having an Ipad to view PDFs (drawings) is not considered adopting touch technologies at large. They had Internet stations that were replaced by Ipads and I already agreed to that.
Thanks for moving the goalposts and simultaneously disagreeing with your original point and agreeing with me.
Apple didn't build Mac OSX on top of UNIX, at all. Mac OSX is a microkernel, which is comprised of several different elements to communicate with basic UNIX commands, such as POSIX and message passing. The only thing "UNIX" about OSX is the Terminal. Even Aqua is a proprietary GUI, as opposed to xWindows or XORG for Linux. Funny you mention Windows. Any OS can achieve UNIX accreditation with the right compatibility layer. We see an offshoot of this already in Windows with PowerShell. But, like OSX, that wouldn't turn Windows into a UNIX operating system. When people talk about OSX being "UNIX-based," they're generalizing, and most of the time it's due to lack of knowledge. A more proper term would be "UNIX-compliant." Remember, OSX wasn't accredited by the Open Group until Leopard was released. That's quite far down the pipe. However, Linux...being closer to UNIX than OSX ever will be, still has not been OG accredited. So you see...terms and accreditation don't mean much in the world of UNIX.
Max OSX is not a microkernel. OSX is an operating system that includes the Xnu hybrid microkernel that contains mach and bits of the FreeBSD kernel for the required Unix syscalls and process models.
You forgot the entire BSD userland.
A proprietary GUI is as much part of Unix as any other. CDE was the standard desktop for mainline Unix for years and was proprietary. Motif was the proprietary GUI toolkit CDE was built on (eventually open sourced). Ever heard of that maybe? And OSX had X11 installed up to mountain lion and now supports XQuartz which is the X.org port for OS X.
Comments
Originally Posted by Hturt Seaker
USB storage is relatively cheap. Add removable memory to the Iphone.
See, these things will never happen.
The idea is to replace a computer. It makes most sense for businesses since at least you are replacing a laptop and a business phone.
Except you're not! You're just moving it! Why can't the future of iOS replace a traditional computer on its own? We're not using a mouse ten years from now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
See, these things will never happen.
If there is no demand for it, no. Plus USB storage is already cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except you're not! You're just moving it
You are in the example I provided. Instead of buying and supporting 2 devices I can do the same functions with one, it is more cost effective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Why can't the future of iOS replace a traditional computer on its own? We're not using a mouse ten years from now.
I don't think the IOS is meant to do that. Yes it does what it does pretty well. But it is not built to be a desktop PC replacement. Touch technology is nice, but it is not meant to be productive (yet). Yes we can send emails, and fill up basic spreadsheets and maybe one day we'll type faster on a touchscreen, but you can't effectively multitask, run specialized software and be generally efficient. The industry will be using a mouse in 10 years.
Originally Posted by Hturt Seaker
If there is no demand for it, no. Plus USB storage is already cheap.
I don't understand what demand has to do with anything. And what does reiterating that accomplish?
You are in the example I provided. Instead of buying and supporting 2 devices I can do the same functions with one, it is more cost effective.
Some of the same functions, more complicated and with much greater restriction.
I don't think the IOS is meant to do that. Yes it does what it does pretty well. But it is not built to be a desktop PC replacement.
That's what OS XI will be for.
Touch technology is nice, but it is not meant to be productive (yet). Yes we can send emails, and fill up basic spreadsheets and maybe one day we'll type faster on a touchscreen, but you can't effectively multitask, run specialized software and be generally efficient.
Ha! You're joking. This is totally wrong.
The industry will be using a mouse in 10 years.
Good luck with that. Microsoft might be, but the industry's leaders won't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
1.- I don't understand what demand has to do with anything. And what does reiterating that accomplish?
2.- Some of the same functions, more complicated and with much greater restriction.
3.- That's what OS XI will be for.
4.- Ha! You're joking. This is totally wrong.
5.- Good luck with that. Microsoft might be, but the industry's leaders won't.
1.- If Apple's costumers created a high demand for removable storage they'd add it.
2.- There shouldn't be. I think we are not talking about the same things here.
3.- So then IOS will not be doing it like you were suggesting earlier.
4.- Are you suggesting that a IOS device is at least equally efficient as a full fledged desktop? IOS devices don't even support multiple monitors (hallmark of multitasking and efficiency across most industries - there is even studies about this). There is no Autocad support (most used CAD software across multiple industries). Can they run full versions of professional photo editing, website building, graphic intensive games and other specialized software? Many (if not most) of the new Desktop Personal Computers do. Atm IOS devices may be able to replace internet stations, but that's about it.
5.- The Tech industry is not the only industry out there. For example, the Aerospace and Manufacturing industries are not going touch anytime soon. Btw Win 8 is touchscreen as well.
Let's just agree to disagree and celebrate our right to have opinions.
Originally Posted by Hturt Seaker
2.- There shouldn't be. I think we are not talking about the same things here.
You can't run OS X on ARM without compromises that the people for whom this device would be intended wouldn't be willing to accept.
3.- So then IOS will not be doing it like you were suggesting earlier.
No, it won't be doing what you were suggesting.
4.- Are you suggesting that a IOS device is at least equally efficient as a full fledged desktop?
I am suggesting that for a growing number of purposes, people would be better served with an iOS device than another computing source. As time passes, eventually the stated benefits of a keyboard and mouse will apply to too few people to bother continuing to make product.
IOS devices don't even support multiple monitors (hallmark of multitasking and efficiency across most industries…
Two eyes, one cursor, one application at a time. You can only DO one thing at once, which is why iOS operates the way it does. As touch pervades the desktop, your needs will be filled, and better than a mouse could ever have done it.
There is no Autocad support
You pitch this as though it's an inherent flaw of the platform, unable to ever be changed for any reason. AutoCAD is next to meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It will be on them, not Apple, to support the products people use going forward.
Can they run full versions of professional photo editing, website building, graphic intensive games and other specialized software?
Again, you're operating under the assumption that now = forever.
Also, yes, for all of these, anyway.
Atm IOS devices may be able to replace internet stations, but that's about it.
This isn't 2007. Take a gander at modern iOS devices.
5.- The Tech industry is not the only industry out there. For example, the Aerospace and Manufacturing industries are not going touch anytime soon.
Who says? What's your evidence of that? We have posters here who use iPads on their respective companies' factory floors. Sort of puts a hole in that theory.
Btw Win 8 is touchscreen as well.
And look how well they're doing.
Let's just agree to disagree and celebrate our right to have opinions.
Look, I'm not discounting the idea of a docking, portable device. I sort of like the idea, and would like to see some companies at least throw up concepts of what it could become. I'm discounting your idea of having two OS on one machine. It's crazy, inefficient, and renders far too many compromises to be worth selling to a consumer or professional. And Apple wants consumers and professionals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You can't run OS X on ARM without compromises that the people for whom this device would be intended wouldn't be willing to accept.
No, it won't be doing what you were suggesting.
I am suggesting that for a growing number of purposes, people would be better served with an iOS device than another computing source. As time passes, eventually the stated benefits of a keyboard and mouse will apply to too few people to bother continuing to make product.
Two eyes, one cursor, one application at a time. You can only DO one thing at once, which is why iOS operates the way it does. As touch pervades the desktop, your needs will be filled, and better than a mouse could ever have done it.
You pitch this as though it's an inherent flaw of the platform, unable to ever be changed for any reason. AutoCAD is next to meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It will be on them, not Apple, to support the products people use going forward.
Again, you're operating under the assumption that now = forever.
Also, yes, for all of these, anyway.
This isn't 2007. Take a gander at modern iOS devices.
Who says? What's your evidence of that? We have posters here who use iPads on their respective companies' factory floors. Sort of puts a hole in that theory.
And look how well they're doing.
Look, I'm not discounting the idea of a docking, portable device. I sort of like the idea, and would like to see some companies at least throw up concepts of what it could become. I'm discounting your idea of having two OS on one machine. It's crazy, inefficient, and renders far too many compromises to be worth selling to a consumer or professional. And Apple wants consumers and professionals.
1.- ARM is not the only processing platform. Make a new Kernel.
2.- And that is the reason I used "IF"
3.- corecommunication.ca/4-studies-which-show-that-using-a-second-monitor-can-boost-productivity/
4.- It may not be a flaw, but Personal Computers do support most of those applications. Until IOS can match support then we can say that IOS is a viable replacement for Personal Computers.
5.- You are saying that they currently can, and I am saying they courrently can't replace PCs other than Interner stations.
6.- I work on both of those Industries. Having an Ipad to view PDFs (drawings) is not considered adopting touch technologies at large. They had Internet stations that were replaced by Ipads and I already agreed to that.
They are not adopting it anytime soon because the current technology works, and they will not fix what is not broken (Because it costs tons of money). The lifecycle of the software they use is long to minimize training and certification costs. CATIA for example, which is the main 3D software that major OEMs (Boeing, Airbus, Tesla, and other automotive and Aerospace leaders) use. CATIA V5 (about $14k a seat for the cheapest config. + a yearly fee) came out in 1998, CATIA V6 came out in 2008 and it has not been implemented by OEMs yet! Even if CATIA V7 was Touch technology, it'd take many, many years to be adopted, if ever. Suppliers follow what OEMs get, so no hope there either. And smaller design houses (Say MasterCAM's) don't have the power to push touch technology even if they wanted.
Heck, a company recently I contracted with (2000+ employees with a several hundred engineers) still uses Win XP, Office 2007 (recently upgraded) and Acad 2004.
Another heck, some companies already invested into Space Mouses, they are not going to waste all of that money/training to go touch with stylus (assuming there was such software).
All in all, those industries are not going Touch anytime soon.
7.- Idk, I dislike Win 8.
8.- It may use more storage, but a well done Kernel should handle the transition well. I am not advocating running a VM.
Originally Posted by Hturt Seaker
1.- ARM is not the only processing platform. Make a new Kernel.
So design completely new hardware for a completely new product and completely rewrite BOTH of your operating systems for the SOLE PURPOSE of building a device that can run both of them for an absolutely minuscule niche?!
4.- It may not be a flaw, but Personal Computers do support most of those applications. Until IOS can match support then we can say that IOS is a viable replacement for Personal Computers.
Except not everyone uses every single piece of software ever written for every industry. Your argument isn't one. iOS is a perfectly valid computing platform and a hugely viable replacement for hundreds of millions of people. ALREADY. And growing.
5.- You are saying that they currently can, and I am saying they courrently can't replace PCs other than Interner stations.
Yes, you're totally wrong, and I'm right. That's the gist of it.
6.- I work on both of those Industries. Having an Ipad to view PDFs (drawings) is not considered adopting touch technologies at large. They had Internet stations that were replaced by Ipads and I already agreed to that.
Thanks for moving the goalposts and simultaneously disagreeing with your original point and agreeing with me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaestroDRAVEN
Apple didn't build Mac OSX on top of UNIX, at all. Mac OSX is a microkernel, which is comprised of several different elements to communicate with basic UNIX commands, such as POSIX and message passing. The only thing "UNIX" about OSX is the Terminal. Even Aqua is a proprietary GUI, as opposed to xWindows or XORG for Linux. Funny you mention Windows. Any OS can achieve UNIX accreditation with the right compatibility layer. We see an offshoot of this already in Windows with PowerShell. But, like OSX, that wouldn't turn Windows into a UNIX operating system. When people talk about OSX being "UNIX-based," they're generalizing, and most of the time it's due to lack of knowledge. A more proper term would be "UNIX-compliant." Remember, OSX wasn't accredited by the Open Group until Leopard was released. That's quite far down the pipe. However, Linux...being closer to UNIX than OSX ever will be, still has not been OG accredited. So you see...terms and accreditation don't mean much in the world of UNIX.
Max OSX is not a microkernel. OSX is an operating system that includes the Xnu hybrid microkernel that contains mach and bits of the FreeBSD kernel for the required Unix syscalls and process models.
You forgot the entire BSD userland.
A proprietary GUI is as much part of Unix as any other. CDE was the standard desktop for mainline Unix for years and was proprietary. Motif was the proprietary GUI toolkit CDE was built on (eventually open sourced). Ever heard of that maybe? And OSX had X11 installed up to mountain lion and now supports XQuartz which is the X.org port for OS X.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5293?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US
http://xquartz.macosforge.org/landing/
OSX is not UNIX-based. It IS UNIX and you have no clue what you're talking about.