Apple's Ive played 'key' role in developing upcoming iOS 7

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
During his interview at the D11 conference, Apple CEO Tim Cook noted that the company's Senior Vice President of Industrial Design Jonathan Ive was key in creating the next generation operating system set to be unveiled at WWDC in June.

Tim Cook
Apple CEO Tim Cook at the D11 conference. | Source: AllThingsD


Walt Mossberg of AllThingsD's asked Cook about Ive's involvement in Apple's forthcoming iOS 7, set for reveal at the company's Worldwide Developers Conference next month.

?Yes. Jony is really key,? Cook said.

He went on to say describe the management shake up that occurred last fall which ultimately led to the axing of then iOS chief Scott Forstall.

"What we did last fall was change things up, to really ramp up our innovation," Cook said. "The key in the post-PC era for having a great product is incredible hardware, incredible software, and incredible services, and to combine them so you can't tell what's what. The magic is at the intersection."

When probed on Forstall's departure, Cook had nothing to say, instead deflecting the question to focus on the progress being made in iOS and OS X.

?We recognized that Jony had contributed significantly to the look and feel of Apple for many, many years and could do that for software as well, and I think it?s absolutely incredible," Cook said of Ive.

As for the general state of affairs in Apple's two flagship operating systems, Cook appears pleased with the results.

"Now it's seven months later, and I think it's been an incredible change," he said. "Craig [Federighi] is running iOS and OS X, which has been fantastic."

Federighi took his post as part of the change last fall.

Cook said "the future of iOS and OS X" will rollout at WWDC 2013 in June.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 41
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,250member


    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

    Cook said "the future of iOS and OS X" will rollout at WWDC 2013 in June.


     


    Ah, FRIG, they're gonna unify them too soon.

  • Reply 2 of 41
    bigmikebigmike Posts: 245member
    Looking forward to the new look. Maybe a hint of the minimalist early days but modernized. It's time for a refresher.
  • Reply 3 of 41
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,382member
    I know I'm excited about what's coming at WWDC. Especially the new Mac Pro mentioned above ... oh wait a minute ... it wasn't.
  • Reply 4 of 41

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Ah, FRIG, they're gonna unify them too soon.



     


    They may unify them somewhat, but not "go stupid" like Microsoft. I do hope to see iWork for both the Mac and iDevices to grow a lot of new features. Pages and Numbers don't need a lot of new features, if Apple focuses on the ones most enterprise and education users need the most.

  • Reply 5 of 41
    ruel24ruel24 Posts: 432member
    It doesn't matter what comes out, all of you Apple lap dogs are gonna triumph it as the greatest thing that ever happened... You people make others want to own the competition! I, personally, hope it better be a home run because Apple can use it. I've already read articles where people are not looking forward to a new look. I think the current look still has legs.
  • Reply 6 of 41
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Ah, FRIG, they're gonna unify them too soon.

    If Apple didn't just shoehorn the iPhone UI into the iPad — unlike what happened with Android tablets in 2010 and Windows tablets for 2 decades prior — I don't think you need to worry about Mac OS X and the 3 iOS UIs becoming one entity. They will surely continue to share underlying code and become more unified where it's effective (e.g.: Renaming of similar apps, QTX engine, frameworks, services unification, and other low level items) but they will still need to be unique UIs if they are going to still be functional.

    The most radical I could possibly conceive, if I'm being very generous, is having iOS apps run on the Mac, which is something that someSamsung devices allow, but that's only if there is a real use for that over just being gimmicky. I certainly don't see one but I'm open to suggestions.
  • Reply 7 of 41
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,515member


    He sure uses the word "incredible" a lot.

  • Reply 8 of 41
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    He sure uses the word "incredible" a lot.

    For WWDC we can play Tim Cook's "Incredible" Drinking Game.
  • Reply 9 of 41

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post


     


    They may unify them somewhat, but not "go stupid" like Microsoft. I do hope to see iWork for both the Mac and iDevices to grow a lot of new features. Pages and Numbers don't need a lot of new features, if Apple focuses on the ones most enterprise and education users need the most.



    I have to disagree about Numbers. They need a backend programming language similar to how Excel has VBA. They could really kick MS Office in the nuts if they did that.

  • Reply 10 of 41
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 706member


    Ive is instrumental in the upcoming look and feel of iOS 7? I heard a huge NO SHIT form inside my skull.


     


    SolipsismX: Imagine running iOS apps such as Deliveries on your Mac. It'd be pretty useful. Lots of biz apps could run like widgets and be quite useful.


     


    I'd love to be further distracted than I already am on my iPhone when I'm busy on my iMac - say, a word is played on Words with Friends.....


     


    I also can't see any reason why my media apps like ABC, CBS, Daily Show, TED and others shouldn't run on my Apple TV. Also, some games would be perfect with my big living room tv.

  • Reply 11 of 41
    vl-tonevl-tone Posts: 337member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    If Apple didn't just shoehorn the iPhone UI into the iPad — unlike what happened with Android tablets in 2010 and Windows tablets for 2 decades prior — I don't think you need to worry about Mac OS X and the 3 iOS UIs becoming one entity. They will surely continue to share underlying code and become more unified where it's effective (e.g.: Renaming of similar apps, QTX engine, frameworks, services unification, and other low level items) but they will still need to be unique UIs if they are going to still be functional.



    The most radical I could possibly conceive, if I'm being very generous, is having iOS apps run on the Mac, which is something that someSamsung devices allow, but that's only if there is a real use for that over just being gimmicky. I certainly don't see one but I'm open to suggestions.


    As you must know, with the dev tools installed, iOS apps can be compiled and run natively on Mac OS X. The simulator is essentially a wrapper that sandboxes x86 iOS apps into a restricted environment simulating iOS devices.


     


    Apple's development version of the simulator must be much more flexible than what we have, and it's probably relatively trivial for them to make it access large amount of memory and screen estate.


     


    It's probably also relatively easy for them to make a "Super iOS" layer that has access to all Mac OS X frameworks that it doesn't normally have on the iOS devices, making it possible to port large Mac apps to a new window-less, auto-layout, touch friendly UI layer without too much work.


     


    I'm not saying that they'll do it anytime soon, if ever, but it would make sense for them to have played with the idea. Remember, iOS is developed inside Mac OS X.

  • Reply 12 of 41
    vl-tonevl-tone Posts: 337member


    Nevermind. Hit the wrong button. Again.

  • Reply 13 of 41
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    bugsnw wrote: »
    SolipsismX: Imagine running iOS apps such as Deliveries on your Mac. It'd be pretty useful. Lots of biz apps could run like widgets and be quite useful.

    That's what I don't get. It seems like a solution in search of a problem. Why not just use a service designed for the Mac. I use Delivery Status that syncs my deliveries via JuneCloud. I add/remove/change it in only place and it updates everywhere else.

    The iOS Simulator for Xcode shows how clumsy it would be to use an iOS app with a mouse. You have to use the Alt key for two fingers and the Menu Bar for many other features like rotate, shake and Home. Would this be one simulated app per app or do you want this to be exactly like your iPhone OS? What would happen if you made changes on one but not the other?

    That all seems like the wrong way to go. I'd rather just have a model designed for the UI which is what they have now. Granted, Apple seems to have given up on Widgets because they can't monetize them, and they may be able to do that with Mac widgets that are more iOS familiar, but simulating actual iOS apps doesn't seem like the right way to go... especially not for Apple where UX is key.
  • Reply 14 of 41
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,544member
    ruel24 wrote: »
    It doesn't matter what comes out, all of you Apple lap dogs are gonna triumph it as the greatest thing that ever happened... You people make others want to own the competition! I, personally, hope it better be a home run because Apple can use it. I've already read articles where people are not looking forward to a new look. I think the current look still has legs.

    Troll off. Wait, Apple needs a HR? I guess the iPod, iPhone, iPad were what exactly? The only reason Sammy (and Android) scored any runs us because they were stealing signs and getting bloop singles.
  • Reply 15 of 41
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bigmike View Post



    Looking forward to the new look. Maybe a hint of the minimalist early days but modernized. It's time for a refresher.


     


    I'm not sure that there were any "minimalist early days."   image


     


    Early OS X was garish and has gotten slowly more sedate and less zazzy over time.  


     


    Unless you mean Mac OS which started out rather plain and ended up looking like a cheap hooker? 

  • Reply 16 of 41
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post


     


    They may unify them somewhat, but not "go stupid" like Microsoft. I do hope to see iWork for both the Mac and iDevices to grow a lot of new features. Pages and Numbers don't need a lot of new features, if Apple focuses on the ones most enterprise and education users need the most.



     


    For the record, Pages for iOS needs a few more features to even be "feature-complete" vis-a-vis the original desktop version, and both versions are as old and ugly (UI-wise) as iOS itself.  Pages for iOS doesn't do basic hyphenation for instance, and it doesn't support ligatures.  


     


    Technically, it can't even open and save Pages for OS X documents for cripes sake.  It just makes a new, rough approximated copy of the document, stripping out all the features and other junk it doesn't understand.  Opening editing and saving the same documents should be a given for this sort of thing. 


     


    I for one am going to be really pissed if they don't announce something to do with iWork apps finally being fixed/upgraded at this WWDC.  


     


    It's already a slap in the face that they haven't even finished the iOS apps and haven't given an update of any significance to the desktop apps for two years or more.  If they are now going to radically update iOS functionally, as well as visually, and do the same to OS X, but then still hope to get away with doing fuk all with iWork I think there will be significant blowback even from the critics that usually give Apple a pass on this kind of stuff.  

  • Reply 17 of 41
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gazoobee wrote: »
    I'm not sure that there were any "minimalist early days."   :???:

    Early OS X was garish and has gotten slowly more sedate and less zazzy over time.  

    Unless you mean Mac OS which started out rather plain and ended up looking like a cheap hooker? 

    Pin stripping, extra heavy shadowing, brushed aluminum, and bubble effects come to mind. At the time they were impressive feats but they were still garish. I am looking forward to a more subdued and subtle look to the OS.

    I think the App Store and Music apps on iOS could be examples of what to expect.
  • Reply 18 of 41

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post



    It doesn't matter what comes out, all of you Apple lap dogs are gonna triumph it as the greatest thing that ever happened... You people make others want to own the competition! I, personally, hope it better be a home run because Apple can use it. I've already read articles where people are not looking forward to a new look. I think the current look still has legs.


    Apple has changed how the Mac interface looked several times in the past, and some of the times I felt it was a step backwards... but then, later, I boot up an older version of MacOS and I'm astounded at how clunky the old screens looked. I'm not into change for changes sake, but I've used the Mac since 1984 and know by now that I'm not a UI designer and Apple's changes are usually on target.


     


    As for your opening sentence(s), I don't know why you feel so negative about people being a fan of Apple. I'd expect you have favorite sports teams. Business is a form of competition too... maybe it's nerdy and not jocky, but Apple has a lot of fans. It's different if you are anti-Apple and in reaction pick another manufacturer to support. You may never really know what it's like to really care about a brand or team, but it is a nice feeling and I for one enjoy it.

  • Reply 19 of 41

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


     


    For the record, Pages for iOS needs a few more features to even be "feature-complete" vis-a-vis the original desktop version, and both versions are as old and ugly (UI-wise) as iOS itself.  Pages for iOS doesn't do basic hyphenation for instance, and it doesn't support ligatures.  


     


    Technically, it can't even open and save Pages for OS X documents for cripes sake.  It just makes a new, rough approximated copy of the document, stripping out all the features and other junk it doesn't understand.  Opening editing and saving the same documents should be a given for this sort of thing. 


     


    I for one am going to be really pissed if they don't announce something to do with iWork apps finally being fixed/upgraded at this WWDC.  


     


    It's already a slap in the face that they haven't even finished the iOS apps and haven't given an update of any significance to the desktop apps for two years or more.  If they are now going to radically update iOS functionally, as well as visually, and do the same to OS X, but then still hope to get away with doing fuk all with iWork I think there will be significant blowback even from the critics that usually give Apple a pass on this kind of stuff.  



     


    I think you and I are in complete agreement. Certain new features will be a big plus for corporate/institutional/educational users. I've seen some lists of "must haves" and they are not that extensive. When I say "not a lot of features," I'm thinking of Microsoft Word and it's endless feature list. I'm sure that somewhere some one is using features that only a slim fraction of one percent of the users need, and that's good for Microsoft. However, Pages and Numbers need to satisfy 80 to 90 percent of the users as soon as possible. Then, if Apple could make the programs open enough to allow programmers to add certain features for specific applications in much the way I can add things onto Firefox or Safari, that would be the next step in finishing iWorks IMHO.

  • Reply 20 of 41

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    I'm not sure that there were any "minimalist early days."   image



     


    You'd need to go back to Mac OS 1.1 when the computer only had 128K to work with. The screen was a work of wonder, especially the icons. It was a totally B/W IU with no shading. Even the city fonts were bare bones. I loved it, but then all I could compare it to was DOS and the command line interface.

Sign In or Register to comment.