iOS and OSX WILL converge. I'm an Apple user, both iOS OSX. Microsoft has paved the way and I've been considering their hybrid solution. A friend of mine has already switched to Microsoft Surface. Now even her new phone is an Android. I'll wait for Apple to do their hybrid device, because I know it would be much better than Microsoft's Surface.
Some things I know:
- Apple wants to offer great products and continue being the personal devices leader.
- Microsoft Surface sales are on the rise.
- While selling not hybrid devices, an Apple CEO would NEVER say that an hybrid one is on the go.
This brings us to the only conclusion: Tim Cook is now protecting the Apple sales, and to do so in the future, he will have to sell a MacPad.
Maybe sooner than later.
Whether Surface sales are on the rise long-term, or in any meaningful way, remains to be seen. Remember netbooks? People bought them in droves but quickly figured out that they weren't really good. The iPad killed that market.
Also, why should Apple need to do anything just because the Surface could be a success? Windows is still FAR more widespread than Mac, but Apple is raking in all the profits. They couldn't care less, and certainly don't "need" to respond to anything with what they, as a company, feel would be an inferior product.
Well, Cook talked similarly about bigger iPhones...
...now we have them.
Also there are two ways to do hybrid devices: one's the M$ way, with a hybrid GUI; the other would be with two distinct GUI modes.
OS X already has window and full screen modes, they could easily add a touch UI mode. The underlying OS is the same anyway. App developers would simply have to write universal apps that are capable of switching to the third display mode when the device is used without keyboard/pointing device.
Given the iPad Pro's power, a dockable keyboard with USB ports, SD card slot and track pad could make an iPad Pro like device switchable between laptop and tablet modes, with corresponding switch in UI; no compromise necessary.
If Apple is able to address the needs of 99% of the market with consumer machines, Apple may decide it is not worth pursuing the high end market.
Apple has already decided that it is not interested in the datacenter market (RIP X-Serve).
As a high end user I will be very annoyed if Apple stops making the machine I want. As a stockholder I will be thrilled at the money they make by not wasting resources on relatively small market niches.
as an Apple stock holder, I never want Apple to make a hybrid device. It spells disaster. Most people want an iPad because they didn't want to deal with computer.. Ask Surface users how they like the MS Office application once they remove the keyboard and continue on the saved files. It's a messed up process because it wouldn't work seamlessly.
tvOS is decidedly NOT iOS. That's the whole point of giving it a different name. It does not look like iOS, it does not work like iOS, and it most decidedly does not work like the Mac. It has a COMPLETELY different interface approach, designed specifically and uniquely for the remote.
Your "logic" is completely moot.
iOS on a MacBook IS NOT POSSIBLE. It wouldn't be iOS anymore, as the ENTIRE POINT of iOS is that it is touch-operated.
The only way this could possibly work is if the MacBook/Pad had two completely separate and distinct operational modes. Which would make it complex, confusing, and a bad trade off over having two separate devices being best at their separate things.
You're simply completely wrong. tvOS is entirely based on iOS. It's still touch, it's just that you remotely touch to interface with the non-touchscreen. Those changes are entirely implementable in iOS mainstream, the logic is perfect, it's an easy extension of iOS and one I'm sure Apple is planning on supporting at some point. While tvOS is rudimentary non-touchscreen (remote touch) functionality, it is non-touchscreen iOS nonetheless, a v1 so to speak. You can yell in all caps that I'm wrong that it's not possible, but it is possible, we have a working version of iOS that doesn't use a touchscreen.
If you can't understand this I'm not sure what issue you have with this, do you think it's not technically possible? Apple has solved the technical issues (most of them), they've elegantly extended the touch paradigm to use a remote "touch surface" to move focus on screen, to select items on the screen, they've even extended it to more complex physical controllers - the same apps that run on iOS, with some small changes due to the way tvOS handles the interfacing (which can easily be rolled into iOS mainstream), run on tvOS. All you have to think about is moving the notion of touch off the screen on to another surface and continuing that elegant paradigm using a touchpad - you move your finger around the pad, focus moves around the screen (indicated in the same way tvOS indicates movement of focus), you click to select, you have a keyboard to type - it's slightly different, but it works and it works well.
The OS could easily identify whether a touchpad is connected and the screen is non-touch, then it just switches the way in which it accepts input from the screen to the touchpad - easy, peasy. Entirely possible, and we have a v1 working example. It's totally logical, and Apple has done what I think is a great job extending and staying true to iOS with this remote touchpad, can't wait to see them extend it further.
as an Apple stock holder, I never want Apple to make a hybrid device. It spells disaster. Most people want an iPad because they didn't want to deal with computer.. Ask Surface users how they like the MS Office application once they remove the keyboard and continue on the saved files. It's a messed up process because it wouldn't work seamlessly.
Consider Pages. It runs on both the Mac and the iPad. Same program different interface. Imagine that the interface could switch as you reconfigured the machine.
But the real solution is for Apple to change the Mac interface into something that matches the iPad interface. Then the switch between "Laptop mode" and "tablet mode" is seamless because the two interfaces are the just about the same.
You're simply completely wrong. tvOS is entirely based on iOS. It's still touch, it's just that you remotely touch to interface with the non-touchscreen.
If you do not realize that this is the biggest change you can make to an interface aside from going text-input based, then we're done here. I've JUST explained why this difference is fundamental, three posts up:
If you aren't at all clear on what the difference between touch-oriented interface with a finger and the total abstraction introduced by remote-controlling an interface via external pointing device is, then I'm not sure what the point is in discussing this, at all.
You can remote-control a car, and you can drive a car. The car can look exactly the same, and have exactly the same features and specifications and load and tasks, but in terms of actual operation and experience, they could not be any more different.
"iOS" is the name that Apple marketing puts on the TOUCH-ORIENTED version of Darwin.
Of course you can. Touch-Base's UPDD comes to mind immediately.
No, you cannot.
Operate the Mac via VNC on a tablet. You can't even scroll ANYTHING - unless you set it to always show scroll bars, and then please make them finger-width. Some of the most basic assumptions made on desktop software and desktop web interfaces fail - nothing mouse-over works, no tooltips, no rollover menus, no scrubbing previews.
Sure, you CAN hack stuff to avoid all that and kind of make it work anyway, but this either makes the tablet feel really clunky, or the desktop stuff just less good at being desktop stuff.
These are completely different operational modes. You can build a machine that switches between them, but you can not sensibly merge them.
Like back when Macs had Front Row. That was great, but it worked ONLY with the remote. Apple decided to remove it because it made more sense to have that kind of interface on Apple TV, rather than add a wholly separate operational layer to the Mac. (Sadly - I still miss it, as my media center is a 24" iMac, and I don't own a TV.)
Consider Pages. It runs on both the Mac and the iPad. Same program different interface. Imagine that the interface could switch as you reconfigured the machine.
But the real solution is for Apple to change the Mac interface into something that matches the iPad interface. Then the switch between "Laptop mode" and "tablet mode" is seamless because the two interfaces are the just about the same.
If you do not realize that this is the biggest change you can make to an interface aside from going text-input based, then we're done here. I've JUST explained why this difference is fundamental, three posts up.
Banging my head against the wall is more fun.
If you have used the new AppleTV you have experienced how to use a trackpad to control an iOS device.
If you've used an iPad screen sharing App to remotely control a Mac, then you have experienced how to use a touch screen interface to control a Mac.
These examples clearly demonstrate that trackpads can be used to run iOS and touch can be used to run OS-X. Both systems are useable with either input method.
Whether or not any remaining differences are "fundamental" is a matter of terminology not practicality.
When they look and act the same, the question of whether or not they are the same is merely one of terminology.
The answer becomes even more muddy if they are both compiled from the same source code, just with different options. (i.e. one version uses the iOS user interface API, and the other uses the OS-X user interface API).
If you have used the new AppleTV you have experienced how to use a trackpad to control an iOS device.
If you've used an iPad screen sharing App to remotely control a Mac, then you have experienced how to use a touch screen interface to control a Mac.
These examples clearly demonstrate that trackpads can be used to run iOS and touch can be used to run OS-X. Both systems are useable with either input method.
Whether or not any remaining differences are "fundamental" is a matter of terminology not practicality.
You are NOT CONTROLLING AN iOS DEVICE.
You are controlling a tvOS device.
That mode of interaction is literally the primary difference between the two and the reason why they are TWO SEPARATE OS'EN.
To say it's just a matter of terminology and not practicality is a delightfully ridiculous argument, since you cannot run tvOS on an iPad, nor can you run iOS on a TV. I mean YOU, practically. Apple doesn't allow it (AirPlay mode for iOS notwithstanding). How much more "practical" does it get?
I'm not claiming it's a "practical" issue - it's a CONCEPTUAL issue. Which you are completely failing to address.
Operate the Mac via VNC on a tablet. You can't even scroll ANYTHING - unless you set it to always show scroll bars, and then please make them finger-width. Some of the most basic assumptions made on desktop software and desktop web interfaces fail - nothing mouse-over works, no tooltips, no rollover menus, no scrubbing previews.
Sure, you CAN hack stuff to avoid all that and kind of make it work anyway, but this either makes the tablet feel really clunky, or the desktop stuff just less good at being desktop stuff.
These are completely different operational modes. You can build a machine that switches between them, but you can not sensibly merge them.
Like back when Macs had Front Row. That was great, but it worked ONLY with the remote. Apple decided to remove it because it made more sense to have that kind of interface on Apple TV, rather than add a wholly separate operational layer to the Mac. (Sadly - I still miss it, as my media center is a 24" iMac, and I don't own a TV.)
Actually, I scroll on my Mac by dragging two fingers on my Trackpad. I scroll on my iPad by dragging one or two fingers across the screen.
The biggest difference is that the two systems used to have me move my fingers in different directions. Apple fixed that by changing the Mac to use the same scrolling model as the iPad. Now I scroll on the Mac the same as the iPad.
As to removing Front Row from the Mac, that was a policy decision, not a technical one. Apple TV version 2 and 3 could be operated both by the Apple remote, or by the touchpad on an iPhone via the remote App. I suspect Front Row was discontinued as it is easy for a Mac based media center to display third party content. With an Apple TV, Apple retain more control over what you can watch. Apple really likes control.
That mode of interaction is literally the primary difference between the two and the reason why they are TWO SEPARATE OS'EN.
To say it's just a matter of terminology and not practicality is a delightfully ridiculous argument, since you cannot run tvOS on an iPad, nor can you run iOS on a TV. I mean YOU, practically. Apple doesn't allow it (AirPlay mode for iOS notwithstanding). How much more "practical" does it get?
I'm not claiming it's a "practical" issue - it's a CONCEPTUAL issue. Which you are completely failing to address.
I do get it. It is entirely a "conceptual" issue. It is how you choose to think about it.
From a technical standpoint, tvOS is almost identical to iOS. The difference is in the user interface. From a conceptual standpoint the difference is huge.
From a technical standpoint, Intel CPUs are very different from PowerPC CPUs. Apple succeeded in making them conceptually the same.
Apple is changing the Mac interface to match the iPad interface. While many people will conceptualize them as being very different, eventually they will be the same.
If you do not realize that this is the biggest change you can make to an interface aside from going text-input based, then we're done here.
Then I guess we're done here, but I do realise it's a big change, I never said it wasn't a big change, I simply said it was a logical extension of a lovely OS that has become more sophisticated and functional and is ready for the next step - that's not to say iOS will become *only* a remote touch system, just that it'll start to support remote touch, non-touchscreen systems. Think of it from a visionary perspective. Those three little dots that are on the side of the iPad Pro - those obviously have life outside the iPad Pro, that's their "smart connector" that will allow docking of iDevices to support peripherals, such as a monitor and touchpad (so you don't have to suffer what Apple calls the "gorilla arms" syndrome). This is much more likely than adding touch to OS X (which people keep desiring), they've already taken a first step on the path to this and we see it in tvOS. You may not agree it's a path, but you can't deny that tvOS is a version of iOS that accepts a different input method. The amount of effort it would take to bring that to the desktop is most likely minimal and I would assume in the works - it's a great way to get the world to embrace iOS even more, extending it in this fashion, a great way for Apple to be able to sell more high margin devices to the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spheric
I've JUST explained why this difference is fundamental, three posts up:
Banging my head against the wall is more fun.
No you haven't, you've come up with a list of things that explain something that makes sense only to you, and is completely illogical because it ignores the whole reality of what exists today. If you can't see that the paradigm of touch *can be* extended to a remote touch and that Apple has a version of it in the market today (making it more than a concept), then it's you who is fundamentally misunderstanding something or simply being obtuse for the sake of argument.
We're talking about extending the iOS paradigm to include a remote touch instead of on-screen, Apple has done what I think is an elegant job with a rudimentary version of this in tvOS - those are iOS apps running and the core OS underlying it all is iOS. You can deny that it exists, you can deny that it's iOS, you can deny that remote touch is possible, but that doesn't make it true -> there exists a version of iOS that doesn't accept onscreen touching as its input.
But, I guess we're done here, so I'll leave you with this: tvOS is a remote touch iOS.
Actually, I scroll on my Mac by dragging two fingers on my Trackpad. I scroll on my iPad by dragging one or two fingers across the screen.
Actually, you scroll on the iPad by dragging ONE finger across the screen. Two fingers usually does something completely different — like zoom, or changing viewing angle, or some such.
Excellent demonstration of how it being a conceptual issue and merely "how you choose to think about it" means that you simply choose not to think at all about how things actually work.
Now, next level: How do you drag an object on the Mac?
Actually, you scroll on the iPad by dragging ONE finger across the screen. Two fingers usually does something completely different — like zoom, or changing viewing angle, or some such.
Excellent demonstration of how it being a conceptual issue and merely "how you choose to think about it" means that you simply choose not to think at all about how things actually work.
Now, next level: How do you drag an object on the Mac?
Generally I would drag by touching the Wacom pen to the screen and dragging the object. Just about the same as the iPad except that I use a stylus rather than my finger. Other than finger vs. stylus, conceptually the same.
Of course, not everyone has a Wacom tablet. Some use a trackpad. With the trackpad, Apple allows you to use many of the same gestures as the iPad. For instance Pinch to Zoom. Multi-finger swipes for switching between full screen apps, etc.
Sometimes I use a trackpad. When I do, my windows show scroll bars and I can click on them.
Every once in a while I use a mouse. This is similar to using the Wacom stylus, but generally involves an extra click.
It turns out that there are many variations to the Mac interface. Apple is working very hard to add iPad like functionality to the Mac, and to discourage traditional Mac interfaces. If Apple wanted to keep the traditional Mac interface, then scroll bars would not be off by default. Apple does want Mac users to scroll with scroll bars. Apple really wants the Mac user to pretend like scroll bars don't exist as controls. Scrolling should be down by pointing and dragging the content (conceptually, just like an iPad).
It's interesting to look at Tim Cook's actual comments.
He said that customers don't want a converged Mac and iPad. What he didn't mention is that Apple strives to give customers what Apple thinks they need, not what the customer's want. Customer's were not asking for a Graphical User Interface when Apple Introduced the Mac. Customer's were not demanding that Apple remove optical drives from the Mac. Many customers were upset when Apple discontinued support for ADB (Apple Desktop Bus) keyboards, and switched all Macs to USB. And let's not forget how many people thought it was a drastic mistake that the iPhone lacked a physical keyboard.
What customer's think they want has little to do with what Apple delivers.
Tim Cook's primary message was that the iPad will replace the surface because the Surface was a bad merging of tablets/laptops. In Cook's opinion, the Surface made too many compromises in trying to do everything. He then points out that Macs and PCs are not the same. Suggesting that a Surface like device running an Apple OS would not necessarily contain those compromises.
Cook then goes on to justify having both a Mac and an iPad product line by declaring that they address different market segments. Of course the iPad Mini and iPad Pro address different market segments, and they differ primarily in screen size. Address different market segments does not mean fundamental product differences.
He reaffirms that both Macs and iPads have a strong future, but he declines to provide any clarity on what that future will look like.
In other words that only thing that Tim Cook told us was that he thinks Apple products are better than Windows products. He also claimed that both the Mac brand and the iPad brand will be sticking around.
The user comments on this topic include a lot of informed speculation as to the future of these products. Mr. Cook's comments actually tell us very little, and are only worth reporting because Apple does not provide product roadmaps.
Comments
Whether Surface sales are on the rise long-term, or in any meaningful way, remains to be seen. Remember netbooks? People bought them in droves but quickly figured out that they weren't really good. The iPad killed that market.
Also, why should Apple need to do anything just because the Surface could be a success? Windows is still FAR more widespread than Mac, but Apple is raking in all the profits. They couldn't care less, and certainly don't "need" to respond to anything with what they, as a company, feel would be an inferior product.
Your reasoning is flawed.
You can't run OS X on a touch screen.
Of course you can. Touch-Base's UPDD comes to mind immediately.
tvOS is decidedly NOT iOS. That's the whole point of giving it a different name. It does not look like iOS, it does not work like iOS, and it most decidedly does not work like the Mac. It has a COMPLETELY different interface approach, designed specifically and uniquely for the remote.
Your "logic" is completely moot.
iOS on a MacBook IS NOT POSSIBLE. It wouldn't be iOS anymore, as the ENTIRE POINT of iOS is that it is touch-operated.
The only way this could possibly work is if the MacBook/Pad had two completely separate and distinct operational modes. Which would make it complex, confusing, and a bad trade off over having two separate devices being best at their separate things.
You're simply completely wrong. tvOS is entirely based on iOS. It's still touch, it's just that you remotely touch to interface with the non-touchscreen. Those changes are entirely implementable in iOS mainstream, the logic is perfect, it's an easy extension of iOS and one I'm sure Apple is planning on supporting at some point. While tvOS is rudimentary non-touchscreen (remote touch) functionality, it is non-touchscreen iOS nonetheless, a v1 so to speak. You can yell in all caps that I'm wrong that it's not possible, but it is possible, we have a working version of iOS that doesn't use a touchscreen.
If you can't understand this I'm not sure what issue you have with this, do you think it's not technically possible? Apple has solved the technical issues (most of them), they've elegantly extended the touch paradigm to use a remote "touch surface" to move focus on screen, to select items on the screen, they've even extended it to more complex physical controllers - the same apps that run on iOS, with some small changes due to the way tvOS handles the interfacing (which can easily be rolled into iOS mainstream), run on tvOS. All you have to think about is moving the notion of touch off the screen on to another surface and continuing that elegant paradigm using a touchpad - you move your finger around the pad, focus moves around the screen (indicated in the same way tvOS indicates movement of focus), you click to select, you have a keyboard to type - it's slightly different, but it works and it works well.
The OS could easily identify whether a touchpad is connected and the screen is non-touch, then it just switches the way in which it accepts input from the screen to the touchpad - easy, peasy. Entirely possible, and we have a v1 working example. It's totally logical, and Apple has done what I think is a great job extending and staying true to iOS with this remote touchpad, can't wait to see them extend it further.
as an Apple stock holder, I never want Apple to make a hybrid device. It spells disaster. Most people want an iPad because they didn't want to deal with computer.. Ask Surface users how they like the MS Office application once they remove the keyboard and continue on the saved files. It's a messed up process because it wouldn't work seamlessly.
Consider Pages. It runs on both the Mac and the iPad. Same program different interface. Imagine that the interface could switch as you reconfigured the machine.
But the real solution is for Apple to change the Mac interface into something that matches the iPad interface. Then the switch between "Laptop mode" and "tablet mode" is seamless because the two interfaces are the just about the same.
If you do not realize that this is the biggest change you can make to an interface aside from going text-input based, then we're done here. I've JUST explained why this difference is fundamental, three posts up:
Banging my head against the wall is more fun.
No, you cannot.
Operate the Mac via VNC on a tablet. You can't even scroll ANYTHING - unless you set it to always show scroll bars, and then please make them finger-width. Some of the most basic assumptions made on desktop software and desktop web interfaces fail - nothing mouse-over works, no tooltips, no rollover menus, no scrubbing previews.
Sure, you CAN hack stuff to avoid all that and kind of make it work anyway, but this either makes the tablet feel really clunky, or the desktop stuff just less good at being desktop stuff.
These are completely different operational modes. You can build a machine that switches between them, but you can not sensibly merge them.
Like back when Macs had Front Row. That was great, but it worked ONLY with the remote. Apple decided to remove it because it made more sense to have that kind of interface on Apple TV, rather than add a wholly separate operational layer to the Mac. (Sadly - I still miss it, as my media center is a 24" iMac, and I don't own a TV.)
No, they aren't. They just look the same.
If you do not realize that this is the biggest change you can make to an interface aside from going text-input based, then we're done here. I've JUST explained why this difference is fundamental, three posts up.
Banging my head against the wall is more fun.
If you have used the new AppleTV you have experienced how to use a trackpad to control an iOS device.
If you've used an iPad screen sharing App to remotely control a Mac, then you have experienced how to use a touch screen interface to control a Mac.
These examples clearly demonstrate that trackpads can be used to run iOS and touch can be used to run OS-X. Both systems are useable with either input method.
Whether or not any remaining differences are "fundamental" is a matter of terminology not practicality.
No, they aren't. They just look the same.
When they look and act the same, the question of whether or not they are the same is merely one of terminology.
The answer becomes even more muddy if they are both compiled from the same source code, just with different options. (i.e. one version uses the iOS user interface API, and the other uses the OS-X user interface API).
You are NOT CONTROLLING AN iOS DEVICE.
You are controlling a tvOS device.
That mode of interaction is literally the primary difference between the two and the reason why they are TWO SEPARATE OS'EN.
To say it's just a matter of terminology and not practicality is a delightfully ridiculous argument, since you cannot run tvOS on an iPad, nor can you run iOS on a TV. I mean YOU, practically. Apple doesn't allow it (AirPlay mode for iOS notwithstanding). How much more "practical" does it get?
I'm not claiming it's a "practical" issue - it's a CONCEPTUAL issue. Which you are completely failing to address.
But they don't.
No, you cannot.
Operate the Mac via VNC on a tablet. You can't even scroll ANYTHING - unless you set it to always show scroll bars, and then please make them finger-width. Some of the most basic assumptions made on desktop software and desktop web interfaces fail - nothing mouse-over works, no tooltips, no rollover menus, no scrubbing previews.
Sure, you CAN hack stuff to avoid all that and kind of make it work anyway, but this either makes the tablet feel really clunky, or the desktop stuff just less good at being desktop stuff.
These are completely different operational modes. You can build a machine that switches between them, but you can not sensibly merge them.
Like back when Macs had Front Row. That was great, but it worked ONLY with the remote. Apple decided to remove it because it made more sense to have that kind of interface on Apple TV, rather than add a wholly separate operational layer to the Mac. (Sadly - I still miss it, as my media center is a 24" iMac, and I don't own a TV.)
Actually, I scroll on my Mac by dragging two fingers on my Trackpad. I scroll on my iPad by dragging one or two fingers across the screen.
The biggest difference is that the two systems used to have me move my fingers in different directions. Apple fixed that by changing the Mac to use the same scrolling model as the iPad. Now I scroll on the Mac the same as the iPad.
As to removing Front Row from the Mac, that was a policy decision, not a technical one. Apple TV version 2 and 3 could be operated both by the Apple remote, or by the touchpad on an iPhone via the remote App. I suspect Front Row was discontinued as it is easy for a Mac based media center to display third party content. With an Apple TV, Apple retain more control over what you can watch. Apple really likes control.
You are NOT CONTROLLING AN iOS DEVICE.
You are controlling a tvOS device.
That mode of interaction is literally the primary difference between the two and the reason why they are TWO SEPARATE OS'EN.
To say it's just a matter of terminology and not practicality is a delightfully ridiculous argument, since you cannot run tvOS on an iPad, nor can you run iOS on a TV. I mean YOU, practically. Apple doesn't allow it (AirPlay mode for iOS notwithstanding). How much more "practical" does it get?
I'm not claiming it's a "practical" issue - it's a CONCEPTUAL issue. Which you are completely failing to address.
I do get it. It is entirely a "conceptual" issue. It is how you choose to think about it.
From a technical standpoint, tvOS is almost identical to iOS. The difference is in the user interface. From a conceptual standpoint the difference is huge.
From a technical standpoint, Intel CPUs are very different from PowerPC CPUs. Apple succeeded in making them conceptually the same.
Apple is changing the Mac interface to match the iPad interface. While many people will conceptualize them as being very different, eventually they will be the same.
If you do not realize that this is the biggest change you can make to an interface aside from going text-input based, then we're done here.
Then I guess we're done here, but I do realise it's a big change, I never said it wasn't a big change, I simply said it was a logical extension of a lovely OS that has become more sophisticated and functional and is ready for the next step - that's not to say iOS will become *only* a remote touch system, just that it'll start to support remote touch, non-touchscreen systems. Think of it from a visionary perspective. Those three little dots that are on the side of the iPad Pro - those obviously have life outside the iPad Pro, that's their "smart connector" that will allow docking of iDevices to support peripherals, such as a monitor and touchpad (so you don't have to suffer what Apple calls the "gorilla arms" syndrome). This is much more likely than adding touch to OS X (which people keep desiring), they've already taken a first step on the path to this and we see it in tvOS. You may not agree it's a path, but you can't deny that tvOS is a version of iOS that accepts a different input method. The amount of effort it would take to bring that to the desktop is most likely minimal and I would assume in the works - it's a great way to get the world to embrace iOS even more, extending it in this fashion, a great way for Apple to be able to sell more high margin devices to the world.
Quote:I've JUST explained why this difference is fundamental, three posts up:
Banging my head against the wall is more fun.
No you haven't, you've come up with a list of things that explain something that makes sense only to you, and is completely illogical because it ignores the whole reality of what exists today. If you can't see that the paradigm of touch *can be* extended to a remote touch and that Apple has a version of it in the market today (making it more than a concept), then it's you who is fundamentally misunderstanding something or simply being obtuse for the sake of argument.
We're talking about extending the iOS paradigm to include a remote touch instead of on-screen, Apple has done what I think is an elegant job with a rudimentary version of this in tvOS - those are iOS apps running and the core OS underlying it all is iOS. You can deny that it exists, you can deny that it's iOS, you can deny that remote touch is possible, but that doesn't make it true -> there exists a version of iOS that doesn't accept onscreen touching as its input.
But, I guess we're done here, so I'll leave you with this: tvOS is a remote touch iOS.
Actually, I scroll on my Mac by dragging two fingers on my Trackpad. I scroll on my iPad by dragging one or two fingers across the screen.
Actually, you scroll on the iPad by dragging ONE finger across the screen. Two fingers usually does something completely different — like zoom, or changing viewing angle, or some such.
Excellent demonstration of how it being a conceptual issue and merely "how you choose to think about it" means that you simply choose not to think at all about how things actually work.
Now, next level: How do you drag an object on the Mac?
Actually, you scroll on the iPad by dragging ONE finger across the screen. Two fingers usually does something completely different — like zoom, or changing viewing angle, or some such.
Excellent demonstration of how it being a conceptual issue and merely "how you choose to think about it" means that you simply choose not to think at all about how things actually work.
Now, next level: How do you drag an object on the Mac?
Generally I would drag by touching the Wacom pen to the screen and dragging the object. Just about the same as the iPad except that I use a stylus rather than my finger. Other than finger vs. stylus, conceptually the same.
Of course, not everyone has a Wacom tablet. Some use a trackpad. With the trackpad, Apple allows you to use many of the same gestures as the iPad. For instance Pinch to Zoom. Multi-finger swipes for switching between full screen apps, etc.
Sometimes I use a trackpad. When I do, my windows show scroll bars and I can click on them.
Every once in a while I use a mouse. This is similar to using the Wacom stylus, but generally involves an extra click.
It turns out that there are many variations to the Mac interface. Apple is working very hard to add iPad like functionality to the Mac, and to discourage traditional Mac interfaces. If Apple wanted to keep the traditional Mac interface, then scroll bars would not be off by default. Apple does want Mac users to scroll with scroll bars. Apple really wants the Mac user to pretend like scroll bars don't exist as controls. Scrolling should be down by pointing and dragging the content (conceptually, just like an iPad).
It's interesting to look at Tim Cook's actual comments.
He said that customers don't want a converged Mac and iPad. What he didn't mention is that Apple strives to give customers what Apple thinks they need, not what the customer's want. Customer's were not asking for a Graphical User Interface when Apple Introduced the Mac. Customer's were not demanding that Apple remove optical drives from the Mac. Many customers were upset when Apple discontinued support for ADB (Apple Desktop Bus) keyboards, and switched all Macs to USB. And let's not forget how many people thought it was a drastic mistake that the iPhone lacked a physical keyboard.
What customer's think they want has little to do with what Apple delivers.
Tim Cook's primary message was that the iPad will replace the surface because the Surface was a bad merging of tablets/laptops. In Cook's opinion, the Surface made too many compromises in trying to do everything. He then points out that Macs and PCs are not the same. Suggesting that a Surface like device running an Apple OS would not necessarily contain those compromises.
Cook then goes on to justify having both a Mac and an iPad product line by declaring that they address different market segments. Of course the iPad Mini and iPad Pro address different market segments, and they differ primarily in screen size. Address different market segments does not mean fundamental product differences.
He reaffirms that both Macs and iPads have a strong future, but he declines to provide any clarity on what that future will look like.
In other words that only thing that Tim Cook told us was that he thinks Apple products are better than Windows products. He also claimed that both the Mac brand and the iPad brand will be sticking around.
The user comments on this topic include a lot of informed speculation as to the future of these products. Mr. Cook's comments actually tell us very little, and are only worth reporting because Apple does not provide product roadmaps.