Anticipating WWDC 2016: What's in store for Apple's Macs and OS X

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 76
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,088member
    staticx57 said:
    Any ARM based Mac would likely not be a Ax series chip, that is a phone tablet focused design. It would likely be a different custom design with desktop class features such as pcie, gpu that runs at a high precision, thunderbolt, more USB support, etc. I wouldn't need all of the touchscreen or cellular silicon for example.


    edit: can't believe I'm taking a DED article even halfway seriously..
    An ARM-based Mac could still use a custom Apple Ax series chip and add all the other things just like an iOS device does. The Mac-A10+ wouldn't need to include GPUs but Apple could always include a separate GPU chip with another chip containing whatever else they wanted and licensed. As for touchscreen, I'd rather not touch my large screen but it would be interesting to have a 27" diagonal canvas to use with an Apple pencil and new pen (an adapted pencil with different tip that works like an actual brush instead of using a brush setting with the pencil). I could see this as a benefit for CAD systems instead of using a separate tablet. As for everything else you desire, it all depends on what peripherals are required and how they would best work. Daniel is talking about future products, which don't have to be based on your conception of what's been working for you for the last several years. 
  • Reply 22 of 76
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,088member
    I've been asking for the return of the Xserve including setting it up as a blade server for years. Since Apple is working with both IBM and SAS, why shouldn't their be a small business server product available from Apple instead of having to use some linux server hardware from companies no Mac user likes. IBM dumped their small server division onto Lenovo so why can't Apple get back into the server business for Mac/iOS users? An Apple-ARM blade server could fit in something the size of an old Mac mini, with USB-C (Thunderbolt 3) as the main I/O port for storage and everything else. The new Apple server would need to be able to run a local version of iCloud so small businesses and families could make use of all the current and new iCloud storage capabilities without always having to go to Apple's servers when there isn't a reason to send your data outside your home or business (we're talking total encryption as well with adequate firewalls and intrusion detection capabilities). If Apple really wants to help people secure their data, then let's get back to being able to securely manage or local data.
    ksecmattinozfastasleep
  • Reply 23 of 76
    correctionscorrections Posts: 1,386member
    staticx57 said:
    Any ARM based Mac would likely not be a Ax series chip, that is a phone tablet focused design. It would likely be a different custom design with desktop class features such as pcie, gpu that runs at a high precision, thunderbolt, more USB support, etc. I wouldn't need all of the touchscreen or cellular silicon for example.


    edit: can't believe I'm taking a DED article even halfway seriously..
    Apple has only occasionally developed a new Ax chip for two devices in a year: A7/A8/A9 for iPhone/iPad/Apple TV and A8X and A9X for high end iPads. Each chip was used by projected volumes of 150-250 million iPhones and 50-70 million iPads (and reused in Apple TV, iPod touch, etc.)

    Apple sells 20m Macs. So developing a real replacement Ax chip (a replacement family of chips, actually, ranging from efficient notebook chips to iMac Core i7 and Pro Xeon substitutes) for a Intel-laptop CPU would be an enormous undertaking involving huge risk, with the potential for saving some money across 5 million Macs per quarter. I think Intel would have to begin failing before Apple could justify making a move to building its own desktop class chips for Macs. 

    On the other hand, designing a single server blade processor that could efficiently install 6 deep on a single blade in a compact server environment would require much less work, and could deliver a big jump in CPU power/watt, and create a new market for millions of new computing engines. Apple certainly has the cloud data center demand itself, and it also has that sort of competency in having acquired PA Semi. Apple may surprise again by turning cloud computing into a commodity business running on its proprietary hardware.

    radarthekatpatchythepirate
  • Reply 24 of 76
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,279member
    I'd love a ARM based Mac mini.   Consumers today view a $600 computer as expensive.   The mini no longer engenders the "wow that's cheap for a Mac" anymore.   While the mini doesn't seem successful it's because it is selling more into businesses than consumers.   Businesses need small inexpensive computers to plug in or use as backup floating units or servers.  I think Apple would have liked to kill the mini years ago but there's constant demand from the biz sector for the units.  

    If Arm could get a Mac mini down to $399 with a 64GB SSD that would be a nice unit for consumers IMO.  

    Apple's entire store infrastructure needs improvement.   Here's just a brief list of features i'd love to see. 
    1.  Unification of features 
     
    I should be able to purchase any Apple Store product from any device.  
    Wish-lists across all stores with notifications of price changes or new products from marked developers. 
    Analytics for Mac app developers equal to what iOS developers receive 
    Ability to purchase and download later for all store products over 100MB 

    2. Bundles 
    The ability of developers to bundles any app store product they product (iPhone, iPad, iBook, iTunes) 
    The ability for bundles to be created from multiple developers in a time limited manner. 

    macOS


    New filesystem please.   Dominic has been there 14 years and we're still running a patched HFS+ system 
    Airdrop - please at least make it work 80% of the time 
    Launch Pad - for those that use it make it more robust and easier to manage.
    Extensions-  More features, more robustness. We're almost ready to rid ourselves of the Services menu and it's clutter.
    CloudKit - Great start ...hit another home run out of the park with the next major revision
    Mail - why does this app continue to suck? 

    Out in left field feature:

    Mac and iOS Folder Sync -  I want to be able to create a folder structure that syncs  amongst all of my iOS devices and Macs.   I create a folder on one device and move an an app and all of my other devices sync the same changes provided they have the app installed.  Not that difficult when you think a folder is just a directory

     



    patchythepirate
  • Reply 25 of 76
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    We can expect 2009 Macs to not get Mac OS 10.12. That much is certain. 

    Can’t even use native Unicode emoticons here. Can’t properly express the distaste at that...
    revenant
  • Reply 26 of 76
    revenantrevenant Posts: 530member
    revenant said:
    is not google trying to put android apps on their awful chrome books? i thought i read that in and earlier ded piece.
    as someone who edits my work and other professor's work, i would like to see the Mac get side by side split view of the same app so i can compare drafts. as of now two windows of the same program is a no go. 

    Um, what? I run two Word windows side by side all the time. On 1280x800, no less.
    i am trying to use two pages documents side by side- "this split view is not allowed" i am not a Word user because i refuse to pay a monthly/yearly subscription (unless that has changed)- once payment should be sufficient unless i want to upgrade.
  • Reply 27 of 76
    revenantrevenant Posts: 530member

    meterest said:
    revenant said:
    as someone who edits my work and other professor's work, i would like to see the Mac get side by side split view of the same app so i can compare drafts. as of now two windows of the same program is a no go. 
    Reveant, You can already!
    Just resize the windows from full screen mode and open a second window. Currently you can auto open at half the monitor size previous Mac OS were manual drag to resize. Word and pages even have a compare versions mode. We have had that ability in Mac since 1984  B
    i will give it a shot- i usually just open two windows next to each other, but split view should allow this. i am bewildered as to why i cannot. and, unless i am incorrect, the files for compare versions mode have to be named the same- which they never are.
    edited May 2016
  • Reply 28 of 76
    blitz1blitz1 Posts: 412member
    This is not even close to anticipating WWDC.

    This is just a wish list... filled with wrong assumptions and a gaping lack of tech know how.
    An example? The deep understanding of running server parks can bring this know how to the Apple Mini.
    Right! Because everybody needs an architecture that is specific to running a server park.
    edited May 2016 ksec
  • Reply 29 of 76
    crowleycrowley Posts: 6,020member
    revenant said:

    Um, what? I run two Word windows side by side all the time. On 1280x800, no less.
    i am trying to use two pages documents side by side- "this split view is not allowed"
    Really?  Works fine for me on a 2014 MBA.  I haven't found a multi-window app that supports full screen that doesn't let me split screen it.
  • Reply 30 of 76
    appexappex Posts: 687member
    TO ADMINS: THIS WEB FORM DOES NOT INCLUDE CARRIAGE RETURNS USING LATEST VERSIONS OF SAFARI ON MAC. I am including ------------- below to separate paragraphs.

    Mac OS X is the best computer interface, although Apple has degraded it recently (no color labels, scroll arrows, etc). On the other hand, iOS is a jailed crippled and limited disgrace.

    Mac should run on Intel x86 to be compatible with the rest 97% of the world out there (read Windows). Did Apple learn from previous Apple-IBM-Motorola PowerPC disaster? Try to switch Mac to ARM and we will also switch to Windows. A shame for all. Do not get me wrong. I love the Mac, but I also want to improve it, not degrade it.

    And yes, a true headless Mac like Mac mini is a must. Actually, the iMac is a waste, when you have to throw away a perfectly working and expensive display just because the CPU inside is obsolete. As an example, I am using a current Mac mini with an Apple Cinema Display 22-inch purchased in March 2000 (more than 16 years ago!) that works great. The Mac mini has been replaced for newer ones many times during such 16 years, keeping the great working display. That is green and ecological computing, not discarding perfectly working iMac displays! In summary, all-in-one computers are anti-ecological and a waste of resources.

    Apple should use standards on all devices, like Thunderbolt 3, USB 3.1 Type-C (reversible) Generation 2 and SDXC with extra pins supporting maximum read/write speeds (300 MB/s). And implement many ports. Not just one as in MacBook.

    Last but not least, if Apple really wants to boost market share (continuing making billions in cash), it should reduce to half pricing of all its products. As an example, it is really shocking that Apple charges two to three times more than original manufacturer or reseller like Amazon for the very same make/model of RAM or SSD at Apple Store. That is utterly unacceptable, besides being greedy.
    edited May 2016 blitz1
  • Reply 31 of 76
    ksecksec Posts: 1,567member
    appex said:

    Mac should run on Intel x86 to be compatible with the rest 97% of the world out there (read Windows). Did Apple learn from previous Apple-IBM-Motorola PowerPC disaster? Try to switch Mac to ARM and we will also switch to Windows. A shame for all. Do not get me wrong. I love the Mac, but I also want to improve it, not degrade it.

    And yes, a true headless Mac like Mac mini is a must. Actually, the iMac is a waste, when you have to throw away a perfectly working and expensive display just because the CPU inside is obsolete. 


    Apple should use standards on all devices, like Thunderbolt 3, USB 3.1 Type-C (reversible) Generation 2 and SDXC with extra pins supporting maximum read/write speeds (300 MB/s). And implement many ports. Not just one as in MacBook.

    Last but not least, if Apple really wants to boost market share (continuing making billions in cash), it should reduce to half pricing of all its products. As an example, it is really shocking that Apple charges two to three times more than original manufacturer or reseller like Amazon for the very same make/model of RAM or SSD at Apple Store. That is utterly unacceptable, besides being greedy.
    Half pricing on all its product?

    Implement many ports? 

    The he post has so many wrong I don't even know where to start. This is suppose to be a joke right ? 
    williamlondonbaconstangtallest skilstevehspheric
  • Reply 32 of 76
    ksecksec Posts: 1,567member

    rob53 said:
    I've been asking for the return of the Xserve including setting it up as a blade server for years. Since Apple is working with both IBM and SAS, why shouldn't their be a small business server product available from Apple instead of having to use some linux server hardware from companies no Mac user likes. IBM dumped their small server division onto Lenovo so why can't Apple get back into the server business for Mac/iOS users? An Apple-ARM blade server could fit in something the size of an old Mac mini, with USB-C (Thunderbolt 3) as the main I/O port for storage and everything else. The new Apple server would need to be able to run a local version of iCloud so small businesses and families could make use of all the current and new iCloud storage capabilities without always having to go to Apple's servers when there isn't a reason to send your data outside your home or business (we're talking total encryption as well with adequate firewalls and intrusion detection capabilities). If Apple really wants to help people secure their data, then let's get back to being able to securely manage or local data.

    I really like Apple getting back into the server business. And I too believe in a small self hosting server appliance. It would be an iCloud Appliance, that gives you Email, iWork , backup etc all without going to their Server. It would be a front end to iCloud. Providing Email, Chat, Calander, iWork solution. This is a lot difference To OSX server which is not an appliance at all. 



    williamlondonmattinoz
  • Reply 33 of 76
    ksec said:
    appex said:

    Do not get me wrong. I love the Mac, but...
    The post has so many wrong I don't even know where to start. This is suppose to be a joke right ? 
    Ah, yes, "I love [fill in the blank], but..." a great lead-in for a long "concern trolling" diatribe.

    I like the idea of an appliance, I'd be all over that.
  • Reply 34 of 76
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,100member
    No need for the Mac to run ARM emulation (or include an ARM chip) to allow iPad and iPhone apps to run as hypothetical accessories on the Mac.   Just an iOS emulation environment for them to run in (which already exists in Xcode).   Xcode can already compile iOS apps as x86 code and run them, which is what happens in the simulator, so you would need to just enhance the simulator to be mass customer ready and have developers upload binaries that included x86 architecture as well.   Apple has app thinning technology that would strip out x86 or ARM code when the app is installed on an iPhone/iPad or a Mac.  
    kernapster
  • Reply 35 of 76
    the.bearthe.bear Posts: 14member
    The people stating that Apple should re-enter the server market are very unaware of who currently buys servers and what they are used for.
  • Reply 36 of 76
    the.bearthe.bear Posts: 14member
    Sorry. My initial post got hammered. Enterprises are not going to supply local iClouds when the shift is toward offloading as much as you can to the cloud to save hardware. Anyone who thinks that server I/O can or should be handled by USB type C needs to go locate a networking or administration handbook. No enterprise is going to buy and manage a server to meet the needs of the small percentage of their workforce that uses Apple products when all other servers support all comers. Also, servers need to be able to handle scalable and high performance enterprise tasks like networking, databases, web servers, authentication, enterprise communications, ERP applications, content management, monitoring, security, storage management,  etc. Not only must the hardware and OS be able to run it, but the enterprise applications need to be supplied too. Apple doesn't make true enterprise software. Even if they made their hardware OS and application agnostic or really pushed virtualization (and Apple has no enterprise virtualization software like VMWare or Hyper-V) there would be no reason to choose Apple's server hardware over anyone else if you are just going to install Red Hat or Windows Server on it anyway.

    Enterprises have different needs from households who have a bunch of MacBook, iPads, iPhones and Apple TVs. What you all are describing are home media "servers" and not serious enterprise products that actually have business value by creating revenue for their owners. Maybe it would be great if Apple got into that market to compete with the likes of Microsoft, Red Hat and IBM in actual data center type enterprise products instead of just end user stuff but they are not that type of company now and never have been.
    baconstang
  • Reply 37 of 76
    jakebjakeb Posts: 557member
    I hope they keep the Mac mini. I never would have moved my parents over from Windows if it hadn't been such an easy drop in replacement for their crappy Windows tower.
  • Reply 38 of 76
    frankiefrankie Posts: 373member
    I'm hoping for an update to the Mac Pro since there were all these sales in the last couple months.  

    Maybe I'm the only one....
    wozwozfastasleepargonaut
  • Reply 39 of 76
    saldogsaldog Posts: 37member
    Cloud computing for business applications is exploding these days. This space is pretty much platform independent, so it is harder for Apple to differentiate. I think it is a threat to Mac sales, or at least it will hurt them in the push to get more mainstream, corporate Mac sales. On the other hand, cloud services are a benefit to iOS devices as they typically are mobile device friendly. Still, I'd like to see Apple improve iCloud, add more apps (such as iMessage), and open it up to developers, allowing third party apps. This could happen if Apple could figure out a way to make the experience much better on their hardware while still accessible from others'. If anything they might get a halo effect.
  • Reply 40 of 76
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,451member
    I agree, settings should be unified, but iOS settings are a nightmare: traversing 10 levels or so to toggle a switch is unacceptable and so '80's.
    One feature of iOS settings is ok, its (hidden by default?) search field, but the rest is unworkable.
    One thing iOS and Mac OS X lack is customization, system setting on the Mac should for example allow simply dragging a settings icon to the doc (as a widget) for one click access everywhere.
    iOS should allow settings access within an app context in a universal way, also one tap away, and should allow adding settings to the 'swipe up panel'.

    Mac OS X seems to be in a dead end street, it's security is absolutely abysmal if you look at the facts, it's file system is from another century and even the concept of a file system is ancient and shouldn't be replaced by another; the hardware targeted by OS X is also from before the Greeks it seems and it's API's and software are way to old and partly obsolete.

    Wat to do? 
    Apple is in the unique position to introduce new ARM reference hardware and target its completely revamped and swiftified Apple OS (as a replacement of iOS and Mac OS X) directly to it.
    Uniting the hardware will solve the artificial difference between iOS and OS X devices and makes a universal OS a possibility.


    edited May 2016 kernapster
Sign In or Register to comment.