The OS was refered as iPhone OS instead of OS X, as previously used by Jobs, but Forstall said in the preview that iPhone is not the only device that runs iPhone OS. Of course, when he said that, he meant there's iPod touch too. But actually he really was hinting something else.
I think in the future Apple will have two OSes they can market, the Mac OS X and the iPhone OS, which will represent the best mobile computing platform(for developers to make money) and experience(for consumers), so there would be no risk to cannibalize Apple's high profit mac sales. And the success of App Store, made this all possible.
By the way, could anybody explain field-programmable gate array? What does this mean to the coming device?
Insert Papermaster HW here. Though it would be cool if it were an FPGA-based production unit. Shape-shifting hardware, how green is that?
McD
Shape shifting technology?
You asked for it!
Quote:
The PCs of the future could be more flexible in every way -- even physically. For starters, they'll have adjustable screens that users can stretch, roll or unfold to open.
"So you can contort that device and make it bigger, maybe widen it to 6 inches tall and 10 inches wide so you can watch TV or access information through wireless broadband or peer-to-peer technology," says Sam Driver, an analyst at research firm ThinkBalm in Little Compton, R.I. "Then say you take that device to your office, you can stretch it and start working, and you can have it communicate in the office with printers and other devices."
But that's just the beginning. Researchers are working on programmable products that contain embedded microprocessors and storage in the material itself. The material would be programmed to change shape based on the user's needs, Chien explains.
For example, you could morph your smartphone into a Bluetooth headset and then into a remote control by just touching a button on the device. Think of it as the ultimate Transformer toy.
The OS was refered as iPhone OS instead of OS X, as previously used by Jobs, but Forstall said in the preview that iPhone is not the only device that runs iPhone OS. Of course, when he said that, he meant there's iPod touch too. But actually he really was hinting something else.
I think in the future Apple will have two OSes they can market, the Mac OS X and the iPhone OS, which will represent the best mobile computing platform(for developers to make money) and experience(for consumers), so there would be no risk to cannibalize Apple's high profit mac sales. And the success of App Store, made this all possible.
By the way, could anybody explain field-programmable gate array? What does this mean to the coming device?
iFPGA is probably to allow access for plug-in accessories or their prototypes.
iProd is probably a placeholder name for some up-and-coming Apple product that may not ever pass Jobs' muster. Possibly a tablet, a la 10" iPod touch (Newton MessagePad reprise)
iPhone 2,1 is inevitable, but one can only imagine what changes would constitute a major revision if 3G was considered minor. That makes 3,1 even more confusing. Pro? Nano? Hard-drive based? High-def, titanium unibody with Atom dual core? Who knows.
Symbian is an OS, but the sex device is named Sybian.
That's awesome! but that's too far away, I think what Apple should really do in reality about the iPhone 3,1 is bring some of their own super cool patents to life. One of my favourite is the camera-within-display thing. I always get annoyed by the fact that you can't look at someone in the eye in a video chat.
That's awesome! but that's too far away, I think what Apple should really do in reality about the iPhone 3,1 is bring some of their own super cool patents to life. One of my favourite is the camera-within-display thing. I always get annoyed by the fact that you can't look at someone in the eye in a video chat.
First things first. I want Apple's patent for a small backlight over a small area of the display to come to fruition. This way you can see messages, the time, etc without turning on the full screen display.
Tucked within Apple's iPhone 3.0 beta firmware are hardware strings that mention not one but two unreleased iPhone models as well as similar changes in store for the iPod touch.
What two products? You mean like the iPhone 16GB and 32GB? Same for iPod Touch??
Apple tends to take the long view when designing products and more specifically software and structural systems (iPhone OS, iTunes Store, etc.) I was wondering if there are reasons for developing the Push Notification System the way they have that will become apparent when they start rolling out new categories of mobile devices (Tablets, Netbooks, 3G enabled laptops, etc.)
Is this the basis of a new type of functionality that has broader implications than what we're seeing on with the iPhone OS 3.0? It seems that they are taking on a lot of responsibility / liability with this type of network and I'm not sure they would have done it if there weren't bigger rewards down the road. Are there ways that this back-end system could give them a big leg up on the competition? Any ideas?
Apple tends to take the long view when designing products and more specifically software and structural systems (iPhone OS, iTunes Store, etc.) I was wondering if there are reasons for developing the Push Notification System the way they have that will become apparent when they start rolling out new categories of mobile devices (Tablets, Netbooks, 3G enabled laptops, etc.)
Is this the basis of a new type of functionality that has broader implications than what we're seeing on with the iPhone OS 3.0? It seems that they are taking on a lot of responsibility / liability with this type of network and I'm not sure they would have done it if there weren't bigger rewards down the road. Are there ways that this back-end system could give them a big leg up on the competition? Any ideas?
It's basically what you said. But they didn't expect the interest to be as high as it turned out to be, so they had to do a total revision of the way their servers handled the throughput.
There's no doubt that push will be very important to business, as well as to consumers. Companies can use it for almost anything. Stock prices, sports scores, weather forecasts, customer contacts. New recordings or books from people you might be interested about.
People might use it with social networking, to keep their friends updated on where they are, etc.
That's just a very few of the things I'm already thinking about.
Ideas will come from directions no one has thought about.
It's basically what you said. But they didn't expect the interest to be as high as it turned out to be, so they had to do a total revision of the way their servers handled the throughput.
There's no doubt that push will be very important to business, as well as to consumers. Companies can use it for almost anything. Stock prices, sports scores, weather forecasts, customer contacts. New recordings or books from people you might be interested about.
People might use it with social networking, to keep their friends updated on where they are, etc.
Ideas will come from directions no one has thought about.
So, is this a more flexible system than what RIM has? I hear the argument that RIM's push email is more sophisticated than Apple's but maybe it is much more limited and that the limitations will begin to become apparent over time as there are more and more ways in which Apple's Push is used that RIM's can't? I'm not knowledgeable about RIM's system - does anyone know if this is a fair analysis?
Hopefully Apple doesn't start sending cease and desist orders to all stores that claim to sell "Products" because it sounds too much like iProd. Just like they did for Podium versus iPod.
It's nto simply because it sounds similar. If the Podium was a watermelon slicer or bug zapper, Apple (likely) wouldn't have done anything.
Tuesday's demo showed iPhone 3.0 docking with other devices as an input/display. Perhaps the iProd string is a reference to that sort of device platform?
Comments
Lots of Google results for iProd along these lines:
iProd
good call. the added accessory API could make this happen.
The rumored iTable or even an enterprise iPhone running industry specific apps in enterprise settings could explain the FGPA, no?
iHungry- I need some iFood.
iProd sounds like a sexual device used in Alien 3 or by the OctoMom.
Symbian is a mobile OS and an automated sex machine.
Symbian is a mobile OS and an automated sex machine.
iPod 3,2
iPod 4,1
iPhone 3,1
iPhone 3,2
You saw it here first.
I think in the future Apple will have two OSes they can market, the Mac OS X and the iPhone OS, which will represent the best mobile computing platform(for developers to make money) and experience(for consumers), so there would be no risk to cannibalize Apple's high profit mac sales. And the success of App Store, made this all possible.
By the way, could anybody explain field-programmable gate array? What does this mean to the coming device?
Insert Papermaster HW here. Though it would be cool if it were an FPGA-based production unit. Shape-shifting hardware, how green is that?
McD
Shape shifting technology?
You asked for it!
The PCs of the future could be more flexible in every way -- even physically. For starters, they'll have adjustable screens that users can stretch, roll or unfold to open.
"So you can contort that device and make it bigger, maybe widen it to 6 inches tall and 10 inches wide so you can watch TV or access information through wireless broadband or peer-to-peer technology," says Sam Driver, an analyst at research firm ThinkBalm in Little Compton, R.I. "Then say you take that device to your office, you can stretch it and start working, and you can have it communicate in the office with printers and other devices."
But that's just the beginning. Researchers are working on programmable products that contain embedded microprocessors and storage in the material itself. The material would be programmed to change shape based on the user's needs, Chien explains.
For example, you could morph your smartphone into a Bluetooth headset and then into a remote control by just touching a button on the device. Think of it as the ultimate Transformer toy.
Link:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/16132...cade_away.html
This is a very interesting read!
The OS was refered as iPhone OS instead of OS X, as previously used by Jobs, but Forstall said in the preview that iPhone is not the only device that runs iPhone OS. Of course, when he said that, he meant there's iPod touch too. But actually he really was hinting something else.
I think in the future Apple will have two OSes they can market, the Mac OS X and the iPhone OS, which will represent the best mobile computing platform(for developers to make money) and experience(for consumers), so there would be no risk to cannibalize Apple's high profit mac sales. And the success of App Store, made this all possible.
By the way, could anybody explain field-programmable gate array? What does this mean to the coming device?
The aTv uses it too.
iProd is probably a placeholder name for some up-and-coming Apple product that may not ever pass Jobs' muster. Possibly a tablet, a la 10" iPod touch (Newton MessagePad reprise)
iPhone 2,1 is inevitable, but one can only imagine what changes would constitute a major revision if 3G was considered minor. That makes 3,1 even more confusing. Pro? Nano? Hard-drive based? High-def, titanium unibody with Atom dual core? Who knows.
Symbian is an OS, but the sex device is named Sybian.
AppleTV doesn't run iPhone OS, it runs Tiger.
Symbian is an OS, but the sex device is named Sybian.
You're correct. I've only heard in mentioned (and used) on The Howard Stern Show, but never looked it up before.
AppleTV doesn't run iPhone OS, it runs Tiger.
I'm sure Melgross was referring to the OS being OS X, not that the AppleTV runs the iPhone OS.
Shape shifting technology?
You asked for it!
Link:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/16132...cade_away.html
This is a very interesting read!
That's awesome! but that's too far away, I think what Apple should really do in reality about the iPhone 3,1 is bring some of their own super cool patents to life. One of my favourite is the camera-within-display thing. I always get annoyed by the fact that you can't look at someone in the eye in a video chat.
That's awesome! but that's too far away, I think what Apple should really do in reality about the iPhone 3,1 is bring some of their own super cool patents to life. One of my favourite is the camera-within-display thing. I always get annoyed by the fact that you can't look at someone in the eye in a video chat.
First things first. I want Apple's patent for a small backlight over a small area of the display to come to fruition. This way you can see messages, the time, etc without turning on the full screen display.
Tucked within Apple's iPhone 3.0 beta firmware are hardware strings that mention not one but two unreleased iPhone models as well as similar changes in store for the iPod touch.
What two products? You mean like the iPhone 16GB and 32GB? Same for iPod Touch??
Is this the basis of a new type of functionality that has broader implications than what we're seeing on with the iPhone OS 3.0? It seems that they are taking on a lot of responsibility / liability with this type of network and I'm not sure they would have done it if there weren't bigger rewards down the road. Are there ways that this back-end system could give them a big leg up on the competition? Any ideas?
Apple tends to take the long view when designing products and more specifically software and structural systems (iPhone OS, iTunes Store, etc.) I was wondering if there are reasons for developing the Push Notification System the way they have that will become apparent when they start rolling out new categories of mobile devices (Tablets, Netbooks, 3G enabled laptops, etc.)
Is this the basis of a new type of functionality that has broader implications than what we're seeing on with the iPhone OS 3.0? It seems that they are taking on a lot of responsibility / liability with this type of network and I'm not sure they would have done it if there weren't bigger rewards down the road. Are there ways that this back-end system could give them a big leg up on the competition? Any ideas?
It's basically what you said. But they didn't expect the interest to be as high as it turned out to be, so they had to do a total revision of the way their servers handled the throughput.
There's no doubt that push will be very important to business, as well as to consumers. Companies can use it for almost anything. Stock prices, sports scores, weather forecasts, customer contacts. New recordings or books from people you might be interested about.
People might use it with social networking, to keep their friends updated on where they are, etc.
That's just a very few of the things I'm already thinking about.
Ideas will come from directions no one has thought about.
It's basically what you said. But they didn't expect the interest to be as high as it turned out to be, so they had to do a total revision of the way their servers handled the throughput.
There's no doubt that push will be very important to business, as well as to consumers. Companies can use it for almost anything. Stock prices, sports scores, weather forecasts, customer contacts. New recordings or books from people you might be interested about.
People might use it with social networking, to keep their friends updated on where they are, etc.
Ideas will come from directions no one has thought about.
So, is this a more flexible system than what RIM has? I hear the argument that RIM's push email is more sophisticated than Apple's but maybe it is much more limited and that the limitations will begin to become apparent over time as there are more and more ways in which Apple's Push is used that RIM's can't? I'm not knowledgeable about RIM's system - does anyone know if this is a fair analysis?
Hopefully Apple doesn't start sending cease and desist orders to all stores that claim to sell "Products" because it sounds too much like iProd. Just like they did for Podium versus iPod.
It's nto simply because it sounds similar. If the Podium was a watermelon slicer or bug zapper, Apple (likely) wouldn't have done anything.