That sort of speech is simply anti innovation and frankly is ignorant. One of the big problems with the economy is the lack of innovation, so I object simply on that ground first.
Innovation is essential. Innovation is great and drives this business forwards.
But the tech industry is littered with casualties where people have created impressive "innovative" bits of engineering - without considering how people are going to benefit from using the device.
OQO have just shut their doors. Awesome hardware, but Windows on a 5" screen!
The Newton - which I liked - sold as much as in its lifetime as the iPhone sells in day. (I think)
Real innovation has to be a commercial proposition. It has to create sales. And sales are based on how well a device meets an untapped need.
Thanks for your list of 12 applications. We only need one of these to be awesome - but there's not an item on your list that would motivate me to go out and pay $700.
I do like the idea of a reader. If the Sony Reader / Kindle were $200, I might go for it. But part of the attraction is it would sit in my bag and never need charging. Not something that a color screen could ever match.
My guess is that Apple are looking at something much closer to a conventional Netbook - but working how to make such devices much more useful. And I don't think ripping-off the keyboard is at the top of their list.
Sorry man but I just can't vote with only those 2 choices. I think the device is going to be a hybrid.
I would agree on a "hybrid" or new UI appropriate to the intended use of the device.
If anything, this device will, however, lean more toward Mac that iPod. Tim Cook, in the last financial results conference call, stated that the current embodiment of the "Netbook" as it is being produced by other manufacturers is "not something (Apple) would be comfortable putting the "Mac" brand on. . . ."
This statement has been argued by many to be strong evidence that Apple is indeed working on their interpretation of the slim computer, and I would argue that this same statement was a little bit of a freudian slip indicating just what flavor this new device would carry.
Innovation is essential. Innovation is great and drives this business forwards.
But the tech industry is littered with casualties where people have created impressive "innovative" bits of engineering - without considering how people are going to benefit from using the device.
Innovation doesn't have to be immediately successful to be useful. The fact is OQO has stimulated the industry to deliver more economical netbooks. As to benefitting the user if you get locked into certain acceptable nterfaces you get locked out as far as your ability to innovate. Apple has demonstrated this handidly via the iPhone, they broke the bonds to old interfaces and delivered something entirely new. Could iPhone have been a flop, certainly but you have t rely somewhat on your designers.
Even so the success or failure of the technology does not indicate the success or failure of the company.
Quote:
OQO have just shut their doors. Awesome hardware, but Windows on a 5" screen!
The Newton - which I liked - sold as much as in its lifetime as the iPhone sells in day. (I think)
OQO's failure could be seen as a lack of a proper operating system.
As to Newton that is a perfect example of good innovation from a company that couldn't economically support it. The innovation here wasn't a failure at all, it just became a victim of Apples desire to survive. Innovation it was though and it spawned a lot of devices after it's death. PDAs the most obvious but todays smart phones even iPhone owe a lot to Newton. Frankly I hope the concept of Newton isn't completely dead at Apple and will show up new Touch/Tablet devices.
Quote:
Real innovation has to be a commercial proposition.
That is highly objectionable to me. Sometimes innovation doesn't have an immediate benefit that is obvious to the developer. Or it may take decades to exploit that innovation. If you are only focused immediate commercialization you are not going to broach ideas that take additional effort or don't have fast payoff.
Quote:
It has to create sales. And sales are based on how well a device meets an untapped need.
That doesn't have to be the case at all. Innovation can be as simple as a reliability improvement like Mag-Safe or a more economical case design. It is something that isn't even obvious to the user at times.
Quote:
Thanks for your list of 12 applications. We only need one of these to be awesome - but there's not an item on your list that would motivate me to go out and pay $700.
Well I hope that Apple wises up with pricing as to be honest $700 would be a bit much for me too. At least for what I envision as an Apple tablet. Of course this issue of vision is very important as it very much defines the hardware. I'm fairly certain that Apple could deliver what I want for less than $500, that with an OLED.
Quote:
I do like the idea of a reader. If the Sony Reader / Kindle were $200, I might go for it. But part of the attraction is it would sit in my bag and never need charging. Not something that a color screen could ever match.
That just isn't rational as you won't get an e-ink device to do that either. Given that color is always going to sink more power, I see it as being worthwhile.
Even so I see the ""Reader"" as just another app for the device. The key of course is that the user interface needs to make each of these potential key apps feel as if the device was designed specifically for the app. This is one of the reasons I see an enhanced iPhone OS as a key element in the new tablet.
Quote:
My guess is that Apple are looking at something much closer to a conventional Netbook - but working how to make such devices much more useful. And I don't think ripping-off the keyboard is at the top of their list.
That goes against most thinking right now.
I don't have anything against netbooks but im still leaning towards tablets. Hopefully Apple will offer up more than one size of tablet so that the user can buy what is optimal for his needs. The thing here is that 10" will be to big for many users.
Quote:
C.
If we are real lucky the device will be here in a few weeks.
You forgot the "none of these above" vote. In all reality it depends on what this rumored Apple Tablet is suppose to be. Is it a Media device or is it a fully (or nearly fully) functional computer or is it something else? The iPhone touch gestures are not sophisticated enough to be used with a device that is meant to take the place of a Mac. However, the iPhone gesture system is enough for a Multi Media Device (a big iPod Touch basically) or an advanced PDA.
My thread: Give me Multi-Touch or Give me Death (or really bad carpal tunnel)! I'm sowing off a concept for a Multi-Touch based interface system that could be used to make a device that could compete with the Mac in functionality (I call it Slate). wizard69, after reading your posts here I think we could have a good conversation if you'd actually look at the links in my thread! .
Mac OS X, as it is now, would not work for a pure touch based device. Apple was smart to include touch on the Mac through the track pad only. You don't want to add touch on top of the current keyboard/mouse centric interface. You have to have an OS that can handle the complexities of every square millimeter of the display being a source of input. You have to have an OS that can handle simultaneous use and commands. You have to have an OS designed around an interface system where every window on the screen is capable of accepting commands on it. These and so much more demand a new OS and new interface paradigm! Not iPhone OS X and not Mac OS X.
In the end, it really depends on what you're looking for. Do you want a Media Device, a multi purpose advanced PDA, or a multi-touch device that could be used in the place of a Mac. All three have a value and a market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
A Touch based device souped up a bit. Also know as a Newton 2.
Quote:
This I disagree with, not because the chasm exist but rather the idea that a small tablet needs to have the functionality of a notebook. Tablets will be successful when people stop comparing them to notebooks. Frankly I dontever see a tablet as being successful against a notebook nor does it need to be.
Tablets needs to become valuable in their own right. Much in the same way that iPod Touch and iPhone really became successful as tablet computers more so than as originally marketed. Frankly I think Apple got caught off guard here with respect to these devices becoming tablet computers. Micro tablets for sure but it show clearly that if expectations are right people will use such devices in a variety of ways.
Quote:
It is obvious that consumers don't want the tablets that pretend to be notebook replacements. I very hopeful that Apple has an alternative vision for what a tablet can be and do.
I think I disagree with the above statements. To me it sounds like you are saying that any portable Multi-Touch device would be limited to a niche area of functionality that should/could never reach a point where they are capable of competing with the keyboard/mouse computers in functionality. If that is indeed what you are saying I disagree with you. Multi-Touch gestures convey such a large amount of information that they would greatly enhance the usability of computers. As it stands today the keyboard and mouse interface paradigm is limiting our ability to use our computers to their fullest potential. A lot of the new hardware technologies on the horizon would make a Multi-Touch controlled computer possible. I could very easily see the current keyboard/mouse based OSs of today disappearing to give way to a new generation of post-PC devices based on Multi-Touch (iPhone, iPodTouch, Newton 2.0, and "MacBook"Touch)
To accomplish this there needs to be a revolution in computer interface design. Some elements from modern computers are good and would be very useful on a Multi-Touch device (I believe the Dock was mentioned earlier). Other conventions just limit the usability of Multi-Touch (like the Menu bar issue already mentioned).
Overall, I believe there are many levels to Multi-Touch Devices. I don't believe that Tablet-like devices need to be limited to advanced PDAs when the right Multi-Touch OS could one day eclipse notebooks (and current desktop form factors).
I don't think it's all that wishful... I believe that we reason we're getting what is basically an optimized version of Leopard as 10.6 rather than a new OS with hundreds of features is because Apple's main strengths are in mobile computing.
We've already seen multi touch on the MB/MBA/MBP on OS X so that combined with improved Ink feature (which from what I can tell isn't much improved from it's first version) would, I believe, lend itself better to a tablet in the 10-13 inch range.
When Mac OS X was new, the iMac was 800x600, and later 1024x768. Any modern 10" screen will have better resolution, and the menu bar and dock have been there since the start.
There's really two options for the applications
Regular Mac OS X (and don't give that "iPhone runs Mac OS X" line - there's more to an OS than the kernel)
other, which could be either
iPhone OS (but developing apps is still different - screen size makes a difference)
Modified Mac OS X
In the second case (both variations) developers need to do things differently from what they do today. NeoOffice, Photoshop and MSOffice will need to be vastly modified, in ways that are not obvious from either today's iPhone or today's Mac OS.
If the tablet is coming anytime this year, you have to tell developers the specifics now. And that means, that the product has to be shown/announced no later than WWDC, probably earlier, as participants need to register for sessions.
So if it doesn't get announced by WWDC, it could mean either of two things:
It's not coming any time soon. Maybe next year, or...
It's going to run regular Mac OS X, with regular Mac OS X apps, and the touch interface (if present) is not that big a deal.
In the second case (both variations) developers need to do things differently from what they do today. NeoOffice, Photoshop and MSOffice will need to be vastly modified, in ways that are not obvious from either today's iPhone or today's Mac OS.
Adding a keyboard is enough if the device is running regular OS X. Otherwise these applications are using non-available APIs.
If there is no session at WWDC dedicated to tablet programming, then either the tablet is not coming this year, or regular OS X programs will run fine. And AFAICT, there is no tablet programming session.
When Mac OS X was new, the iMac was 800x600, and later 1024x768. Any modern 10" screen will have better resolution, and the menu bar and dock have been there since the start.
The screen resolution has nothing to do with the selection of the OS. The problem is the user interface and the requirement for either a finger or stylist.
Quote:
There's really two options for the applications
Regular Mac OS X (and don't give that "iPhone runs Mac OS X" line - there's more to an OS than the kernel)
Have you done any development on iPhone OS? How much of Mac OS/X is legacy API that isn't even applicable to new app development.
In anyevent the problem with Mac OS/X, on a tablet, is that the industry has been down that road many times and it clearly doesn't work. You would really need to scrap Aqua, the menu bar and much of the other legacy features because they are not built for the input methods. But wait they have already done that on iPhone OS.
Quote:
other, which could be either
iPhone OS (but developing apps is still different - screen size makes a difference)
Oh come on can't you see your failure in gigesting info here. You stated above that Mac OS/X use to come on computers with low resolution screens yet it and it's apps can run properly on a large numer of screens ( for the most part). For some mysterious reason though iPhone apps can't run on any screen other than the iPhone's. Does that make sense?
As to developmental difference I would hope so. The move from 2.0 to 3.0 should provide for differences right there. In any event this is no different then going from 10.0 to 10.7, OSes change and improve constantly; programmers keep up or apps die.
It is interesting to note that iPhone OS is often called Mobile OS at Apple. Something to keep in mind. From the user and programmers standpoint though, a tablet OS derived from iPhone OS is very light weight and free of a lot of old cruft. That means apps are focused on new APIs with no need for legacy support.
Quote:
Modified Mac OS X
MAC OS/X or iPhone OS it doesn't matter the tablet OS will derive from one of them. There isn't a chance in hell that the tablet will run Mac OS as we know it today, even an iPhone OS based tablet would be derived from iPhone OS.
If the tablet was to run a simple port of Mac OS we likely would have had the tablet by now. It would have likely failed in the market place too.
Quote:
In the second case (both variations) developers need to do things differently from what they do today. NeoOffice, Photoshop and MSOffice will need to be vastly modified, in ways that are not obvious from either today's iPhone or today's Mac OS
Frankly I really hope that Apple isn't even trying to target these sorts of apps on the device. It is very much a repeat of past mistakes with tablets. A tablet simply isn't suitable for massive amounts of text input. Tablets are at best consummers not producers.
Quote:
.
If the tablet is coming anytime this year, you have to tell developers the specifics now. And that means, that the product has to be shown/announced no later than WWDC, probably earlier, as participants need to register for sessions.
So if it doesn't get announced by WWDC, it could mean either of two things:
It's not coming any time soon. Maybe next year, or...
It's going to run regular Mac OS X, with regular Mac OS X apps, and the touch interface (if present) is not that big a deal.
Well you can discount regular Mac OS. That would simply be a repeat of all the other tablet failures. I suspect what we will see is a heavily modified OS that brings an interface that is highly slanted towards the consumptive mode of use. That is e-book reading, web surfing, movies and the like.
Just repeat what I said in the above post, and add:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
...MAC OS/X or iPhone OS it doesn't matter the tablet OS will derive from one of them. There isn't a chance in hell that the tablet will run Mac OS as we know it today, even an iPhone OS based tablet would be derived from iPhone OS.
If the tablet was to run a simple port of Mac OS we likely would have had the tablet by now. It would have likely failed in the market place too...
I agree with your statement here. A touch based system added on top of the current keyboard-mouse centric OS is what has caused the PC Tablets to fail. A touched based post-PC device needs its own OS.
Quote:
...Frankly I really hope that Apple isn't even trying to target these sorts of apps on the device. It is very much a repeat of past mistakes with tablets. A tablet simply isn't suitable for massive amounts of text input...
I agree that the Apps on a touch based device would be different than the ones we find on Macs today. However, If Multi-Touch is done right, typing wouldn't be hard at all. The main problem I have with my iPod Touch is that the keyboard is way too small. Despite that I can type fairly fast on the dang thing. With the same adaptive typing technology applied to a much larger virtual keyboard I would imagine that people could type just about as fast as they do on a physical keyboard. Of course having the option to connect a phisical keyboard to a Muti-Touch device the way we today connect a Wacom Tablet would be good for professional writers.
Quote:
...Tablets are at best consummers not producers...Well you can discount regular Mac OS. That would simply be a repeat of all the other tablet failures. I suspect what we will see is a heavily modified OS that brings an interface that is highly slanted towards the consumptive mode of use. That is e-book reading, web surfing, movies and the like.
As I stated in the post above, it really depends on what an individual Tablet device is suppose to be in the market. You can have your iPhones and iPod Touches, your Media Tablets and Newton 2.0s, but I think we disagree on the issue of Multi-Touch devices replacing Macs. I believe they can. It would require a revolutionary change in the OS used. We are entering the Post-PC era. The Personal Computer (Mac, Windows, and linux boxes) is centered around the keyboard and mouse. Post-PC devices will not. Post-PC devices will also be numerous (phones, PDAs, media systems, notebook-like, home based, etc.).
Comments
That sort of speech is simply anti innovation and frankly is ignorant. One of the big problems with the economy is the lack of innovation, so I object simply on that ground first.
Innovation is essential. Innovation is great and drives this business forwards.
But the tech industry is littered with casualties where people have created impressive "innovative" bits of engineering - without considering how people are going to benefit from using the device.
OQO have just shut their doors. Awesome hardware, but Windows on a 5" screen!
The Newton - which I liked - sold as much as in its lifetime as the iPhone sells in day. (I think)
Real innovation has to be a commercial proposition. It has to create sales. And sales are based on how well a device meets an untapped need.
Thanks for your list of 12 applications. We only need one of these to be awesome - but there's not an item on your list that would motivate me to go out and pay $700.
I do like the idea of a reader. If the Sony Reader / Kindle were $200, I might go for it. But part of the attraction is it would sit in my bag and never need charging. Not something that a color screen could ever match.
My guess is that Apple are looking at something much closer to a conventional Netbook - but working how to make such devices much more useful. And I don't think ripping-off the keyboard is at the top of their list.
C.
Sorry man but I just can't vote with only those 2 choices. I think the device is going to be a hybrid.
I would agree on a "hybrid" or new UI appropriate to the intended use of the device.
If anything, this device will, however, lean more toward Mac that iPod. Tim Cook, in the last financial results conference call, stated that the current embodiment of the "Netbook" as it is being produced by other manufacturers is "not something (Apple) would be comfortable putting the "Mac" brand on. . . ."
This statement has been argued by many to be strong evidence that Apple is indeed working on their interpretation of the slim computer, and I would argue that this same statement was a little bit of a freudian slip indicating just what flavor this new device would carry.
Just a thought. . . .
Innovation is essential. Innovation is great and drives this business forwards.
But the tech industry is littered with casualties where people have created impressive "innovative" bits of engineering - without considering how people are going to benefit from using the device.
Innovation doesn't have to be immediately successful to be useful. The fact is OQO has stimulated the industry to deliver more economical netbooks. As to benefitting the user if you get locked into certain acceptable nterfaces you get locked out as far as your ability to innovate. Apple has demonstrated this handidly via the iPhone, they broke the bonds to old interfaces and delivered something entirely new. Could iPhone have been a flop, certainly but you have t rely somewhat on your designers.
Even so the success or failure of the technology does not indicate the success or failure of the company.
OQO have just shut their doors. Awesome hardware, but Windows on a 5" screen!
The Newton - which I liked - sold as much as in its lifetime as the iPhone sells in day. (I think)
OQO's failure could be seen as a lack of a proper operating system.
As to Newton that is a perfect example of good innovation from a company that couldn't economically support it. The innovation here wasn't a failure at all, it just became a victim of Apples desire to survive. Innovation it was though and it spawned a lot of devices after it's death. PDAs the most obvious but todays smart phones even iPhone owe a lot to Newton. Frankly I hope the concept of Newton isn't completely dead at Apple and will show up new Touch/Tablet devices.
Real innovation has to be a commercial proposition.
That is highly objectionable to me. Sometimes innovation doesn't have an immediate benefit that is obvious to the developer. Or it may take decades to exploit that innovation. If you are only focused immediate commercialization you are not going to broach ideas that take additional effort or don't have fast payoff.
It has to create sales. And sales are based on how well a device meets an untapped need.
That doesn't have to be the case at all. Innovation can be as simple as a reliability improvement like Mag-Safe or a more economical case design. It is something that isn't even obvious to the user at times.
Thanks for your list of 12 applications. We only need one of these to be awesome - but there's not an item on your list that would motivate me to go out and pay $700.
Well I hope that Apple wises up with pricing as to be honest $700 would be a bit much for me too. At least for what I envision as an Apple tablet. Of course this issue of vision is very important as it very much defines the hardware. I'm fairly certain that Apple could deliver what I want for less than $500, that with an OLED.
I do like the idea of a reader. If the Sony Reader / Kindle were $200, I might go for it. But part of the attraction is it would sit in my bag and never need charging. Not something that a color screen could ever match.
That just isn't rational as you won't get an e-ink device to do that either. Given that color is always going to sink more power, I see it as being worthwhile.
Even so I see the ""Reader"" as just another app for the device. The key of course is that the user interface needs to make each of these potential key apps feel as if the device was designed specifically for the app. This is one of the reasons I see an enhanced iPhone OS as a key element in the new tablet.
My guess is that Apple are looking at something much closer to a conventional Netbook - but working how to make such devices much more useful. And I don't think ripping-off the keyboard is at the top of their list.
That goes against most thinking right now.
I don't have anything against netbooks but im still leaning towards tablets. Hopefully Apple will offer up more than one size of tablet so that the user can buy what is optimal for his needs. The thing here is that 10" will be to big for many users.
C.
If we are real lucky the device will be here in a few weeks.
Dave
My thread: Give me Multi-Touch or Give me Death (or really bad carpal tunnel)! I'm sowing off a concept for a Multi-Touch based interface system that could be used to make a device that could compete with the Mac in functionality (I call it Slate). wizard69, after reading your posts here I think we could have a good conversation if you'd actually look at the links in my thread!
Mac OS X, as it is now, would not work for a pure touch based device. Apple was smart to include touch on the Mac through the track pad only. You don't want to add touch on top of the current keyboard/mouse centric interface. You have to have an OS that can handle the complexities of every square millimeter of the display being a source of input. You have to have an OS that can handle simultaneous use and commands. You have to have an OS designed around an interface system where every window on the screen is capable of accepting commands on it. These and so much more demand a new OS and new interface paradigm! Not iPhone OS X and not Mac OS X.
In the end, it really depends on what you're looking for. Do you want a Media Device, a multi purpose advanced PDA, or a multi-touch device that could be used in the place of a Mac. All three have a value and a market.
A Touch based device souped up a bit. Also know as a Newton 2.
This I disagree with, not because the chasm exist but rather the idea that a small tablet needs to have the functionality of a notebook. Tablets will be successful when people stop comparing them to notebooks. Frankly I dontever see a tablet as being successful against a notebook nor does it need to be.
Tablets needs to become valuable in their own right. Much in the same way that iPod Touch and iPhone really became successful as tablet computers more so than as originally marketed. Frankly I think Apple got caught off guard here with respect to these devices becoming tablet computers. Micro tablets for sure but it show clearly that if expectations are right people will use such devices in a variety of ways.
It is obvious that consumers don't want the tablets that pretend to be notebook replacements. I very hopeful that Apple has an alternative vision for what a tablet can be and do.
I think I disagree with the above statements. To me it sounds like you are saying that any portable Multi-Touch device would be limited to a niche area of functionality that should/could never reach a point where they are capable of competing with the keyboard/mouse computers in functionality. If that is indeed what you are saying I disagree with you. Multi-Touch gestures convey such a large amount of information that they would greatly enhance the usability of computers. As it stands today the keyboard and mouse interface paradigm is limiting our ability to use our computers to their fullest potential. A lot of the new hardware technologies on the horizon would make a Multi-Touch controlled computer possible. I could very easily see the current keyboard/mouse based OSs of today disappearing to give way to a new generation of post-PC devices based on Multi-Touch (iPhone, iPodTouch, Newton 2.0, and "MacBook"Touch)
To accomplish this there needs to be a revolution in computer interface design. Some elements from modern computers are good and would be very useful on a Multi-Touch device (I believe the Dock was mentioned earlier). Other conventions just limit the usability of Multi-Touch (like the Menu bar issue already mentioned).
Overall, I believe there are many levels to Multi-Touch Devices. I don't believe that Tablet-like devices need to be limited to advanced PDAs when the right Multi-Touch OS could one day eclipse notebooks (and current desktop form factors).
looking forward to your thoughts
but that's wishful thinking
Mac OS
but that's wishful thinking
I don't think it's all that wishful... I believe that we reason we're getting what is basically an optimized version of Leopard as 10.6 rather than a new OS with hundreds of features is because Apple's main strengths are in mobile computing.
We've already seen multi touch on the MB/MBA/MBP on OS X so that combined with improved Ink feature (which from what I can tell isn't much improved from it's first version) would, I believe, lend itself better to a tablet in the 10-13 inch range.
Mac OS
but that's wishful thinking
When Mac OS X was new, the iMac was 800x600, and later 1024x768. Any modern 10" screen will have better resolution, and the menu bar and dock have been there since the start.
There's really two options for the applications
- Regular Mac OS X (and don't give that "iPhone runs Mac OS X" line - there's more to an OS than the kernel)
- other, which could be either
- iPhone OS (but developing apps is still different - screen size makes a difference)
- Modified Mac OS X
In the second case (both variations) developers need to do things differently from what they do today. NeoOffice, Photoshop and MSOffice will need to be vastly modified, in ways that are not obvious from either today's iPhone or today's Mac OS.If the tablet is coming anytime this year, you have to tell developers the specifics now. And that means, that the product has to be shown/announced no later than WWDC, probably earlier, as participants need to register for sessions.
So if it doesn't get announced by WWDC, it could mean either of two things:
In the second case (both variations) developers need to do things differently from what they do today. NeoOffice, Photoshop and MSOffice will need to be vastly modified, in ways that are not obvious from either today's iPhone or today's Mac OS.
add an optional keyboard
add an optional keyboard
Adding a keyboard is enough if the device is running regular OS X. Otherwise these applications are using non-available APIs.
If there is no session at WWDC dedicated to tablet programming, then either the tablet is not coming this year, or regular OS X programs will run fine. And AFAICT, there is no tablet programming session.
When Mac OS X was new, the iMac was 800x600, and later 1024x768. Any modern 10" screen will have better resolution, and the menu bar and dock have been there since the start.
The screen resolution has nothing to do with the selection of the OS. The problem is the user interface and the requirement for either a finger or stylist.
There's really two options for the applications
In anyevent the problem with Mac OS/X, on a tablet, is that the industry has been down that road many times and it clearly doesn't work. You would really need to scrap Aqua, the menu bar and much of the other legacy features because they are not built for the input methods. But wait they have already done that on iPhone OS.
As to developmental difference I would hope so. The move from 2.0 to 3.0 should provide for differences right there. In any event this is no different then going from 10.0 to 10.7, OSes change and improve constantly; programmers keep up or apps die.
It is interesting to note that iPhone OS is often called Mobile OS at Apple. Something to keep in mind. From the user and programmers standpoint though, a tablet OS derived from iPhone OS is very light weight and free of a lot of old cruft. That means apps are focused on new APIs with no need for legacy support.
MAC OS/X or iPhone OS it doesn't matter the tablet OS will derive from one of them. There isn't a chance in hell that the tablet will run Mac OS as we know it today, even an iPhone OS based tablet would be derived from iPhone OS.
If the tablet was to run a simple port of Mac OS we likely would have had the tablet by now. It would have likely failed in the market place too.
In the second case (both variations) developers need to do things differently from what they do today. NeoOffice, Photoshop and MSOffice will need to be vastly modified, in ways that are not obvious from either today's iPhone or today's Mac OS
Frankly I really hope that Apple isn't even trying to target these sorts of apps on the device. It is very much a repeat of past mistakes with tablets. A tablet simply isn't suitable for massive amounts of text input. Tablets are at best consummers not producers.
.
If the tablet is coming anytime this year, you have to tell developers the specifics now. And that means, that the product has to be shown/announced no later than WWDC, probably earlier, as participants need to register for sessions.
So if it doesn't get announced by WWDC, it could mean either of two things:
Well you can discount regular Mac OS. That would simply be a repeat of all the other tablet failures. I suspect what we will see is a heavily modified OS that brings an interface that is highly slanted towards the consumptive mode of use. That is e-book reading, web surfing, movies and the like.
Dave
...MAC OS/X or iPhone OS it doesn't matter the tablet OS will derive from one of them. There isn't a chance in hell that the tablet will run Mac OS as we know it today, even an iPhone OS based tablet would be derived from iPhone OS.
If the tablet was to run a simple port of Mac OS we likely would have had the tablet by now. It would have likely failed in the market place too...
I agree with your statement here. A touch based system added on top of the current keyboard-mouse centric OS is what has caused the PC Tablets to fail. A touched based post-PC device needs its own OS.
...Frankly I really hope that Apple isn't even trying to target these sorts of apps on the device. It is very much a repeat of past mistakes with tablets. A tablet simply isn't suitable for massive amounts of text input...
I agree that the Apps on a touch based device would be different than the ones we find on Macs today. However, If Multi-Touch is done right, typing wouldn't be hard at all. The main problem I have with my iPod Touch is that the keyboard is way too small. Despite that I can type fairly fast on the dang thing. With the same adaptive typing technology applied to a much larger virtual keyboard I would imagine that people could type just about as fast as they do on a physical keyboard. Of course having the option to connect a phisical keyboard to a Muti-Touch device the way we today connect a Wacom Tablet would be good for professional writers.
...Tablets are at best consummers not producers...Well you can discount regular Mac OS. That would simply be a repeat of all the other tablet failures. I suspect what we will see is a heavily modified OS that brings an interface that is highly slanted towards the consumptive mode of use. That is e-book reading, web surfing, movies and the like.
As I stated in the post above, it really depends on what an individual Tablet device is suppose to be in the market. You can have your iPhones and iPod Touches, your Media Tablets and Newton 2.0s, but I think we disagree on the issue of Multi-Touch devices replacing Macs. I believe they can. It would require a revolutionary change in the OS used. We are entering the Post-PC era. The Personal Computer (Mac, Windows, and linux boxes) is centered around the keyboard and mouse. Post-PC devices will not. Post-PC devices will also be numerous (phones, PDAs, media systems, notebook-like, home based, etc.).