There are a few things that will make or break this device.
1) Will it run a full version of OS X, iPhone/iPod Touch OS or a hybrid.
I can see advantages to all of them, but for my use, an iPhone/iPod Touch only only would be rather limited. But who knows.
Unfortunately, no way it's going to run full OS X. It's not running an Intel processor like an Atom, so both the OS and the apps have to be recompiled for ARM. I just don't see that happening for all but the simplest OS X apps. Can you imagine full Firefox running on ARM? It would be dog slow. Don't even ask about Photoshop.
Me too. Buy a few things. Will their be flash for viewing tv shows like we do on a mac, or tied in with purchasing them, that would be a bummer, especially at
home plugged in, will it, with the no wifi available, be tied in with newer 4G, wil it be sold contract free, will you be forced to but a
subscription, and by the sounds of the article, it sounds like a large iPhone. I thought that Jib's goal was not to build a large iPhone??
1) If it?s ARM based, then I would say that it will definitely not have Flash as default, like Mac OS X, even if un-controlled app installs are allowed. Flash for smartphones that will play Hulu and other video sources isn?t even ready for those devices, and Flash for Mac OS X still sucks. Not even HW acceleration in the latest Beta.
2) Apple does seem to be pushing HTTP Live Streaming and it is a beautiful thing. Outside of some nifty inlaid controls which can be down with HTML/JS (maybe PastryKit?) I see no reason to have Flash if the main purpose of having it is for internet video. Now the only need is for Flash only websites.
3) I hope they have two versions, one subsidized with a carrier subscription and one that is WiFi-only. What carriers will they support? Maybe a simple way to open it up for the one time to insert the card would be in order. There will be on LTE.
4) I hope there will be a simple way to buy publishers subs, like through my iTunes account. Having to use a separate account is not the ease of use I want from this. I want to have daily/weekly/monthly periodicals auto DLed and ready to read on the device without any interaction from me. Like getting the paper delivered to your door in the morning, I want to pick up my tablet and have the paper there for me to read. Give me some flashy Harry Potter-like animations in the pics in the newspapers to make unique.
5) This doesn?t sounds like a giant phone to me. It sounds like more like a giant Touch, but even that is a stretch. It sounds like a device designed for reading and other media. Somewhere in between a PC and a pocketable device. A potential replacement for when you want something in between. At the breakfast table, on the couch, or the train/bus.
6) I wonder how the publishers will handle this. If they want control over the DRM and want to distribute to everyone they have a tough time of keeping the codec up-to-date and preventing it from being hacked if they simply license to multiple vendors for use. If they got eh route of partnering with someone like Apple they have another problem with potential growth loss. I think the best move is to offer up the content to various big players and let them use their own DRM to protect the media. This eases the publishers? duties while allowing them to have stipulations in the contract for having their content protected. Either way, it?s going to leak out, best to find a way to make the most money from it.
Mac OS: I have 60 3rd party apps, not including plug-ins, launch daemons, pref panes, etc.
iPhone OS: 65 apps, not including ones that I?ve removed from iTunes but have chosen not remove delete.
You see, you have two OS's and two sets of third party applications.
Why would Apple not have Apps running on OS X too if they planned on OS X being around forever?
Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? Isn't the desire of Apple to sell more Mac's, using Apps as a trojan? Apparently not and why is that?
In my opinion, Apple is pushing the iPhone OS as the new development platform for all of it's future devices. Once the iTablet comes out with the iPhone OS, it will cannibalize Mac sales, much like netbooks cannibalize laptop sales.
I believe Apple has realized that OS X is too complicated for their customers, also devices like hard drives, cd burners etc are all going away, making computers less complicated. So they are focusing on a simpler OS and it's huge supply of Apps to drive hardware sales.
Sure OS X will be around for quite some time, but as the iPhone OS takes over on newer and newer hardware, like iTablets, it's going to become obsolete.
Can you imagine full Firefox running on ARM? It would be dog slow. Don't even ask about Photoshop.
Mozilla has been working on mobile Firefox for a long time. They really need to get that on Android or risk losing everything in the mobile market. They only gained ground on the desktop due to IE sucking so bad. I?m not sure they can do the same with WebKit actually beating it in performance tests.Their plug-in scheme is there only save and Chrome is putting the kibosh on that.
Mac OS X 10.6 and iPhone OS 3.0 both updated this year. Oh yeah, completely forgotten.
Look ahead, not in the present.
Right now Apple is supporting two operating systems in a period of transition along with hardware transition.
What is stealing laptop and desktop sales right now on PC's?, netbooks.
What will steal Apple sales of Mac laptops in the future? A iTablet.
What will the iTablet run?
OS X and it's limited supply of applications and heat being a heavy OS?
Or a lighter and easier interface with over 100,000 Apps from the App Store that Apple gets a slice of the revenue?
It's obvious.
Also let me remind you just a few years back, that Apple advertised and hailed the PowerMac G5 Dual processor as the bad ass machine of the future from IBM. Third party 3D game programmers took out dozens of ads in Mac magazines, it's was looking like the beginning of something great from Apple.
Then the rug was pulled out and Apple switched to cooler, bus hobbled Intel processors and Apple already had OS X running on Intel long before that. Knowing that they were going to have to switch and conned customers and developers along to keep hardware sales going.
So you see Apple could very well, with the iTablet announcement, tell the world Snow Leopard is going to be the last we see of OS X and everyone should just buy a iTablet and develop iPhone OS from now on.
You see, you have two OS's and two sets of third party applications.
Why would Apple not have Apps running on OS X too if they planned on OS X being around forever?
Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? Isn't the desire of Apple to sell more Mac's, using Apps as a trojan? Apparently not and why is that?
In my opinion, Apple is pushing the iPhone OS as the new development platform for all of it's future devices. Once the iTablet comes out with the iPhone OS, it will cannibalize Mac sales, much like netbooks cannibalize laptop sales.
I believe Apple has realized that OS X is too complicated for their customers, also devices like hard drives, cd burners etc are all going away, making computers less complicated. So they are focusing on a simpler OS and it's huge supply of Apps to drive hardware sales.
Sure OS X will be around for quite some time, but as the iPhone OS takes over on newer and newer hardware, like iTablets, it's going to become obsolete.
1) They are different OSes because they run on different HW with different I/O.
2) "Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? ¿Que? Both platforms have an SDK to compile apps specific for them?
3) Apple is pushing both platforms. Neither version of OS X is dying? Are going to get all Dvorak on us and claim Apple will adopt Windows?
4) I can?t see an Apple tablet using iPhone OS. There is little about the iPhone OS UI that works on a device with a 10? display that is used not as a phone nor as a pocketable PMP. Logic seems to dictate that it will be a new UI designed around the new HW and I/O. It will undoubtedly have aspects of both the Mac OS and iPhone OS with new elements specific to the Tablet OS used.
5) The only way it will cannibalize mac sales if it can be suitable replacement for Macs. With the MB being much faster, having more capacity and many more options than one would consider from a $600 tablet that sounds unreasonable. Then consider that the 13? MBP was the best selling Mac even after the MB update that it appears that many Mac users aren?t looking for the bare minimum. A tablet sounds like a complimentary device for your Mac. I would be surprised if it syncs like an iDevice.
6) HDDs and ODD are goign away, but keyboards aren?t. They are still the best way we have to input data quickly. Perhaps one day a better method will appear, but I doubt it will be next month. As for OS X being too complicated for users, that really makes no sense when comparing it to other OSes,
7) You say OS X, which refers to the iPhone OS and Mac OS, but I think you just mean Mac OS X. Regardless, it?s not going away. There is no way desktops, workstations, servers and notebooks are going to stop being useful or that iPhone OS is going to be the default OS with no Finder and many other desktop OS components.
Apple can easily make a dual compiler, they did it with PPC and Intel processors, it's because they don't want Apps running on OS X.
You would think the advantage of having Apps on both the iPhone and their home computer would boost Mac sales, so they could sync and all, Apple makes more sales of Mac hardware in the process.
They are not doing that because they are going to let OS X die as the new iTablet/App OS takes over.
Apple is trending towards a new OS and a simpler interface with new hardware devices.
Play chess enough, you begin to see 20 or 30 moves ahead.
The iPhone OS is a device specific variant of OS X. Different devices need different UI, driver, graphics, communications and I/O conventions; there are any number of desktop OS X features that would make no sense whatsoever on a phone.
Apple will continue to leverage the scalability of OS X to create versions that are tightly integrated with the hardware at hand. That, however, has nothing to do with abandoning OS X-- quite the opposite.
I'm assuming that any tablet-like device from Apple will run a version of OS X appropriate to such a device, and that such an OS will probably look more like the iPhone OS than desktop OS X. It will not follow, however, that such an OS is "crippled" or that Apple winds up making "a big iPod Touch." It will just mean that Apple has tailored that specific version of OS X to make the most of a touch driven tablet that's larger than the iPhone.
I would also not be surprised to see some simple developer tools for porting OS X apps to the new UI. The fact that iPhone apps may be able to run with just a resolution tweak is merely an acknowledgment that there is already a large catalogue of touch optimized apps that can be used as a selling point for a new device, avoiding the chicken and egg problem of trying to sell such a device without much software.
Again, that doesn't mean that such a device would be "crippled", just that it makes more sense to have a bunch of apps ready to go out of the gate and then bring on the more sophisticated stuff that takes advantage of better hardware while being fully touch optimized. Apple can be confident that many developers of iPhone apps will take advantage of the simple upgrade path, and if sales are robust they can count on desktop OS X developers making the somewhat more complex transition to Cocoa Touch and finger driven UIs. I would guess that Apple will have done just that with some of their desktop OS X apps, on the shipping version of the tablet.
1) They are different OSes because they run on different HW with different I/O.
Yes I know, but Apple does make dual compilers. Just like they did for PPC and Intel. Write once, compile two versions.
One for iPhone/iPod Touch another for OS X and Mac's. Mac sales get a boost because only with a Mac can one sync and use the same Apps on both types of devices, home computer and their portable device.
Quote:
3) Apple is pushing both platforms. Neither version of OS X is dying? Are going to get all Dvorak on us and claim Apple will adopt Windows?
Apple is pushing whatever makes hardware sales and software sales gives a reason to buy hardware.
Developers are going bananas over the iPhone OS, but not OS X. People's needs are changing, they want a small easy to use portable device with a lot of features and not a big complicated computer that has a steep learning curve.
Quote:
4) I can?t see an Apple tablet using iPhone OS. There is little about the iPhone OS UI that works on a device with a 10? display that is used not as a phone nor as a pocketable PMP. Logic seems to dictate that it will be a new UI designed around the new HW and I/O. It will undoubtedly have aspects of both the Mac OS and iPhone OS with new elements specific to the Tablet OS used.
It could be a hybid OS X/iPhone App type OS. I won't discount that. But I'm sure the familiar OS X is not going to be be visible to most users.
Quote:
5) The only way it will cannibalize mac sales if it can be suitable replacement for Macs. With the MB being much faster, having more capacity and many more options than one would consider from a $600 tablet that sounds unreasonable. Then consider that the 13? MBP was the best selling Mac even after the MB update that it appears that many Mac users aren?t looking for the bare minimum. A tablet sounds like a complimentary device for your Mac. I would be surprised if it syncs like an iDevice.
Then why no Apps for OS X? It would seem logical to have both running on both like Apple normally does to boost hardware sales.
Quote:
6) HDDs and ODD are goign away, but keyboards aren?t. They are still the best way we have to input data quickly. Perhaps one day a better method will appear, but I doubt it will be next month. As for OS X being too complicated for users, that really makes no sense when comparing it to other OSes,
Apple has been pushing bluetooth keyboards as standard on Macs, no doubt one could easily wire up a bluetooth to a iTablet or future iPhone. Perhaps this is another key point in my argument.
Quote:
7) You say OS X, which refers to the iPhone OS and Mac OS, but I think you just mean Mac OS X. Regardless, it?s not going away. There is no way desktops, workstations, servers and notebooks are going to stop being useful or that iPhone OS is going to be the default OS with no Finder and many other desktop OS components.
Not for quite some time, if Apple doesn't allow Apps on OS X and if the iTablet has the iPhone OS only, OS X is certainly being shown the door in my opinion.
Just look at the App Store, you have to jailbreak your iPhone to run third party apps, to get the freedom of a computer to run what you want. The same will occur with the iTablet.
Why would Apple not have Apps running on OS X too if they planned on OS X being around forever?
Gee, it has nothing to do with different form factors...
The only OSX likely to die is the one on the aTV.
Quote:
Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? Isn't the desire of Apple to sell more Mac's, using Apps as a trojan? Apparently not and why is that?
Most apps on the iphone that makes any sense on the desktop are...surprise...already on the desktop. The only thing that isn't are some game titles.
Quote:
In my opinion, Apple is pushing the iPhone OS as the new development platform for all of it's future devices. Once the iTablet comes out with the iPhone OS, it will cannibalize Mac sales, much like netbooks cannibalize laptop sales.
Except that an ARM tablet, even one with a tactile touch surface, isn't going to cannibalize macbook sales because it won't be a desktop/notebook replacement.
Not even close.
The reason that netbooks cannibalize laptop sales is because they are roughly equivalent to cheap notebooks.
Quote:
I believe Apple has realized that OS X is too complicated for their customers, also devices like hard drives, cd burners etc are all going away, making computers less complicated. So they are focusing on a simpler OS and it's huge supply of Apps to drive hardware sales.
I'm starting to believe that you aren't serious and just trolling at this point.
OS X and it's limited supply of applications and heat being a heavy OS?
Or a lighter and easier interface with over 100,000 Apps from the App Store that Apple gets a slice of the revenue?
It's obvious.
It's obvious that you have no idea as to the number of apps on OSX that won't be usable on ARM for a very very long time.
Quote:
Also let me remind you just a few years back, that Apple advertised and hailed the PowerMac G5 Dual processor as the bad ass machine of the future from IBM. Third party 3D game programmers took out dozens of ads in Mac magazines, it's was looking like the beginning of something great from Apple.
Then the rug was pulled out and Apple switched to cooler, bus hobbled Intel processors and Apple already had OS X running on Intel long before that. Knowing that they were going to have to switch and conned customers and developers along to keep hardware sales going.
Geez, the G5 was released in 2003. The Intel macs appeared in 2006. There were 8 freaking revs in between launch of the G5 and the Power Mac. Folks that want to "remind" people of history really should try to actually know that history.
Quote:
So you see Apple could very well, with the iTablet announcement, tell the world Snow Leopard is going to be the last we see of OS X and everyone should just buy a iTablet and develop iPhone OS from now on.
Wanna bet $1000? $10,000? They didn't just sink an assload of engineering effort into Snow Leopard to future proof it for multi-core just to declare it done.
Not for quite some time, if Apple doesn't allow Apps on OS X and if the iTablet has the iPhone OS only, OS X is certainly being shown the door in my opinion.
Just look at the App Store, you have to jailbreak your iPhone to run third party apps, to get the freedom of a computer to run what you want. The same will occur with the iTablet.
I hear what you are saying and agree to a point. I would love if some of my iPhone Apps existed on my Mac too, others not so much (like Ramp Champ, love it on my iPhone, don't miss it on my Mac).
However, what do you say about, for example, the iLife apps? Do you think that Apple thinks I'd prefer to use iPhoto on my iPhone or 10" (or 7") tablet? How would I even get those photos from my DSLR onto the device? What about video and iMovie? Or managing my iTunes library? I can tell you right now I don't want to be doing any of this on a tiny screen.
And that's just the basic stuff. What about PS, After Effects, FC Studio or any of those apps where I require not just a large screen but lots of horsepower?
Yes, there is a lot of growth and excitement with iPhone OS now, but that doesn't mean Mac OS I'd dead or even dying. Do you think Apple is just going to abandon this segment of computers where they still make tons of cash?
Comments
There are a few things that will make or break this device.
1) Will it run a full version of OS X, iPhone/iPod Touch OS or a hybrid.
I can see advantages to all of them, but for my use, an iPhone/iPod Touch only only would be rather limited. But who knows.
Unfortunately, no way it's going to run full OS X. It's not running an Intel processor like an Atom, so both the OS and the apps have to be recompiled for ARM. I just don't see that happening for all but the simplest OS X apps. Can you imagine full Firefox running on ARM? It would be dog slow. Don't even ask about Photoshop.
Me too. Buy a few things. Will their be flash for viewing tv shows like we do on a mac, or tied in with purchasing them, that would be a bummer, especially at
home plugged in, will it, with the no wifi available, be tied in with newer 4G, wil it be sold contract free, will you be forced to but a
subscription, and by the sounds of the article, it sounds like a large iPhone. I thought that Jib's goal was not to build a large iPhone??
1) If it?s ARM based, then I would say that it will definitely not have Flash as default, like Mac OS X, even if un-controlled app installs are allowed. Flash for smartphones that will play Hulu and other video sources isn?t even ready for those devices, and Flash for Mac OS X still sucks. Not even HW acceleration in the latest Beta.
2) Apple does seem to be pushing HTTP Live Streaming and it is a beautiful thing. Outside of some nifty inlaid controls which can be down with HTML/JS (maybe PastryKit?) I see no reason to have Flash if the main purpose of having it is for internet video. Now the only need is for Flash only websites.
3) I hope they have two versions, one subsidized with a carrier subscription and one that is WiFi-only. What carriers will they support? Maybe a simple way to open it up for the one time to insert the card would be in order. There will be on LTE.
4) I hope there will be a simple way to buy publishers subs, like through my iTunes account. Having to use a separate account is not the ease of use I want from this. I want to have daily/weekly/monthly periodicals auto DLed and ready to read on the device without any interaction from me. Like getting the paper delivered to your door in the morning, I want to pick up my tablet and have the paper there for me to read. Give me some flashy Harry Potter-like animations in the pics in the newspapers to make unique.
5) This doesn?t sounds like a giant phone to me. It sounds like more like a giant Touch, but even that is a stretch. It sounds like a device designed for reading and other media. Somewhere in between a PC and a pocketable device. A potential replacement for when you want something in between. At the breakfast table, on the couch, or the train/bus.
6) I wonder how the publishers will handle this. If they want control over the DRM and want to distribute to everyone they have a tough time of keeping the codec up-to-date and preventing it from being hacked if they simply license to multiple vendors for use. If they got eh route of partnering with someone like Apple they have another problem with potential growth loss. I think the best move is to offer up the content to various big players and let them use their own DRM to protect the media. This eases the publishers? duties while allowing them to have stipulations in the contract for having their content protected. Either way, it?s going to leak out, best to find a way to make the most money from it.
Mac OS: I have 60 3rd party apps, not including plug-ins, launch daemons, pref panes, etc.
iPhone OS: 65 apps, not including ones that I?ve removed from iTunes but have chosen not remove delete.
You see, you have two OS's and two sets of third party applications.
Why would Apple not have Apps running on OS X too if they planned on OS X being around forever?
Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? Isn't the desire of Apple to sell more Mac's, using Apps as a trojan? Apparently not and why is that?
In my opinion, Apple is pushing the iPhone OS as the new development platform for all of it's future devices. Once the iTablet comes out with the iPhone OS, it will cannibalize Mac sales, much like netbooks cannibalize laptop sales.
I believe Apple has realized that OS X is too complicated for their customers, also devices like hard drives, cd burners etc are all going away, making computers less complicated. So they are focusing on a simpler OS and it's huge supply of Apps to drive hardware sales.
Sure OS X will be around for quite some time, but as the iPhone OS takes over on newer and newer hardware, like iTablets, it's going to become obsolete.
Can you imagine full Firefox running on ARM? It would be dog slow. Don't even ask about Photoshop.
Mozilla has been working on mobile Firefox for a long time. They really need to get that on Android or risk losing everything in the mobile market. They only gained ground on the desktop due to IE sucking so bad. I?m not sure they can do the same with WebKit actually beating it in performance tests.Their plug-in scheme is there only save and Chrome is putting the kibosh on that.
If Jobs is pleased, i can safely bet that we all will be very pleased...
Jobs is also pleased with the Magic Mouse. Means nothing. Show me the product and I'll decide for myself.
Mac OS X 10.6 and iPhone OS 3.0 both updated this year. Oh yeah, completely forgotten.
Look ahead, not in the present.
Right now Apple is supporting two operating systems in a period of transition along with hardware transition.
What is stealing laptop and desktop sales right now on PC's?, netbooks.
What will steal Apple sales of Mac laptops in the future? A iTablet.
What will the iTablet run?
OS X and it's limited supply of applications and heat being a heavy OS?
Or a lighter and easier interface with over 100,000 Apps from the App Store that Apple gets a slice of the revenue?
It's obvious.
Also let me remind you just a few years back, that Apple advertised and hailed the PowerMac G5 Dual processor as the bad ass machine of the future from IBM. Third party 3D game programmers took out dozens of ads in Mac magazines, it's was looking like the beginning of something great from Apple.
Then the rug was pulled out and Apple switched to cooler, bus hobbled Intel processors and Apple already had OS X running on Intel long before that. Knowing that they were going to have to switch and conned customers and developers along to keep hardware sales going.
So you see Apple could very well, with the iTablet announcement, tell the world Snow Leopard is going to be the last we see of OS X and everyone should just buy a iTablet and develop iPhone OS from now on.
Jobs is also pleased with the Magic Mouse.
So am I.
Do you have a point?
Look ahead, not in the present.
Right now Apple is supporting two operating systems in a period of transition along with hardware transition.
What is stealing laptop and desktop sales right now on PC's?, netbooks.
What will steal Apple sales of Mac laptops in the future? A iTablet.
What will the iTablet run?
OS X and it's limited supply of applications and heat being a heavy OS?
Or a lighter and easier interface with over 100,000 Apps from the App Store that Apple gets a slice of the revenue?
It's obvious.
You missed your calling -- you should be an analyst.
So am I.
Same here. Love it.
You see, you have two OS's and two sets of third party applications.
Why would Apple not have Apps running on OS X too if they planned on OS X being around forever?
Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? Isn't the desire of Apple to sell more Mac's, using Apps as a trojan? Apparently not and why is that?
In my opinion, Apple is pushing the iPhone OS as the new development platform for all of it's future devices. Once the iTablet comes out with the iPhone OS, it will cannibalize Mac sales, much like netbooks cannibalize laptop sales.
I believe Apple has realized that OS X is too complicated for their customers, also devices like hard drives, cd burners etc are all going away, making computers less complicated. So they are focusing on a simpler OS and it's huge supply of Apps to drive hardware sales.
Sure OS X will be around for quite some time, but as the iPhone OS takes over on newer and newer hardware, like iTablets, it's going to become obsolete.
1) They are different OSes because they run on different HW with different I/O.
2) "Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? ¿Que? Both platforms have an SDK to compile apps specific for them?
3) Apple is pushing both platforms. Neither version of OS X is dying? Are going to get all Dvorak on us and claim Apple will adopt Windows?
4) I can?t see an Apple tablet using iPhone OS. There is little about the iPhone OS UI that works on a device with a 10? display that is used not as a phone nor as a pocketable PMP. Logic seems to dictate that it will be a new UI designed around the new HW and I/O. It will undoubtedly have aspects of both the Mac OS and iPhone OS with new elements specific to the Tablet OS used.
5) The only way it will cannibalize mac sales if it can be suitable replacement for Macs. With the MB being much faster, having more capacity and many more options than one would consider from a $600 tablet that sounds unreasonable. Then consider that the 13? MBP was the best selling Mac even after the MB update that it appears that many Mac users aren?t looking for the bare minimum. A tablet sounds like a complimentary device for your Mac. I would be surprised if it syncs like an iDevice.
6) HDDs and ODD are goign away, but keyboards aren?t. They are still the best way we have to input data quickly. Perhaps one day a better method will appear, but I doubt it will be next month. As for OS X being too complicated for users, that really makes no sense when comparing it to other OSes,
7) You say OS X, which refers to the iPhone OS and Mac OS, but I think you just mean Mac OS X. Regardless, it?s not going away. There is no way desktops, workstations, servers and notebooks are going to stop being useful or that iPhone OS is going to be the default OS with no Finder and many other desktop OS components.
When Apple didn't allow Apps on OS X.
Apple can easily make a dual compiler, they did it with PPC and Intel processors, it's because they don't want Apps running on OS X.
You would think the advantage of having Apps on both the iPhone and their home computer would boost Mac sales, so they could sync and all, Apple makes more sales of Mac hardware in the process.
They are not doing that because they are going to let OS X die as the new iTablet/App OS takes over.
Apple is trending towards a new OS and a simpler interface with new hardware devices.
Play chess enough, you begin to see 20 or 30 moves ahead.
The iPhone OS is a device specific variant of OS X. Different devices need different UI, driver, graphics, communications and I/O conventions; there are any number of desktop OS X features that would make no sense whatsoever on a phone.
Apple will continue to leverage the scalability of OS X to create versions that are tightly integrated with the hardware at hand. That, however, has nothing to do with abandoning OS X-- quite the opposite.
I'm assuming that any tablet-like device from Apple will run a version of OS X appropriate to such a device, and that such an OS will probably look more like the iPhone OS than desktop OS X. It will not follow, however, that such an OS is "crippled" or that Apple winds up making "a big iPod Touch." It will just mean that Apple has tailored that specific version of OS X to make the most of a touch driven tablet that's larger than the iPhone.
I would also not be surprised to see some simple developer tools for porting OS X apps to the new UI. The fact that iPhone apps may be able to run with just a resolution tweak is merely an acknowledgment that there is already a large catalogue of touch optimized apps that can be used as a selling point for a new device, avoiding the chicken and egg problem of trying to sell such a device without much software.
Again, that doesn't mean that such a device would be "crippled", just that it makes more sense to have a bunch of apps ready to go out of the gate and then bring on the more sophisticated stuff that takes advantage of better hardware while being fully touch optimized. Apple can be confident that many developers of iPhone apps will take advantage of the simple upgrade path, and if sales are robust they can count on desktop OS X developers making the somewhat more complex transition to Cocoa Touch and finger driven UIs. I would guess that Apple will have done just that with some of their desktop OS X apps, on the shipping version of the tablet.
About 5-7 years from now. By that time we get there, you'll have barely noticed the transition.
Apple is the kind of company that runs full steam ahead with ALL of its products. Every product gets love. From OS X right down to the iPod Nano.
1) They are different OSes because they run on different HW with different I/O.
Yes I know, but Apple does make dual compilers. Just like they did for PPC and Intel. Write once, compile two versions.
One for iPhone/iPod Touch another for OS X and Mac's. Mac sales get a boost because only with a Mac can one sync and use the same Apps on both types of devices, home computer and their portable device.
3) Apple is pushing both platforms. Neither version of OS X is dying? Are going to get all Dvorak on us and claim Apple will adopt Windows?
Apple is pushing whatever makes hardware sales and software sales gives a reason to buy hardware.
Developers are going bananas over the iPhone OS, but not OS X. People's needs are changing, they want a small easy to use portable device with a lot of features and not a big complicated computer that has a steep learning curve.
4) I can?t see an Apple tablet using iPhone OS. There is little about the iPhone OS UI that works on a device with a 10? display that is used not as a phone nor as a pocketable PMP. Logic seems to dictate that it will be a new UI designed around the new HW and I/O. It will undoubtedly have aspects of both the Mac OS and iPhone OS with new elements specific to the Tablet OS used.
It could be a hybid OS X/iPhone App type OS. I won't discount that. But I'm sure the familiar OS X is not going to be be visible to most users.
5) The only way it will cannibalize mac sales if it can be suitable replacement for Macs. With the MB being much faster, having more capacity and many more options than one would consider from a $600 tablet that sounds unreasonable. Then consider that the 13? MBP was the best selling Mac even after the MB update that it appears that many Mac users aren?t looking for the bare minimum. A tablet sounds like a complimentary device for your Mac. I would be surprised if it syncs like an iDevice.
Then why no Apps for OS X? It would seem logical to have both running on both like Apple normally does to boost hardware sales.
6) HDDs and ODD are goign away, but keyboards aren?t. They are still the best way we have to input data quickly. Perhaps one day a better method will appear, but I doubt it will be next month. As for OS X being too complicated for users, that really makes no sense when comparing it to other OSes,
Apple has been pushing bluetooth keyboards as standard on Macs, no doubt one could easily wire up a bluetooth to a iTablet or future iPhone. Perhaps this is another key point in my argument.
7) You say OS X, which refers to the iPhone OS and Mac OS, but I think you just mean Mac OS X. Regardless, it?s not going away. There is no way desktops, workstations, servers and notebooks are going to stop being useful or that iPhone OS is going to be the default OS with no Finder and many other desktop OS components.
Not for quite some time, if Apple doesn't allow Apps on OS X and if the iTablet has the iPhone OS only, OS X is certainly being shown the door in my opinion.
Just look at the App Store, you have to jailbreak your iPhone to run third party apps, to get the freedom of a computer to run what you want. The same will occur with the iTablet.
Tablets will likely replace notebooks entirely . . .
About 5-7 years from now. By that time we get there, you'll have barely noticed the transition.
Apple is the kind of company that runs full steam ahead with ALL of its products. Every product gets love. From OS X right down to the iPod Nano.
Your talking to a ex-PowerMac G5 owner that bought into the Rubenstein video and can no longer run future versions of OS X anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnEbPm8mATQ
Why would Apple not have Apps running on OS X too if they planned on OS X being around forever?
Gee, it has nothing to do with different form factors...
The only OSX likely to die is the one on the aTV.
Wouldn't Mac sales be boosted if the Apps were also compiled for OS X? Isn't the desire of Apple to sell more Mac's, using Apps as a trojan? Apparently not and why is that?
Most apps on the iphone that makes any sense on the desktop are...surprise...already on the desktop. The only thing that isn't are some game titles.
In my opinion, Apple is pushing the iPhone OS as the new development platform for all of it's future devices. Once the iTablet comes out with the iPhone OS, it will cannibalize Mac sales, much like netbooks cannibalize laptop sales.
Except that an ARM tablet, even one with a tactile touch surface, isn't going to cannibalize macbook sales because it won't be a desktop/notebook replacement.
Not even close.
The reason that netbooks cannibalize laptop sales is because they are roughly equivalent to cheap notebooks.
I believe Apple has realized that OS X is too complicated for their customers, also devices like hard drives, cd burners etc are all going away, making computers less complicated. So they are focusing on a simpler OS and it's huge supply of Apps to drive hardware sales.
I'm starting to believe that you aren't serious and just trolling at this point.
What will the iTablet run?
OS X and it's limited supply of applications and heat being a heavy OS?
Or a lighter and easier interface with over 100,000 Apps from the App Store that Apple gets a slice of the revenue?
It's obvious.
It's obvious that you have no idea as to the number of apps on OSX that won't be usable on ARM for a very very long time.
Also let me remind you just a few years back, that Apple advertised and hailed the PowerMac G5 Dual processor as the bad ass machine of the future from IBM. Third party 3D game programmers took out dozens of ads in Mac magazines, it's was looking like the beginning of something great from Apple.
Then the rug was pulled out and Apple switched to cooler, bus hobbled Intel processors and Apple already had OS X running on Intel long before that. Knowing that they were going to have to switch and conned customers and developers along to keep hardware sales going.
Geez, the G5 was released in 2003. The Intel macs appeared in 2006. There were 8 freaking revs in between launch of the G5 and the Power Mac. Folks that want to "remind" people of history really should try to actually know that history.
So you see Apple could very well, with the iTablet announcement, tell the world Snow Leopard is going to be the last we see of OS X and everyone should just buy a iTablet and develop iPhone OS from now on.
Wanna bet $1000? $10,000? They didn't just sink an assload of engineering effort into Snow Leopard to future proof it for multi-core just to declare it done.
Not for quite some time, if Apple doesn't allow Apps on OS X and if the iTablet has the iPhone OS only, OS X is certainly being shown the door in my opinion.
Just look at the App Store, you have to jailbreak your iPhone to run third party apps, to get the freedom of a computer to run what you want. The same will occur with the iTablet.
I hear what you are saying and agree to a point. I would love if some of my iPhone Apps existed on my Mac too, others not so much (like Ramp Champ, love it on my iPhone, don't miss it on my Mac).
However, what do you say about, for example, the iLife apps? Do you think that Apple thinks I'd prefer to use iPhoto on my iPhone or 10" (or 7") tablet? How would I even get those photos from my DSLR onto the device? What about video and iMovie? Or managing my iTunes library? I can tell you right now I don't want to be doing any of this on a tiny screen.
And that's just the basic stuff. What about PS, After Effects, FC Studio or any of those apps where I require not just a large screen but lots of horsepower?
Yes, there is a lot of growth and excitement with iPhone OS now, but that doesn't mean Mac OS I'd dead or even dying. Do you think Apple is just going to abandon this segment of computers where they still make tons of cash?
Tablets will likely replace notebooks entirely . . .
About 5-7 years from now. By that time we get there, you'll have barely noticed the transition.
Entirely? Not even close. Notebooks haven't even "entirely" replaced desktops.
Convertible tablets perhaps but that's not the same thing since it's just a notebook with a swivel hinge and a touch display.