While I wouldn't like storing my personal or financial documents on the cloud, I wouldn't mind leaving my iTunes purchases there. It is certainly media files that create backup headaches, due to their size.
Nice work putting two and two together here, and the name definitely makes sense but I?m not sure if it?s different enough from Snow Leopard and Leopard, too many leopards. I would be THRILLED if true cloud computing was built into 10.7.
I'd probably say that by the time 10.7 comes out it'll be:
1) Kernel is now 64bit with the 32bit Intel Core based computers possibly killed off.
2) Further refinement, building on the technology further to expand features, heavier integration of grand central.
3) Merging of optimisations and power saving features from iOS.
4) Webkit2 based browser which will provide rock solid stability and security in a world moving more and more to web based applications.
5) Totally moving over to LLVM (plus updated libstdc++ and more) as the default compiler and XCode 4.0 shipped as well.
We'll probably see more work on multi-touch, don't expect to see touch screens - there is a right place to use it and a wrong place. Desktops are entirely a wrong place to use it web as iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch are the right places to use it.
Remember folks Apple has a habit of screaming revolution, magic and massive change when in reality the changes are evolutionary not revolutionary.
I firmly believe that if its not 10.7 it will be the next one but will probably be OS XI with multi-touch incorporated at every level of the OS.
I mean it makes sense its only natural. But I pretty much saw this as soon the iphone was announced in 07.
The reason some of us use OS X is because it's UNIX underneath. UNIX has been stable for decades, and it's internal APIs (POSIX and others) have also been stable, which means your initial investment into learning it pays dividends for the rest of your life.
If Apple chose to ditch the UNIX subsystem, some of us would ditch OS X like a dirt bag. This is why I don't think Apple will do this (they are not stupid and they know how important this is). As a consequence any renaming of OS X to OS XI is just silly. OS X is a brand really and not a version of the OS. Re-branding the name of the OS is fine, and personally I don't care what they call it, I care about technologies underneath.
As for 3D desktops and touch interfaces, that's just stupid. Who wants to sit in front of the screen with their arm extended to grease up that shiny mirror in front of them. How long do you think you could hold your arm extended like that to browse your web page?
OS-XI will never happen either. iOS *is* (or will become), OS-XI except they won't call it that because iOS sounds a heck of a lot better.
In other words, by the time that iOS is capable enough to run on a desktop, it will already supplant the desktop. There will be no dual modes, and probably no widgety layer either.
I know everyone is excited and terribly pleased about iOS (and so they should be), but that doesn't mean it's headed for the desktop.
You guys really have no idea about software development and internal structure of OS X (it's not a secret. Most of it is open source anyway).
iOS and iPhone OS before it ARE stripped down versions of OS X. So you are saying Apple will take stripped down version of desktop OS X, grow it into full version of desktop OS to replace OS X instead of simply evolving OS X? Really smart.
The App Store with all its 225,000 apps show that developers want to create small specialized apps to do specific things with fast turnaround times, not monolithic apps like desktop apps that take ages to build, support and get right.
With small app components, you can build your own workflows with the best tools for each job. Get a good text editor for code, get an FTP component for syncing, get a lightweight image editor for slicing images, get a browser for testing. Compare it to monolithic Dreamweaver and you get some good bits and some bad bits but you have to live with the bad bits and see improvements very rarely.
+1
This was actually the promise many years ago from the company that we recently have come to hate: Adobe. It is "plug-ins", which were eventually added, and the talk of *"module-based software", which was supposed to come, but became "Suite Software" instead i.e. the monolithic beast(s) we suffer through today.
The idea is rather simple, and I personally still don't understand why it hasn't been properly implemented. For example: an info or inspector pane for text (font, color, spacing, etc.) should only need to be coded ONCE, and then given access to through hooks, from within whatever task you're doing (whether photo, layout, text, tables - type of work). Need rulers or a filter, it's "hooked" when needed, etc. The "Base" software would be say $100,-, and then additional features and functions, say $0,99/each, and would be available from multiple vendors. Naturally, new tested versions would automatically be synced, because these "mini-feature-apps" would be in the cloud, and be DLed and compiled when or if needed.
Strip the software down to the basics, and let particular functions be added as "work-flow" specific apps. Hmmm.... kinda like iOS. Nobody needs to re-create the "keyboard" just to make it available within their app.
BTW: Look at some of the neat stuff the lowly iPad can already do, apart from iWork for iPad as an example:
The only reason I see why the "module style" software never came to be, was that the individual corporations (Adobe, MS) decided that they would lose too much creative and monetary control over "their" software. The couldn't (and still don't!) see past their next quarterly market-share/revenue report.
Conceded, they can't recoup lost software revenue by creating devices like Apple can. Only avenue left was to buy up their competition or anything looking like it, to satiate the ever-present elephant in the room called: "growth at any cost".
In today's world, it is rarely if ever acceptable (by W-Street at least) to become smaller to get bigger, unless your forced into that situation by impending bankruptcy (see GM). Too sad.
*NOTE: Actually, Adobe is testing the waters with this "module" type of approach, by hooking in Flash to Photoshop Extensions (see Kuler, PainterWheel, additional Live Services, etc.), as well as Air. However, they are struggling dearly with Flash, and still haven't given in to the fact that they will almost without a doubt have to recode that piece of their puzzle from scratch... or just scratch it, and go HTML5. We'll see soon enough if they are up to the task with re-working Flash for Mobile platforms. If it is a Hog-&-a-Dog or causes headaches on Android Froyo and 10.1, it's pretty much dead.
I'm pretty sure that feature is about running Mac OSX remotely.
You'll be able to use your iPad/iPod/iPhone to run a Mac OSX session via MobileMe.
You can also share that session on a real Mac where it is running as another OS (virtual) thread.
The future is mobile devices.
The future is also connected always-on computing.
Yet the present is the desktop OS.
How do you merge all these into one congruent user experience?
Mac OSX 10.7 - Lion. Hear it roar!
Yep - this is something that I think has real relevence to the state of computing as-is.
People now have multiple home computers, plus multiple mobile devices and we then some data and services provided online. We need some kind of seamless way to treat our collective data and software as a single personal network, which we access via different devices according to what we're doing and where - not where the bits and bytes are.
...As a consequence any renaming of OS X to OS XI is just silly. OS X is a brand really and not a version of the OS. Re-branding the name of the OS is fine, and personally I don't care what they call it, I care about technologies underneath....
Well, actually a consequence of dumb-luck I would guess re: "OS X" as brand name, considering for the "old guys" around here, it's pronounced "OS Ten" and not "ex".
But I'll go with that "ex" too, because as luck has it, OSX and iOS are both great image-branding moves by Apple. I also think that in one form or another, OS X will be with us for a very, very long time to come.
MS will someday reach 10: "Windows Decennium Desktop Live Cloud Ultimate - Surface Version for Home Professional "... which is well... not so good.
But hey!... they will be "on track" to convert those leftover neophyte Win XP users... finally! Did I mention that this will be in 2020. They're actually proud of their progress, considering 7 was introduced only 10 years earlier... and "Decennium" is just so "cool". That'll show them Apple Fanbois!
Ballmer will be quoted as saying they should have scrapped "7" for the "Decennium" moniker earlier since he thought of that (but couldn't spell it and he couldn't find it on Bing... remember that innovative tech?!), and they would still be at 95% marketshare rather than 23-1/3 as of yesterday's report. F*** rounding errors! Didn't and still doesn't work! Dances a madman's jig at the thought of reaching 23-2/4... uh... 23.5... uh... up or down with that... uh. Nurse settles him back in his chair, one of only a few left that he hasn't broken at the Sanatorium doing the "Developer Dance" for the "yungins".
My dream is that there are two or three isight cameras on the front of the mac, and that they average their images to make it look like you are looking into the camera when you talk on a video conference, instead of looking at the image of the person you are talking to (looks like staring into space for the person you're talking to). It would deliver the emotional punch to video calling that the medium is crying out for.
I don't think this fits the job description, but it would be "very apple" to make the interface so intuitive and satisfying.
Yes, I agree. Getting ONE camera in the middle of the screen is where I last heard Apple was headed.
However, is everyone out there so damn good looking all the time that they want their image blasted out into cyberspace all the time? Maybe I just wasn't blessed with the face of the gods that you all seem to have, but eventually, once the novelty wears off, don't you think Face Time and Video Conferencing is going to fade a bit in popularity?
You don't have to shave, comb hair (if you've got any) or brush teeth.
Comments
Oh and nice photoshop graphic? lol
1) Kernel is now 64bit with the 32bit Intel Core based computers possibly killed off.
2) Further refinement, building on the technology further to expand features, heavier integration of grand central.
3) Merging of optimisations and power saving features from iOS.
4) Webkit2 based browser which will provide rock solid stability and security in a world moving more and more to web based applications.
5) Totally moving over to LLVM (plus updated libstdc++ and more) as the default compiler and XCode 4.0 shipped as well.
We'll probably see more work on multi-touch, don't expect to see touch screens - there is a right place to use it and a wrong place. Desktops are entirely a wrong place to use it web as iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch are the right places to use it.
Remember folks Apple has a habit of screaming revolution, magic and massive change when in reality the changes are evolutionary not revolutionary.
I firmly believe that if its not 10.7 it will be the next one but will probably be OS XI with multi-touch incorporated at every level of the OS.
I mean it makes sense its only natural. But I pretty much saw this as soon the iphone was announced in 07.
The reason some of us use OS X is because it's UNIX underneath. UNIX has been stable for decades, and it's internal APIs (POSIX and others) have also been stable, which means your initial investment into learning it pays dividends for the rest of your life.
If Apple chose to ditch the UNIX subsystem, some of us would ditch OS X like a dirt bag. This is why I don't think Apple will do this (they are not stupid and they know how important this is). As a consequence any renaming of OS X to OS XI is just silly. OS X is a brand really and not a version of the OS. Re-branding the name of the OS is fine, and personally I don't care what they call it, I care about technologies underneath.
As for 3D desktops and touch interfaces, that's just stupid. Who wants to sit in front of the screen with their arm extended to grease up that shiny mirror in front of them. How long do you think you could hold your arm extended like that to browse your web page?
Never happen.
OS-XI will never happen either. iOS *is* (or will become), OS-XI except they won't call it that because iOS sounds a heck of a lot better.
In other words, by the time that iOS is capable enough to run on a desktop, it will already supplant the desktop. There will be no dual modes, and probably no widgety layer either.
I know everyone is excited and terribly pleased about iOS (and so they should be), but that doesn't mean it's headed for the desktop.
You guys really have no idea about software development and internal structure of OS X (it's not a secret. Most of it is open source anyway).
iOS and iPhone OS before it ARE stripped down versions of OS X. So you are saying Apple will take stripped down version of desktop OS X, grow it into full version of desktop OS to replace OS X instead of simply evolving OS X? Really smart.
This could be a great foundation for the new Macbook Air: imagine an ultra slim computer with no computer inside.
Yes, the ultimate, *thin client*...
....
The App Store with all its 225,000 apps show that developers want to create small specialized apps to do specific things with fast turnaround times, not monolithic apps like desktop apps that take ages to build, support and get right.
With small app components, you can build your own workflows with the best tools for each job. Get a good text editor for code, get an FTP component for syncing, get a lightweight image editor for slicing images, get a browser for testing. Compare it to monolithic Dreamweaver and you get some good bits and some bad bits but you have to live with the bad bits and see improvements very rarely.
+1
This was actually the promise many years ago from the company that we recently have come to hate: Adobe. It is "plug-ins", which were eventually added, and the talk of *"module-based software", which was supposed to come, but became "Suite Software" instead i.e. the monolithic beast(s) we suffer through today.
The idea is rather simple, and I personally still don't understand why it hasn't been properly implemented. For example: an info or inspector pane for text (font, color, spacing, etc.) should only need to be coded ONCE, and then given access to through hooks, from within whatever task you're doing (whether photo, layout, text, tables - type of work). Need rulers or a filter, it's "hooked" when needed, etc. The "Base" software would be say $100,-, and then additional features and functions, say $0,99/each, and would be available from multiple vendors. Naturally, new tested versions would automatically be synced, because these "mini-feature-apps" would be in the cloud, and be DLed and compiled when or if needed.
Strip the software down to the basics, and let particular functions be added as "work-flow" specific apps. Hmmm.... kinda like iOS. Nobody needs to re-create the "keyboard" just to make it available within their app.
BTW: Look at some of the neat stuff the lowly iPad can already do, apart from iWork for iPad as an example:
30 Essential iPad Apps for Designers and Creatives - AppStorm
Five great iPad apps for iPhone photographers - Macworld
The only reason I see why the "module style" software never came to be, was that the individual corporations (Adobe, MS) decided that they would lose too much creative and monetary control over "their" software. The couldn't (and still don't!) see past their next quarterly market-share/revenue report.
Conceded, they can't recoup lost software revenue by creating devices like Apple can. Only avenue left was to buy up their competition or anything looking like it, to satiate the ever-present elephant in the room called: "growth at any cost".
In today's world, it is rarely if ever acceptable (by W-Street at least) to become smaller to get bigger, unless your forced into that situation by impending bankruptcy (see GM). Too sad.
*NOTE: Actually, Adobe is testing the waters with this "module" type of approach, by hooking in Flash to Photoshop Extensions (see Kuler, PainterWheel, additional Live Services, etc.), as well as Air. However, they are struggling dearly with Flash, and still haven't given in to the fact that they will almost without a doubt have to recode that piece of their puzzle from scratch... or just scratch it, and go HTML5. We'll see soon enough if they are up to the task with re-working Flash for Mobile platforms. If it is a Hog-&-a-Dog or causes headaches on Android Froyo and 10.1, it's pretty much dead.
I'm pretty sure that feature is about running Mac OSX remotely.
You'll be able to use your iPad/iPod/iPhone to run a Mac OSX session via MobileMe.
You can also share that session on a real Mac where it is running as another OS (virtual) thread.
The future is mobile devices.
The future is also connected always-on computing.
Yet the present is the desktop OS.
How do you merge all these into one congruent user experience?
Mac OSX 10.7 - Lion. Hear it roar!
Yep - this is something that I think has real relevence to the state of computing as-is.
People now have multiple home computers, plus multiple mobile devices and we then some data and services provided online. We need some kind of seamless way to treat our collective data and software as a single personal network, which we access via different devices according to what we're doing and where - not where the bits and bytes are.
...As a consequence any renaming of OS X to OS XI is just silly. OS X is a brand really and not a version of the OS. Re-branding the name of the OS is fine, and personally I don't care what they call it, I care about technologies underneath....
Well, actually a consequence of dumb-luck I would guess re: "OS X" as brand name, considering for the "old guys" around here, it's pronounced "OS Ten" and not "ex".
But I'll go with that "ex" too, because as luck has it, OSX and iOS are both great image-branding moves by Apple. I also think that in one form or another, OS X will be with us for a very, very long time to come.
MS will someday reach 10: "Windows Decennium Desktop Live Cloud Ultimate - Surface Version for Home Professional "... which is well... not so good.
But hey!... they will be "on track" to convert those leftover neophyte Win XP users... finally! Did I mention that this will be in 2020. They're actually proud of their progress, considering 7 was introduced only 10 years earlier... and "Decennium" is just so "cool". That'll show them Apple Fanbois!
Ballmer will be quoted as saying they should have scrapped "7" for the "Decennium" moniker earlier since he thought of that (but couldn't spell it and he couldn't find it on Bing... remember that innovative tech?!), and they would still be at 95% marketshare rather than 23-1/3 as of yesterday's report. F*** rounding errors! Didn't and still doesn't work! Dances a madman's jig at the thought of reaching 23-2/4... uh... 23.5... uh... up or down with that... uh. Nurse settles him back in his chair, one of only a few left that he hasn't broken at the Sanatorium doing the "Developer Dance" for the "yungins".
PS: Sorry got carried away...it's FRIII-DAY!
You guys really have no idea about software development and internal structure of OS X (it's not a secret. Most of it is open source anyway).
Where can I download the source for OS X?
indeed, facetime must eventually = ichat...
My dream is that there are two or three isight cameras on the front of the mac, and that they average their images to make it look like you are looking into the camera when you talk on a video conference, instead of looking at the image of the person you are talking to (looks like staring into space for the person you're talking to). It would deliver the emotional punch to video calling that the medium is crying out for.
I don't think this fits the job description, but it would be "very apple" to make the interface so intuitive and satisfying.
Yes, I agree. Getting ONE camera in the middle of the screen is where I last heard Apple was headed.
However, is everyone out there so damn good looking all the time that they want their image blasted out into cyberspace all the time? Maybe I just wasn't blessed with the face of the gods that you all seem to have, but eventually, once the novelty wears off, don't you think Face Time and Video Conferencing is going to fade a bit in popularity?
You don't have to shave, comb hair (if you've got any) or brush teeth.
Sincerely,
Narcissus
/thread
Where can I download the source for OS X?
http://www.apple.com/opensource/
http://www.apple.com/opensource/
I trust you understand what a very, very small subset of OS X is available there.