Apple seen merging iOS, Mac OS X with custom A6 chip in 2012

1246710

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 186
    zunxzunx Posts: 620member
    "Merging the iOS and Mac OS X platforms would allow users to have content be available and optimized on an even wider range of devices".



    WRONG!!!



    What is needed is compatibility with the 95% of the world, which means both Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. Today that is possible because the Macs use Intel microprocessors. Switch to ARM and we will be back to the PowerPC fiasco. Did Apple learn from the past? Hopefully!
  • Reply 62 of 186
    gprovidagprovida Posts: 247member
    MacOS is unlikely to go ARM until bog developers commit or a compatibility mode exists. Photoshop and Office come to mind. Perhaps cloud apps might mitigate this.
  • Reply 63 of 186
    bcodebcode Posts: 139member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Also, "retarded" is a perfectly scientific word. There is a big push on lately to have it deleted from our collective lexicon for being offensive but it's not actually in and of itself a pejorative or even a negative remark. It's a shortened form of the technical term "developmentally retarded."



    Hear, hear.



    To expand on this, all sorts of things can be retarded - not just developmentally. Engine Retarder Brakes, A music suspension that resolves upward instead of downward (a retardation), Retarded potential in electrodynamics - etc...



    It always grinds my gears when people freak out at me for using the most scientifically correct term available.
  • Reply 64 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post


    The visible file system is a design choice...much like changing the look of the scrollbars.



    Merging the 2 OS'es would basically involve merging almost all the code below the UI. They might even try merging the APIs (which are already very similar). This would mean that the same 3rd Party codebase would function across Mac, iPad, iPhone with only the UI needing to be changed.



    This would be a dramatic improvement for both devs and customers.



    The merge WILL happen, as long as Apple is technically capable of actually doing it. The only remaining question is when will they start.





    Oh... I'd say Apple will start somewhere in late 2006 or early 2007
  • Reply 65 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    1) Those that assume it have no idea what they are talking about. Apple clearly has different UIs for the iPod Touch/iPhone and iPad. They even release different builds for each version of a device within a market category. For example, the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, G4 iPod Touch, and G3 iPod Touch all have different IPSWs for iOS 5.0 despite all having the same UI design from CocoaTouch.



    2) Your last sentence refers to a universal application. That's different than a Universal OS that will have the drivers, frameworks, and UIs for all devices. Mac OS is already over 3.5GB just for Macs if you were to add it for all iDevices consider at least another 1GB. But for argument sake lets ignore that and just consider the 3.5GB of Mac OS and assume it also contains all the needed files for the iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad and AppleTV models. Does it really make sense for, say, an iPod Touch user to download 3.5GB just to update their iPod? Not in the least!



    3) I can see Apple eventually moving their Xcode SDK to allow for easier code sharing for Mac OS and iOS apps the way they made it easy for iOS for iPhone/Touch and iOS for iPad apps to share code. That is where Apple, the developer and the user would benefit from well designed system, but not from having one bulky OS that will install on all their products.





    Everything you say is true...



    Except that just because the OS consists of a single all-incluseive bundle does not mean that it need be delivered (downloaded) and installed that way (though it would be nice to have the option of a single download to be installed on all your Apple computers and devices).



    The latest beta of iOS 5 has OTA updates for all iDevices -- so Apple may have already demonstrated the capability to do install-time download/configuration of iOS.
  • Reply 66 of 186
    Merging the OS' of major computing platforms such as the MBP, MP, iMac, etc. with the OS' of small, niche embedded devices like the iPhone and iPad is ridiculous.



    I do see Apple capitalizing off of their success though and Apple will be trying to redefine the term "niche" in the process. For the company, it seems a niche product is no longer niche if the majority of people use it. Regardless of the inherent limitations in what it can do.



    I don't NEED an iPhone. but I have one. don't NEED and iPad either... but you get the point.



    I do NEED my MBP for both work and home endeavors. And the way it works is so much easier with a more robust experience.



    IOS is great for the slimmed down mobile experience - when mobile means in transition from place to place or position to position in the same place. But not when it simply means transportable.



    The MBP is a better product for computing than the touchscreen iPad.



    The money coming in from IOS devices seems to skew Apple here as they have done some foolish moves with Lion, which is a great OS, but handicapped in some ways by its "merge" with iOS though process. Marketing is ruling over development in some areas where it should not be so.



    The mouse on a flat surface is far more precise than a finger on an angled screen. It's only exacerbated should fatigue set in.



    The ARM architecture will no doubt be able to have PC like strength in 2016. However, that is compared to the PC's of today. In 2016, there will be much more powerful chips available.



    Apple for a few years seemed to be doing everything right - the best engineered, powerful computers that literally let you do EVERYTHING, removing any barrier one might have to making the mac the center of their computing experience for work or play. It was a success. The marketshare grew and the sales went up up and away.



    however...



    that all paled in comparison to the sales of the iDevices. And while no one can blame Apple for looking into ways to translate that kind of stratospheric money making into Mac sales as well, they are seriously hampering the robust mac experience by doing so. merging the two OS' seems fine when the iOS gets more Mac like features, but not when the robust, feature laden Mac is dumbed down in order to accomadate said "merge."



    We have already seen this philosophy in play with the recent FCP X disaster, where Apple was using a high profile, major professional tool in order to try to convince professionals that real work can be done this way - without saying it of course. and in the real world (outside of apple thinktanks) it simple makes a great product inferior, regardless of how glossy and cool the interface graphics are.



    c'mon apple!
  • Reply 67 of 186
    jukesjukes Posts: 213member
    This would be a real downgrade for those of us who consider Mac OS X to be a pretty unix system, and rely on things like the terminal, filesystem, and macport functionality for our everyday work, particularly now that the new Air is so attractive when paired with a thunderbolt screen (and hopefully external GPU box in the future). This includes a huge fraction of the computer scientists and engineers who have entered or graduated from school within the past 10 years.
  • Reply 68 of 186
    neilwneilw Posts: 77member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post


    Merging the OS' of major computing platforms such as the MBP, MP, iMac, etc. with the OS' of small, niche embedded devices like the iPhone and iPad is ridiculous.



    While I agree with much of the sentiment of your post, classifying iPhone and iPad as "small, niche embedded devices" is shortsighted. Mobile devices are taking over computing. The transition may take a while, but it's underway. We are headed for the day when heavyweight desktop and laptop products will be the "niche devices".
  • Reply 69 of 186
    bregaladbregalad Posts: 816member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    He doesn't outline anything, so these are valid questions.



    But a fully-multitouch desktop OS can easily be done. Its audience is everyone. It's the replacement of the mouse.



    The Magic Trackpad is the replacement of the mouse done ergonomically and practically.



    Having to reach up and touch your work is literally a pain in the arm (and other body parts). A trackpad pointer can be accurate to a single pixel. The average finger is only accurate to 100 pixels (10x10 grid) at best and most people using a touch screen cover more than 200 pixels at a time.

    Try touching your work without obscuring some of it with your hand. Yeah that's SO efficient.
  • Reply 70 of 186
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,451member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    BTW, about 30 minutes ago, AAPL market cap was within $18 Billion of XOM.



    With their last quarter pulling in $25.34B or something like that we will see Apple beating Exxon in the next quarter. Wow, who would have thought... Exxon did pull in $383B last year in revenue with 'only' 80k+ employees, all pretty staggering. But their net income of $30B doesn't even come close to Apples'
  • Reply 71 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jukes View Post


    This would be a real downgrade for those of us who consider Mac OS X to be a pretty unix system,







    The number of customers who use Unix is vanishingly small. OTOH, the number of people who want/need to do common tasks, as easily and efficiently as possible, is HUGE.



    Apple is now aiming for the sweet spot, where most of the money is. I expect that their devices will become, over time, easier to use. That is what gives value to the hardware, not the ability for a few geeks to do esoteric tasks.
  • Reply 72 of 186
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    The latest beta of iOS 5 has OTA updates for all iDevices -- so Apple may have already demonstrated the capability to do install-time download/configuration of iOS.



    Those OTA delta updates are specific to that device, not a single OTA update that will work for all iOS-based devices. That's the difference.
  • Reply 73 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleLover2 View Post


    I do. The vast majority of people don't need anything except iOS. It makes perfect sense to trim the bloat from OSX. Only a very few people will miss anything, and it will be easier for most customers to use.



    Disagree. Do the following with iOS: Create an email and attach to that one email a Pages document, a Numbers file and a PDF. Not possible.



    Until iOS implements a file system that is shared across applications (i.e. each app does not own its own files), you cannot come close to replacing a business desktop with an iOS device and you'd be severely limited at home.
  • Reply 74 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleLover2 View Post


    The number of customers who use Unix is vanishingly small.



    Not so. The number of customer who use Unix is huge. All OSX and iOS users use Unix. Unix is at the core of many consumer appliances. The number of users who use the Unix terminal is small. The main benefit Unix is not the terminal but rather the architecture and stability. If you like the stability, memory management and multitasking abilities of either OS, then Unix is important to you.
  • Reply 75 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by emig647 View Post


    While there being a million other things like that, that is the most important one. Without a usable file system, there won't be a need to use a computer.



    Assume this happens, how would ANY professional work be done on a computer? Programming, Video Editing, Audio Processing, Desktop Publishing... without easy access to files you essentially kill the professional use of a computer. If Apple went this way, I'd be out, after 17 years.



    First: iOS and OSX share a common file system -- it is just hidden on iOS (and sandboxed).



    But, Apple is making the first tentative steps to reducing user-dependency/and interaction with the OSX file system. Things like:



    1) the documents and download stacks in the dock



    2) LaunchPad



    3) Media browsers that allow you to access other app's files within an app



    4) Predefined locations within the file system for certain types of files -- first iMovie, now FCP X and Motion 5



    5) Spotlight



    6) file metadata



    7) file versioning



    8) Smart Folders/Collections



    9) large external storage repositories -- RAID, NAS, SAN



    10) Dropbox



    11) iCloud



    12) intelligent file share (export) options which allow the app/OS to gather and package associated interdependent files -- for example FCP X allows you to gather a project, its media files (events), render files, etc. and distribute it as a self-contained package.



    13) SQL-based file repository replacing XML





    There are some very subtle changes being made within the OS and the apps, themselves. Access to the files information via SQL rather than XML or hierarchical drill-down.



    At some point we users will realize that we do not need to know (or care) where the file is just as long as we can access it -- we have computers that can do the grunge/munge work.



    Apple already knows this!





    EDIT: Oops... forgot that Lion hides ~/Library



    I suspect that the UNIX file system will be with us until a superior system is developed...





    And, I can remember back far enough -- when real men had to remember (or keep a list) in which drawers of which file cabinets his punch-card data files were stored.



    That was over 50 years ago -- and we still retrieve files in much the same way!



    Now, where did I put that damned Lion install DVD....
  • Reply 76 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post


    Merging the OS' of major computing platforms such as the MBP, MP, iMac, etc. with the OS' of small, niche embedded devices like the iPhone and iPad is ridiculous.



    I do see Apple capitalizing off of their success though and Apple will be trying to redefine the term "niche" in the process. For the company, it seems a niche product is no longer niche if the majority of people use it. Regardless of the inherent limitations in what it can do.



    I don't NEED an iPhone. but I have one. don't NEED and iPad either... but you get the point.



    I do NEED my MBP for both work and home endeavors. And the way it works is so much easier with a more robust experience.



    IOS is great for the slimmed down mobile experience - when mobile means in transition from place to place or position to position in the same place. But not when it simply means transportable.



    The MBP is a better product for computing than the touchscreen iPad.



    The money coming in from IOS devices seems to skew Apple here as they have done some foolish moves with Lion, which is a great OS, but handicapped in some ways by its "merge" with iOS though process. Marketing is ruling over development in some areas where it should not be so.



    The mouse on a flat surface is far more precise than a finger on an angled screen. It's only exacerbated should fatigue set in.



    The ARM architecture will no doubt be able to have PC like strength in 2016. However, that is compared to the PC's of today. In 2016, there will be much more powerful chips available.



    Apple for a few years seemed to be doing everything right - the best engineered, powerful computers that literally let you do EVERYTHING, removing any barrier one might have to making the mac the center of their computing experience for work or play. It was a success. The marketshare grew and the sales went up up and away.



    however...



    that all paled in comparison to the sales of the iDevices. And while no one can blame Apple for looking into ways to translate that kind of stratospheric money making into Mac sales as well, they are seriously hampering the robust mac experience by doing so. merging the two OS' seems fine when the iOS gets more Mac like features, but not when the robust, feature laden Mac is dumbed down in order to accomadate said "merge."



    We have already seen this philosophy in play with the recent FCP X disaster, where Apple was using a high profile, major professional tool in order to try to convince professionals that real work can be done this way - without saying it of course. and in the real world (outside of apple thinktanks) it simple makes a great product inferior, regardless of how glossy and cool the interface graphics are.



    c'mon apple!



    You're making so many assumptions here and most of them are not supportable. I'm not going to do a point by point ting, but your characterisation of the Final Cut Pro "disaster" is waaay over the top and basically marks you as someone not worth debating at all.



    On a more substantive note:



    What everyone here who is freaking out about OS X and iOS merging is not thinking about is that iOS is still in the early stages and both OS's are, you know, EVOLVING. So it's not the case that some future OS X will be "dumbed down" to the level of iOS we see today at all. For that to happen iOS would have to be standing still and OS X would have to plummet in popularity. This is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.



    It's far more likely that the iOS way of doing things will evolve to the point where it can actually handle files and folders than it is Apple would remove the file system from OS X for example.



    The point is we don't even know what each of the OS's will look like next year let alone five or ten years down the road. Panicking now is surely not going to be very productive. Let's wait until something actually happens before we all drive off the cliff.
  • Reply 77 of 186
    gustavgustav Posts: 824member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    He doesn't outline anything, so these are valid questions.



    But a fully-multitouch desktop OS can easily be done. Its audience is everyone. It's the replacement of the mouse.



    It's everyone or no one? Touch works great on a 10" tablet. Not so much on a 30" display on a desk.
  • Reply 78 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by barthrh View Post


    Not so. The number of customer who use Unix is huge. All OSX and iOS users use Unix. Unix is at the core of many consumer appliances. The number of users who use the Unix terminal is small. The main benefit Unix is not the terminal but rather the architecture and stability. If you like the stability, memory management and multitasking abilities of either OS, then Unix is important to you.



    Unix will still be there, it just won't likely be as acceptable. Shame really - one of the reasons I'm able to be so productive with my Mac is because I can make short work of processing tons of files at the command prompt.
  • Reply 79 of 186
    gustavgustav Posts: 824member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post


    Why do people assume a merger of iOS and OS X should automatically entail identical UIs? An OS is a lot more than the user interface - they can have a single OS with the same kernel, device drivers, file system, development environment, etc., with a different style of UI depending on device, in very much the exact same way that iOS handles both iPhone and iPad now. There's no reason they can't extend the idea of a universal iOS application to have a different UI for mouse/keyboard interactions too.



    You are describing what they have now, with the exception of having two different UIs.



    MacOS X and iOS already have the same core.
  • Reply 80 of 186
    jukesjukes Posts: 213member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleLover2 View Post


    The number of customers who use Unix is vanishingly small. OTOH, the number of people who want/need to do common tasks, as easily and efficiently as possible, is HUGE.



    Apple is now aiming for the sweet spot, where most of the money is. I expect that their devices will become, over time, easier to use. That is what gives value to the hardware, not the ability for a few geeks to do esoteric tasks.



    How is this relevant to my post? I said that losing access the terminal, filesystem, and macports tree would be a real downgrade for us. Not that there are a lot of us.
Sign In or Register to comment.