1) Maybe an A6 processor would contain both ARM and X86 ISAs and would be capable of running both instruction sets natively. That sort of thing has been done before and most of the transistors on a CPU these days are cache; adding an ARM ISA to an x86 chip wouldn't be that hard.
This depends on Intel because a) Apple doesn't have a license to build x86 compatible processors and b) Intel owns all of Transmeta's IP which presumably covers most of the IP required to effectively do this sort of thing. If Apple can convince Intel to fab the A6 (as suggested by an earlier response) then maybe we could see this.
Yes Apple borrowed from iOS but example they could have added versioning and resume features without removing the Save As... item from the file menu. Why they decided to do so? Just because of the way iOS apps work. Instant On.
Whatever you were working on reappears after closing. Thats fine and dandy but I want to be able to save a file manually for sharing or anything else. I want control.
Also, hate the command left click in a windows title bar no longer shows that document or folders path. Launchpad I can live without. Mission control SHOULD be separate, its a memory hog now. I don't want to be forced to use spaces or dashboard. If I only want to use expose, i should be allowed to do so. Aesthetically, Snow Leopard looked better. The login screen/window, the aqua buttons, ical, address book etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tails
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
Mac OSX will NEVER see anything weaker than Sandy Bridge!
True, but OS 11 (or whatever it becomes) might be a totally different animal and OS X will continue on Pro models for a long while until the newer stuff is up to needed level of performance. Jobs has stated that Apple will only work on two OS's at a time. So if they can eventually merge iOS and OSX into one OS, than Apple can work on creating a true web/cloud based OS with icloud that could offset any short comings the merged ios/osx would have.
This depends on Intel because a) Apple doesn't have a license to build x86 compatible processors and b) Intel owns all of Transmeta's IP which presumably covers most of the IP required to effectively do this sort of thing. If Apple can convince Intel to fab the A6 (as suggested by an earlier response) then maybe we could see this.
If Apple were able to get Intel to build a custom package which included an A6-An chip as well as an I7-n...
All of Apple's laptops from the Air on up would gain instant on, low battery usage basic tasks (email, web, chat, etc.), and still have sufficient power to do heavy lifting.
They'd become kinda' a hybrid SUV -- somewhere between a post-pc mobile device and a "truck".
Seriously, there is a specific split between the two platforms for many reasons. They share as much of the foundation as possible and where they don't is an intentional split between the two target platforms.
And people have been panning Windows 8 for merging traditional Windows with touch screen capabilities claiming it can't be done successfully.
Don't even get me started. I used Windows 3.11 for Pen Computing back in 1995 on freaking touch screen tablets, all the way to the UMPCs. Microsoft PROVED it can't be done successfully, if by "successfully" you mean "a mainstream product that lots of people want to buy." But hey, maybe the 7th time's a charm.
And therein lies the problem: there is a need for it. One of the main reasons the Mac has steadily gained in popularity over the past several years is its chameleon-like abilities to run *any* OS running on an Intel chip (for me, that's Mac OSX, Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD). Even if someone never *intends* to run Windows on the machine, knowing they can if they have to is a big safety blanket and convinces a lot of people to buy Macs rather than go with a Windows box.
...
The point is that this was probably needed to gain traction a few years ago, but now with the iPhone and iPad Apple has almost insurmountable advocates for it's platform and doesn't need the small traction of windows emulation. Especially since windows use is rapidly declining and it's programs can be replaced by a plethora of applications and apps on the Mac platform.
And Apple made it clear that they've fully tested a touch interface for a desktop and deliberately split the UI into two camps.
Nope, Apple made it clear they tested Mac OS X on a touchscreen device. And it sucked. Rightly. Because Mac OS X is designed for one point of input at the size of one pixel (and because at the time, it was Panther, but that's secondary).
Doesn't stop them from making a completely new desktop touch OS.
If Apple were able to get Intel to build a custom package which included an A6-An chip as well as an I7-n...
All of Apple's laptops from the Air on up would gain instant on, low battery usage basic tasks (email, web, chat, etc.), and still have sufficient power to do heavy lifting.
They'd become kinda' a hybrid SUV -- somewhere between a post-pc mobile device and a "truck".
And one OS to run them all!
A combination chip is a bad idea especially because of dissipation, which corresponds directly to the number of transistors. Arm is successful in mobile applications because it has a relatively low number of transistors and a 'simple' processor architecture. Intel processors are the opposite because of it's legacy compatibility and it's complicated design.
For Apple's more traditional and more powerful computers, like the MacBook Pro and Mac desktops, the analyst sees Apple sticking with Intel processors and the current Mac OS X software. But by 2016, he sees all of Apple's Mac devices running on an ARM-based processor like the ones found in the iPhone and iPad.
"Our preliminary view is that Apple can use a 32-bit ARM architecture to address the vast majority of the OS X ecosystem's needs in 2012-13 except for high-end professional devices," he wrote. "When 64-bit ARM is available in 2016, we believe Apple will have a single OS and hardware architecture."
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, Misek believes. He sees this strategy being more difficult for Apple to achieve if the company continues to keep its Mac and iOS operating systems separate.
A single OS does not mean a single CPU family. While I can envision a single operating system for all the consumer electronics sold by Apple, it would be foolish to deny the merits of Intel CPUs, the current market leader in technology, performance and design.
While ARM designs have definite advantages, most notably low battery drainage and low heat dissipation, both stemming from low electric consumption and reduced CPU speed, ARM designs are not a match for the power and performance of Intel CPUs.
As is commonly said in business circles, Intel is the current market leader and its leading position is Intel to loose.
Any scenario where ARM designs would become superior to Intel designs rests on one foolish assumption, i.e. that Intel would do nothing between now and then.
Takes this as the perspective of another old guy. I really like most aspects of Lion. The bugs aren't even that bad compared to previous OS releases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charley2
I can't believe that Apple is stupid enough to replace OSX with an IOS blend. I detest most of the IOS system to the point where i no longer use My iPod touch except as a GPS guidance system. Most of the IOS features in Lion are good only because they can be turned off.
It depends! I really like some of Lions features as it makes the system easier to use. It provides for more convenient usage if you eye sight isn't what it was ten or fifteen years ago.
Quote:
I have arthritis in my hands and I am not alone. The multifinger motions are painful. I even use a mouse on my laptop.
Would you not agree though that that is an issue with everything you need to manipulate? Just because it doesn't work well for you doesn't mean that others have trouble. Frankly my joints aren't what they where either, in part due to a broken hand a few years ago, but pinch to zoom is a god send. Well at least where it has been implemented.
Quote:
Apple seems to be so fascinated by the success of IOS hardware that they have lost track of the fact that most computer users have big screens and don't need adaptations to run apps on a screen under 12 inches. If this prediction is correct, I can see Apple Producing touch screen computers and declaring the mouse era dead.
First I don't think the perdition is correct on the face of it. I can see the two OS'es sharing a lot feature wise but they really target far different use cases with this software.
Quote:
I cannot envision buying Mac software That is an IOS clone. When that day comes my OS will become Linux
I really don't think you have to worry. Everyone is focused on a few minor GUI changes in Lion that they ignore the details of the ENTIRE Lion update. I put entire in caps because Apple has put a lot of effort and polish into the UNIX'y side of Lion. It really is a solid update in many ways. Things that most users never see have not been forgotten. Python has been updated as have many other UNIX utilities. Internals such a Grand Central Dispatch have been enhanced too.
Oh buy the way I'm liking full screen mode for some things. How well it works for any one work flow varies of course but sometimes it pays to put a little effort into adaptation.
You will own a single device, an iPhone 7, say. When you are out and about, it presents the iOS UI on its screen and it works pretty much as a smartphone. When you get home, you can connect it to your monitor, keyboard and other peripherals (perhaps wirelessly, perhaps not) and that opens up the Mac OS functions that you need for large-screen computing (video editing, word processing, software development, etc.).
Sounds like a Motorola Atrix. I wonder if they patented that idea already?
Yes Apple borrowed from iOS but example they could have added versioning and resume features without removing the Save As... item from the file menu.
I'm really like Lion but I have to agree the new saving mechanism sucks. Of course the depends upon user and app but not having the option can sometimes be counter productive.
Quote:
Why they decided to do so? Just because of the way iOS apps work. Instant On.
That is an over simplification if you ask me. I don't reject the auto save mechanism at all, rather I reject the lack of control when I need it.
Quote:
Whatever you were working on reappears after closing. Thats fine and dandy but I want to be able to save a file manually for sharing or anything else. I want control.
I guess we do think a like here.
Quote:
Also, hate the command left click in a windows title bar no longer shows that document or folders path.
Put in a bug report!
Quote:
Launchpad I can live without.
I'm adapting to launch pad pretty quick. In fact I'm about ready to reorganize to make it my primary way to start apps. For me it seems to work better than anything else I've tried.
Quote:
Mission control SHOULD be separate, its a memory hog now. I don't want to be forced to use spaces or dashboard. If I only want to use expose, i should be allowed to do so. Aesthetically, Snow Leopard looked better. The login screen/window, the aqua buttons, ical, address book etc...
That is subjective, something's are better some are worst.
I do want to point out one thing, if you (or anyone for that matter) is having trouble with Safari look seriously at running a WebKit nightly. It looks like a serious regression got into Safari.
Maybe I sound to fanboy'ish here but there is more to like about Lion than to dislike. For those things you really hate look into disabling the feature.
That be a pretty substantial jump in processing power for just one year from the a5 to something competitive with the core i5. I don't see it unless it's a new product. Plus, there's really no reason to think a MacBook air would be more productive using ios6 than lion or that laptops will suddenly become comfortable to use as touch screens. Why would apple axe their most popular computer completely to make it significantly slower, less ergonomic, and less powerful?
No kidding! This is the same stupid rumor crap still going around. The ARM chip that Apple uses in the A5 and the A6 is at least 5-6 years behind Intel in performance. So like Apple is going to put a processor that's slower than the original Air had in them when they first shipped, yea get real. People stop falling for this BS.
Comments
1) Maybe an A6 processor would contain both ARM and X86 ISAs and would be capable of running both instruction sets natively. That sort of thing has been done before and most of the transistors on a CPU these days are cache; adding an ARM ISA to an x86 chip wouldn't be that hard.
This depends on Intel because a) Apple doesn't have a license to build x86 compatible processors and b) Intel owns all of Transmeta's IP which presumably covers most of the IP required to effectively do this sort of thing. If Apple can convince Intel to fab the A6 (as suggested by an earlier response) then maybe we could see this.
Whatever you were working on reappears after closing. Thats fine and dandy but I want to be able to save a file manually for sharing or anything else. I want control.
Also, hate the command left click in a windows title bar no longer shows that document or folders path. Launchpad I can live without. Mission control SHOULD be separate, its a memory hog now. I don't want to be forced to use spaces or dashboard. If I only want to use expose, i should be allowed to do so. Aesthetically, Snow Leopard looked better. The login screen/window, the aqua buttons, ical, address book etc...
Lion uses certain "ideas" from iOS. Other than that it's basically the same as Snow Leopard.
Merging iOS with OS X is more than changing the looks of scrollbars. iOS does not have a visible filesystem. OS X without a visible file system won't be usable even in 2016. And there are a million other things like that.
"Apple is looking to merge its iOS and Mac OS X operating systems into one unified platform for applications and cloud services as soon as next year"
Exactly what problem is this attempting to solve? What is driving this?
The problem that you thought never existed until Apple came up with a solution.
What's the matter with you, don't you know by now that that's what Apple does and that's why they're so successful? :-)
Mac OSX will NEVER see anything weaker than Sandy Bridge!
True, but OS 11 (or whatever it becomes) might be a totally different animal and OS X will continue on Pro models for a long while until the newer stuff is up to needed level of performance. Jobs has stated that Apple will only work on two OS's at a time. So if they can eventually merge iOS and OSX into one OS, than Apple can work on creating a true web/cloud based OS with icloud that could offset any short comings the merged ios/osx would have.
This depends on Intel because a) Apple doesn't have a license to build x86 compatible processors and b) Intel owns all of Transmeta's IP which presumably covers most of the IP required to effectively do this sort of thing. If Apple can convince Intel to fab the A6 (as suggested by an earlier response) then maybe we could see this.
If Apple were able to get Intel to build a custom package which included an A6-An chip as well as an I7-n...
All of Apple's laptops from the Air on up would gain instant on, low battery usage basic tasks (email, web, chat, etc.), and still have sufficient power to do heavy lifting.
They'd become kinda' a hybrid SUV -- somewhere between a post-pc mobile device and a "truck".
And one OS to run them all!
And people have been panning Windows 8 for merging traditional Windows with touch screen capabilities claiming it can't be done successfully.
Don't even get me started. I used Windows 3.11 for Pen Computing back in 1995 on freaking touch screen tablets, all the way to the UMPCs. Microsoft PROVED it can't be done successfully, if by "successfully" you mean "a mainstream product that lots of people want to buy." But hey, maybe the 7th time's a charm.
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.
And Apple made it clear that they've fully tested a touch interface for a desktop and deliberately split the UI into two camps.
And therein lies the problem: there is a need for it. One of the main reasons the Mac has steadily gained in popularity over the past several years is its chameleon-like abilities to run *any* OS running on an Intel chip (for me, that's Mac OSX, Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD). Even if someone never *intends* to run Windows on the machine, knowing they can if they have to is a big safety blanket and convinces a lot of people to buy Macs rather than go with a Windows box.
...
The point is that this was probably needed to gain traction a few years ago, but now with the iPhone and iPad Apple has almost insurmountable advocates for it's platform and doesn't need the small traction of windows emulation. Especially since windows use is rapidly declining and it's programs can be replaced by a plethora of applications and apps on the Mac platform.
J.
And Apple made it clear that they've fully tested a touch interface for a desktop and deliberately split the UI into two camps.
Nope, Apple made it clear they tested Mac OS X on a touchscreen device. And it sucked. Rightly. Because Mac OS X is designed for one point of input at the size of one pixel (and because at the time, it was Panther, but that's secondary).
Doesn't stop them from making a completely new desktop touch OS.
If Apple were able to get Intel to build a custom package which included an A6-An chip as well as an I7-n...
All of Apple's laptops from the Air on up would gain instant on, low battery usage basic tasks (email, web, chat, etc.), and still have sufficient power to do heavy lifting.
They'd become kinda' a hybrid SUV -- somewhere between a post-pc mobile device and a "truck".
And one OS to run them all!
A combination chip is a bad idea especially because of dissipation, which corresponds directly to the number of transistors. Arm is successful in mobile applications because it has a relatively low number of transistors and a 'simple' processor architecture. Intel processors are the opposite because of it's legacy compatibility and it's complicated design.
J.
For Apple's more traditional and more powerful computers, like the MacBook Pro and Mac desktops, the analyst sees Apple sticking with Intel processors and the current Mac OS X software. But by 2016, he sees all of Apple's Mac devices running on an ARM-based processor like the ones found in the iPhone and iPad.
"Our preliminary view is that Apple can use a 32-bit ARM architecture to address the vast majority of the OS X ecosystem's needs in 2012-13 except for high-end professional devices," he wrote. "When 64-bit ARM is available in 2016, we believe Apple will have a single OS and hardware architecture."
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, Misek believes. He sees this strategy being more difficult for Apple to achieve if the company continues to keep its Mac and iOS operating systems separate.
A single OS does not mean a single CPU family. While I can envision a single operating system for all the consumer electronics sold by Apple, it would be foolish to deny the merits of Intel CPUs, the current market leader in technology, performance and design.
While ARM designs have definite advantages, most notably low battery drainage and low heat dissipation, both stemming from low electric consumption and reduced CPU speed, ARM designs are not a match for the power and performance of Intel CPUs.
As is commonly said in business circles, Intel is the current market leader and its leading position is Intel to loose.
Any scenario where ARM designs would become superior to Intel designs rests on one foolish assumption, i.e. that Intel would do nothing between now and then.
ouragan
Takes this as the perspective of another old guy. I really like most aspects of Lion. The bugs aren't even that bad compared to previous OS releases.
I can't believe that Apple is stupid enough to replace OSX with an IOS blend. I detest most of the IOS system to the point where i no longer use My iPod touch except as a GPS guidance system. Most of the IOS features in Lion are good only because they can be turned off.
It depends! I really like some of Lions features as it makes the system easier to use. It provides for more convenient usage if you eye sight isn't what it was ten or fifteen years ago.
I have arthritis in my hands and I am not alone. The multifinger motions are painful. I even use a mouse on my laptop.
Would you not agree though that that is an issue with everything you need to manipulate? Just because it doesn't work well for you doesn't mean that others have trouble. Frankly my joints aren't what they where either, in part due to a broken hand a few years ago, but pinch to zoom is a god send. Well at least where it has been implemented.
Apple seems to be so fascinated by the success of IOS hardware that they have lost track of the fact that most computer users have big screens and don't need adaptations to run apps on a screen under 12 inches. If this prediction is correct, I can see Apple Producing touch screen computers and declaring the mouse era dead.
First I don't think the perdition is correct on the face of it. I can see the two OS'es sharing a lot feature wise but they really target far different use cases with this software.
I cannot envision buying Mac software That is an IOS clone. When that day comes my OS will become Linux
I really don't think you have to worry. Everyone is focused on a few minor GUI changes in Lion that they ignore the details of the ENTIRE Lion update. I put entire in caps because Apple has put a lot of effort and polish into the UNIX'y side of Lion. It really is a solid update in many ways. Things that most users never see have not been forgotten. Python has been updated as have many other UNIX utilities. Internals such a Grand Central Dispatch have been enhanced too.
Oh buy the way I'm liking full screen mode for some things. How well it works for any one work flow varies of course but sometimes it pays to put a little effort into adaptation.
You will own a single device, an iPhone 7, say. When you are out and about, it presents the iOS UI on its screen and it works pretty much as a smartphone. When you get home, you can connect it to your monitor, keyboard and other peripherals (perhaps wirelessly, perhaps not) and that opens up the Mac OS functions that you need for large-screen computing (video editing, word processing, software development, etc.).
Sounds like a Motorola Atrix. I wonder if they patented that idea already?
Yes Apple borrowed from iOS but example they could have added versioning and resume features without removing the Save As... item from the file menu.
I'm really like Lion but I have to agree the new saving mechanism sucks. Of course the depends upon user and app but not having the option can sometimes be counter productive.
Why they decided to do so? Just because of the way iOS apps work. Instant On.
That is an over simplification if you ask me. I don't reject the auto save mechanism at all, rather I reject the lack of control when I need it.
Whatever you were working on reappears after closing. Thats fine and dandy but I want to be able to save a file manually for sharing or anything else. I want control.
I guess we do think a like here.
Also, hate the command left click in a windows title bar no longer shows that document or folders path.
Put in a bug report!
Launchpad I can live without.
I'm adapting to launch pad pretty quick. In fact I'm about ready to reorganize to make it my primary way to start apps. For me it seems to work better than anything else I've tried.
Mission control SHOULD be separate, its a memory hog now. I don't want to be forced to use spaces or dashboard. If I only want to use expose, i should be allowed to do so. Aesthetically, Snow Leopard looked better. The login screen/window, the aqua buttons, ical, address book etc...
That is subjective, something's are better some are worst.
I do want to point out one thing, if you (or anyone for that matter) is having trouble with Safari look seriously at running a WebKit nightly. It looks like a serious regression got into Safari.
Maybe I sound to fanboy'ish here but there is more to like about Lion than to dislike. For those things you really hate look into disabling the feature.
Lion gives you parental controls. iOS doesn't.
They're under 'restrictions' in settings.. It even let's you disable ping
That be a pretty substantial jump in processing power for just one year from the a5 to something competitive with the core i5. I don't see it unless it's a new product. Plus, there's really no reason to think a MacBook air would be more productive using ios6 than lion or that laptops will suddenly become comfortable to use as touch screens. Why would apple axe their most popular computer completely to make it significantly slower, less ergonomic, and less powerful?
No kidding! This is the same stupid rumor crap still going around. The ARM chip that Apple uses in the A5 and the A6 is at least 5-6 years behind Intel in performance. So like Apple is going to put a processor that's slower than the original Air had in them when they first shipped, yea get real. People stop falling for this BS.