The main reason why Windows 8 has been such a flop is because Microsoft tried to do exactly that.
I am so sick of analyst constantly deciding what Apple should do, netbooks anyone? this is as baseless as the 12" ipad or the bigger iphone. The analysts really do not understand Apple.
I am sure Jon Ive is rolling his eyes and laughing, and Phil Schiller is laughing too, this obsession by "analysts" to become Apple designers and try to guess what the next big thing will be gives Apple tons of free publicity, I wonder if it isn't Apple itself somehow spreading out non-sense rumors.
some user said: "JP morgan should stick to what they are familiar with. Banks don't change the world every decade."
Well, no, they don't even know their own business, who got us in this crisis to start with? retarded overpaid Wall Street Analyst that invested in trash mortgages. The same analysts that value Amazon, which never had a profit and probably never will much higher (in terms of PE ratio) than Apple.
After the rant, a mix between iOS and OS X is a terrible idea. In fact at the beginning, the iPhone was running a modified version of OS X and the code bases are the same, but overtime Apple differentiated them more and more. Sure, they made features similar but it's plain clear that a touch device, with a small screen and limited battery life (and that usually is not plugged in) is very different from a device with a big or huge screen, that has a keyboard, a mouse, plenty of space, a huge battery and is usually operated plugged in. Did I mention that the processors are completely different?
And the idea of docking the device to a monitor and using it as a computer is so stupid that it's not even worth considering it. For a start, that's what Motorola, who haven't had a good idea in decades tried to do and failed miserably.
Really, I am sure Apple is trying to make the code of iOS and OS X as similar as possible, because it's easier and cheaper to maintain, but there are fundamental, conceptual differences between the two, the aforementioned hardware and usability and the fact that the kernels are completely different.
Why do analyst want Apple to do things that other companies tried and failed? Maybe JP Morgan should worry about not messing up again as they did in 2008. I don't see Apple advising them on investments (but they probably should).
If you haven't noticed, my level of respect for Wall Street is really low at the moment.
This sounds more and more as iWhatever. These analysts have no formation or knowledge to have a validated worth listening opinion about possible future products.
So why is this here?
There is bullshit, and then there is J.P. Morgan-branded bullshit.
This makes as much sense as the brain fart that promised webOS would be preinstalled on every new HP Windows PC sold in order to revive the dead mobile OS. A solution to no problem any customers had, but a solution for HP's platform problems.
Analysts predicting products, yeah I believe they have a clue
I don't think Apple is doing anything of the sort hardware wise. Tim etc have made it clear in recent interviews that they are NOT looking to converge the two systems in such ways.
IAnywhere might exist, but as an attitude to bring the two worlds into sharing such that there is seamless flow between the Mac version and iOS versions of things. Parity in features in iLife and pages. Adding features like the tap to jump to the top from iOS to Mac. Finally getting iTunes extras back on iOS. And so on.
J.P. Morgan hasn't been listening to Time Cook and company. They have said many times that combining OSX and IOS would be a big mistake and have no intentions on doing this.
Look at what happened with Microsoft's Window's 8. Total garbage!
This is just another FUD story from people who don't understand technology or how it is implemented. Schiller said “We don’t waste time thinking, ‘But it should be one [interface!]‘ How do you make these [operating systems] merge together?’ What a waste of energy that would be.”
So J.P. Morgan you can stop writing about FUD now because it's not going to happen.
Biggest issue, in order for iOS to become your single platform it will need more horse power, more storage and far better cloud base storage. Today, mobile operating systems need to rely on put your stuff in the cloud including thing you may not want stored there since local storage is far too expensive and unreliable. If the Target issue has not taught you something people are way too trusting with their personal information. Hacker are very smart people, people who break in to your house are not so protecting stuff in you house is far easier then in the cloud.
I can imagine a professional using their iPhone to check their schedule while commuting then connecting their iPhone to an Apple display via AirPlay and an Apple Magic Mouse upon arriving at their office for use as a workstation.
One can not deny the fact that mobile processors are approaching desktop/laptop capabilities at a rapid pace. Everyone was caught off guard when Apple announced the A7 64 bit chip last year.
One also can not deny the fact that most of Apple's software iWork, iLife, functions very similarly on both iOS and OSX.
When SJ first demoed the iPhone, he said that they put OSX on it. In a reality it was a stripped down version of that OS later renamed iOS. Both share a common codebase.
With evolving technology, this idea doesn't seem far fetched. Many of you say that MS tried it and failed. I think where MS failed is that they never really did the necessary adjustments to their software in order make them touch friendly and all that happened was deliver a miniaturized version of Excel or Word on the Surface. Hardware wise, the technology may not be there yet, to make mobile processors powerful enough and energy efficient enough. In the end they delivered a half baked solution.
Others amongst you believe that Apple execs never go back on their word. Remember Apple's (SJ's really) word on not wanting a smaller tablet?
Well the time isn't right for them to release such a unified solution yet. They may do it in the future when all the pieces are in place.
One thing you can bet on, is that no Apple exec will start blurting out the company's future plans. They'll leave that to the Amazons of this world and beta solutions to Google. Glass anyone?
Think about the dock as something like an Apple TV, and this doesn't sound to far fetched. We already can stream content from an iDevice to a large display through an Apple TV. We can also connect a keyboard to an iDevice. Why not re-invent what happens when an iDevice is hooked up together with a large display, Apple TV, keyboard, mouse, game controller, etc. This could be a minor expansion of what happens today or a radical conceptual mix of iOS and OSX.
iAnywhere could be a real Apple initiative but it probably won't just be docking an iPad to a keyboard. It would more likely be docking something like an iPsd or iPod Touch to a refrigerator or a washing machine and leaving it connected permanently. That would give you smart touch screen appliances running iOS and with the ability to extend their features via apps.
It's a terrible idea based on Windows 8 and Surface.
My thought exactly.
Why the street keeps thinking Apple should do what Microsoft (and many other faltering companies) do is beyond me. It's a weird sort of brain-dead groupthink.
I would like to have an environment where I could work or watch video on my iXXX device and due to having another iXXX device or iTV next to me, I could easily swap not only the work, but also the "file" (in case of a network reference passing only the reference) to the other device. Depending on the task I would like either to work with the new device on the file maybe with the old device as remote/keyboard or watch the film with the first device as remote or free to use, because it is not synchronising via airplay the screen. A lot of options would be possible (extend screens, sync screens, remote, ...)
Comments
I am so sick of analyst constantly deciding what Apple should do, netbooks anyone? this is as baseless as the 12" ipad or the bigger iphone. The analysts really do not understand Apple.
I am sure Jon Ive is rolling his eyes and laughing, and Phil Schiller is laughing too, this obsession by "analysts" to become Apple designers and try to guess what the next big thing will be gives Apple tons of free publicity, I wonder if it isn't Apple itself somehow spreading out non-sense rumors.
some user said: "JP morgan should stick to what they are familiar with. Banks don't change the world every decade."
Well, no, they don't even know their own business, who got us in this crisis to start with? retarded overpaid Wall Street Analyst that invested in trash mortgages. The same analysts that value Amazon, which never had a profit and probably never will much higher (in terms of PE ratio) than Apple.
After the rant, a mix between iOS and OS X is a terrible idea. In fact at the beginning, the iPhone was running a modified version of OS X and the code bases are the same, but overtime Apple differentiated them more and more. Sure, they made features similar but it's plain clear that a touch device, with a small screen and limited battery life (and that usually is not plugged in) is very different from a device with a big or huge screen, that has a keyboard, a mouse, plenty of space, a huge battery and is usually operated plugged in. Did I mention that the processors are completely different?
And the idea of docking the device to a monitor and using it as a computer is so stupid that it's not even worth considering it. For a start, that's what Motorola, who haven't had a good idea in decades tried to do and failed miserably.
Really, I am sure Apple is trying to make the code of iOS and OS X as similar as possible, because it's easier and cheaper to maintain, but there are fundamental, conceptual differences between the two, the aforementioned hardware and usability and the fact that the kernels are completely different.
Why do analyst want Apple to do things that other companies tried and failed? Maybe JP Morgan should worry about not messing up again as they did in 2008. I don't see Apple advising them on investments (but they probably should).
If you haven't noticed, my level of respect for Wall Street is really low at the moment.
There is bullshit, and then there is J.P. Morgan-branded bullshit.
I don't think Apple is doing anything of the sort hardware wise. Tim etc have made it clear in recent interviews that they are NOT looking to converge the two systems in such ways.
IAnywhere might exist, but as an attitude to bring the two worlds into sharing such that there is seamless flow between the Mac version and iOS versions of things. Parity in features in iLife and pages. Adding features like the tap to jump to the top from iOS to Mac. Finally getting iTunes extras back on iOS. And so on.
J.P. Morgan hasn't been listening to Time Cook and company. They have said many times that combining OSX and IOS would be a big mistake and have no intentions on doing this.
Look at what happened with Microsoft's Window's 8. Total garbage!
This is just another FUD story from people who don't understand technology or how it is implemented. Schiller said “We don’t waste time thinking, ‘But it should be one [interface!]‘ How do you make these [operating systems] merge together?’ What a waste of energy that would be.”
So J.P. Morgan you can stop writing about FUD now because it's not going to happen.
Biggest issue, in order for iOS to become your single platform it will need more horse power, more storage and far better cloud base storage. Today, mobile operating systems need to rely on put your stuff in the cloud including thing you may not want stored there since local storage is far too expensive and unreliable. If the Target issue has not taught you something people are way too trusting with their personal information. Hacker are very smart people, people who break in to your house are not so protecting stuff in you house is far easier then in the cloud.
Poor Apple, tossing "innovation" aside and just riding on the coat-tails of the worldwide spectacular that IS Windows 8.
Or.
Not.
One can not deny the fact that mobile processors are approaching desktop/laptop capabilities at a rapid pace. Everyone was caught off guard when Apple announced the A7 64 bit chip last year.
One also can not deny the fact that most of Apple's software iWork, iLife, functions very similarly on both iOS and OSX.
When SJ first demoed the iPhone, he said that they put OSX on it. In a reality it was a stripped down version of that OS later renamed iOS. Both share a common codebase.
With evolving technology, this idea doesn't seem far fetched. Many of you say that MS tried it and failed. I think where MS failed is that they never really did the necessary adjustments to their software in order make them touch friendly and all that happened was deliver a miniaturized version of Excel or Word on the Surface. Hardware wise, the technology may not be there yet, to make mobile processors powerful enough and energy efficient enough. In the end they delivered a half baked solution.
Others amongst you believe that Apple execs never go back on their word. Remember Apple's (SJ's really) word on not wanting a smaller tablet?
Well the time isn't right for them to release such a unified solution yet. They may do it in the future when all the pieces are in place.
One thing you can bet on, is that no Apple exec will start blurting out the company's future plans. They'll leave that to the Amazons of this world and beta solutions to Google. Glass anyone?
We already can stream content from an iDevice to a large display through an Apple TV. We can also connect a keyboard to an iDevice. Why not re-invent what happens when an iDevice is hooked up together with a large display, Apple TV, keyboard, mouse, game controller, etc. This could be a minor expansion of what happens today or a radical conceptual mix of iOS and OSX.
Because it was predicted by an analyst, I don't think this will ever happen. Those guys are wrong every time.
JP Moron.
It's a terrible idea based on Windows 8 and Surface.
My thought exactly.
Why the street keeps thinking Apple should do what Microsoft (and many other faltering companies) do is beyond me. It's a weird sort of brain-dead groupthink.
Um, do they know iOS and Mac OS X are based on the same kernal and application frameworks?