Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 16th Dec 2010 21:58 UTC, submitted by jebb
Mac OS X In two recent columns, JLG analysed why iOS may well replace OS X, as well as why it may not be such a good idea after all. "So: Now that I've taken both sides - yes, iOS will be the Apple OS; No, it won't - what do I really believe? I think it's a matter of numbers and layers of software silt. [...] The lure of a fresh start, of a born again OS that I evoked two weeks ago will be too strong. Over time, iOS version 7 or 10 will become the operating system that runs inside most Apple computing devices."
Order by: Score:
Bia
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 16th Dec 2010 23:27 UTC
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah, I figured he'd love Apple's approach. Be's last gasp was to make devices similar to the ipad/ipod touch. Bia or BeOS Internet appliances I think thats what they were to be called. Don't think they ever got released, but were probably the bait to get the last ditch buyout by palm. Not that they did anything good with it, the bastards.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Bia
by judgen on Fri 17th Dec 2010 14:57 UTC in reply to "Bia"
judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

It was indeed released. Atleast two companies made models with it included. Sony was one of the players: http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/pcreleased/images/sony_evi...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Bia
by cb88 on Fri 17th Dec 2010 15:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Bia"
cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

Sad thing is... they were too obtuse to realize that no one was going to buy the eVilla. I mean even today homes aren't setup for a networked appliance to fit in... at least in 90% I've seen. So instead of a regular desktop targeting nearly 100% of homes they limited themselves to a nitch that didn't even exist yet and still doesn't exist.

Edited 2010-12-17 15:06 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bia
by jello on Fri 17th Dec 2010 20:12 UTC in reply to "Bia"
jello Member since:
2006-08-08

The Compaq iPAQ IA-1 Home Internet Appliance is one of them (there was another one besides Sony):

http://www.amazon.com/Compaq-iPAQ-IA-1-Internet-Appliance/dp/B00004...

Used it back in the days (must have been around 2002 or so) to fetch emails and browse the web (still have it somewhere...).

It has a 200MHz AMD processor, 32 MB SDRAM (shared 2MB for video), 16 MB flash memory, 4 USB ports and one CF-Card slot.
The ethernet connection was accomplished with a small USB/Ethernet device from Linksys.

Because BE-IA was tight to MSN I flashed the 16MB flash memory with a Linux distro that was available for this machine and was a happy clam.

One point in time I even had Windows 95 running on it (on a 256MB CF-Card) as dual boot.

Reply Score: 1

FIHN...
by SuperDaveOsbourne on Thu 16th Dec 2010 23:43 UTC
SuperDaveOsbourne
Member since:
2007-06-24

This MacBook Pro I'm working on will be the last Apple hardware devices I own for a long long (maybe forever) time. The LCD approach to consumerism that Apple has come to embrace via the 'new' revolution is just too limiting. Bottom line, too high a price, too low performance. Its really that simple. The good news and silver lining for Apple stock holders is that Apple continues to produce seriously flawed and compromised hardware (I'm an owner of about 10+ generations of hardware since the Apple ][) for the guy that wants to get something more out of 2500 USD hardware than Skype and BOINC. Sorry Apple, the Steve Jobs Bukkake face wash you serve is no longer needed here.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Kasi
by Kasi on Fri 17th Dec 2010 00:36 UTC
Kasi
Member since:
2008-07-12

I recognize I probably don't have enough imagination to see the future other people are painting.

However, in my opinion the operating system back-end used really doesn't seem to matter much in contrast to the UI that is presented for user interaction.

This is already apparent in the iPad. It is not that there is no file system on the iPad - there very much is - its that the file system is just not directly user accessible.

Taken to the extreme I think a really well designed back-end (kernel, memory management, filesystem, API, frameworks) will need little variation between devices. However the UI and what/how the underlying functionality is exposed to the end-user with be entirely device dependent.

This is why I think if the iOS is scaled towards a personal computer, the back-end would have very little difference from OSX. The UI may be completely different - but I don't think coreaudio, corevideo, opencl, etc would be tossed out or deemed unnecessary. I just think they would be exposed/interacted with in a different way as perceived by the end user.

That leaves the argument of being tied to backward compatibility - which has never been one of Apple's problems to being with. In that respect I think the rest of the market should take a cue from Apple not act so paralysed in regards to breaking from the past.

Edited 2010-12-17 00:38 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Kasi
by Neolander on Fri 17th Dec 2010 04:46 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kasi"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

This is why I think if the iOS is scaled towards a personal computer, the back-end would have very little difference from OSX. The UI may be completely different - but I don't think coreaudio, corevideo, opencl, etc would be tossed out or deemed unnecessary. I just think they would be exposed/interacted with in a different way as perceived by the end user.

Indeed, they belong to the same category of operating systems : "desktop" operating systems for personal use (painfully shoehorned on top of a server philosophy at the kernel level, but that's not going to disappear anytime soon).

In fact, would someone rewrite the UI layer and applications to reach input and output resolution independence, and remove all the crap in the deep, even desktop Windows could become a good fit for tablets.

The problem is that it looks like Apple are going to try to remove what makes the desktops and laptops unique and likeable in an attempt to unify its lines of product and make more money, namely...
-A mouse and a keyboard. They are what makes the desktop good for heavy work, touchscreens are going nowhere in this area except on gigantic-sized screens à la Surface.
-A hierarchical file system. Yes, it's useful, in fact as soon as you start to have more than 10 documents on your computer it becomes the best way to manage them we've found until now. And it can also be organized if *you* are organized. Search is not a proper replacement, only a complementary feature.
-Ways to start applications which don't suck. Porting the iPhone's app grid on the iPad was one of the worse UI ideas Apple has ever had, and now they're tainting Mac OS with it too. Grid menus are a compromise made to address the limitations of small screens, not something we should strive for.
-Independence from the OS manufacturer at the application level. While I do appreciate the idea of having repositories in a desktop OS (and the success of Steam shows that I'm not alone), they are not a replacement for a good security system (I wish some guy at Apple learned a bit more about backdoors) and they should not be the sole way to install software. But since doing it the other way is more lucrative (no need to pay for a good security team, making money on every single developer), I can safely say that it's the way we're heading.

Edited 2010-12-17 04:47 UTC

Reply Score: 3

most Apple computing devices
by arpan on Fri 17th Dec 2010 05:18 UTC
arpan
Member since:
2006-07-30

Over time, iOS version 7 or 10 will become the operating system that runs inside most Apple computing devices."


iOS already runs most Apple computing devices. iPhone + iPod touch + iPad greatly outnumber the total macs sold.

Reply Score: 5

RE: most Apple computing devices
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 17th Dec 2010 16:59 UTC in reply to "most Apple computing devices"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

iOS already runs most Apple computing devices. iPhone + iPod touch + iPad greatly outnumber the total macs sold


In terms fo volume of all sold device,s yes. However, when it comes the line-up, it only runs on three devices.

Reply Score: 1

bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

By that logic you could say that iOS runs on phones, mp3 players and tablets, while OS X only runs on computers.

Reply Score: 2

iOS is OSX
by Phloptical on Fri 17th Dec 2010 11:49 UTC
Phloptical
Member since:
2006-10-10

so, iOS is running on all your devices, now. And why would I want a stripped OS running on my Mac? Just so I can touch the screen? No thanks. The UI isn't that useful.

Reply Score: 2

Stockholm syndrome
by Verenkeitin on Sat 18th Dec 2010 17:42 UTC
Verenkeitin
Member since:
2007-07-01

From Gassee's blog post:
"A few days ago, I downloaded a neat little utility to silence the startup sound on my new 11” MacBook Air. [...] it’s freeware; [...] How much would I have paid for it from a Mac App Store? Less than $5, more than 99 cents."

That's sad on so many levels.

It's like Apple customers are Elois. Their things are pretty but fragile, and they are far too clueless to change or fix anything. FOSS Morlokcs have things that are free and robutst, and they know how to make, fix and change anything. The analogy will be complete when Apple users pay for things like basic system settings.

Reply Score: 2

Why
by Soulbender on Sun 19th Dec 2010 08:29 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

do people pay attention to a CEO that has fucked up so badly?

Reply Score: 1

Photoshop and Final Cut
by jokkel on Mon 20th Dec 2010 03:26 UTC
jokkel
Member since:
2008-07-07

As long as people need to do real work, mouse based Mac OS will not be replaced by touch based iOS.

Reply Score: 2