Submitted by The iPhone is running an optimised but full version of OS X that weighs in at “considerably less” than half a GB, according to Apple vice president of worldwide iPod marketing Greg Joswiak. Joswiak confirmed that the operating system sits in the flash memory of the device and that Apple will “provide updates to the operating system like we do today.”
So the OS X that runs on my Macbook is unoptimised? Gee. Thanks Apple.
At least the rumour is finally settled.
However, looking at the links at the bottom in seems there will be no devtools for 3rd parties to develop software?
Thanks Apple, but no thanks.
Edited 2007-01-15 10:41
Well, I’m not sure how it can be a ‘full’ version of anything without development tools.
Until we know exactly what makes up the OS, then I don’t think the rumour at all; an optimised but full version of OSX could still mean anything, in much the same way that Windows Mobile is a ‘full optimised version’ of Windows.
The lack of development tools doesn’t mean that it isn’t the “full” version of Mac OS X. It just means that there aren’t any publicly available development tools. However, the fact that they aren’t allowing 3rd party applications is significant.
it’s sad that apple doesn’t allow for third party apps. at least give us j2me support. there are tons of useful j2me apps available.
Last I read Apple is allowing 3rd party apps, but you have to pay for a license.
It has not been released yet, first samples will be delivered in this summer and that is only for USA, Europe and asia wil come after that.
So there is plenty of time for apple to release an developer kit for the phone and they do not have to do it now.
So the OS X that runs on my Macbook is unoptimised? Gee. Thanks Apple.
Pretty much. It’s general purpose, while this is specialized and optimized for just a few purposes.
Is it me or your comment sounds very stupid?
Optimized means that they get rid of anything that is not needed for a phone. And OS X has a lot of it, i mean do you need for example Apache on a iphone? I really don’t think so….. Optmized means also that it is built in a way that it fits to a phone.
This does not mean that the OS X that runs on your macbook is unoptmized, i don’t get your point…..
So based on your definition, how do you reconcile the phrase “optimized but full”? See the problem?
It’s amazing how the Apple fans jump out and mod things down because they think it disses their favorite OS.
1. Tiny screen
2. Input method
3. Size needs to be reduced – so leave out some libs and what not and rework the API a bit.
Sounds optimized enough for you?
If you leave out some libs, how on earth can you still call that “full”? If you rework the APIs, it is no longer “full”. If you have a “full” version of OS X that can be “optimized” to fit on a phone, I want this “optimized but full” version running on my Macbook.
By optimized and full version of MacOSX they mean, this is really most of the MacOSX but optimized to fit in that half Gb, not just new small embedded OS imitating Aqua look’n’feel…
Uhh, many of the things installed by OS X are not actually part of OS X. Therefore a full version of OS X does not have to include these. But then you are really just talking about semantics here, aren’t you! And for the record, just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make them an Apple fan.
Some of us actually choose our tools to fit the job we want to do. And while you may find it hard to believe, Apple tools fit some jobs better than Windows or Linux tools do. The same could also be said of Windows and Linux so lighten up a bit, will you.
“So the OS X that runs on my Macbook is unoptimised? Gee. Thanks Apple.”
This is an example of bad reasoning.
It’s not because Mac OS X is optimized for use on iPhone
(different needs and resources as on a regular computer)
that it isn’t optimal to run Mac OS X (without omission of some components as on the iPhone) on a MacBook (or any other Mac)
Open Moko is the answer.
1) Open – whatever apps you want by whoever you want
2) Half the price
3) No contract or network lockins
4) Available February
No its not as pretty
But the more comes out about it, the more the iPhone business model is looking more and more dated, and the more Jobs pronouncements about the need for control raise questions about judgment. Does he really think that open phones can crash networks? Or does he not think that, but thinks everyone will just believe it if he says it? Either way, how out of touch can you get?
Stuck in 1985 and determined never to leave it.
Uhm… no. It isn’t immediately obvious from the website what OpenMoko is. How can you compare a product that already exists (iPhone) with something that doesn’t?
Hmmm, the impression I got, was that appart from Apple’s massive marketing department (I.E. the website), the iPhone is not actually due till the summer, it’s not not FCC authorised (check the RATHER TINY small print at the bottom of the page).
However, the FIC Neo 1973 (initial device) is due for general release in january/febuary this year (obviously it may be delayed).
So, again, I’m not entirely sure, why you would state the iPhone exists (not available for another 6 months I think), and the OpenMoko FIC Neo 1973 (initial release happened, general release due within a few weeks) does not exist.
I don’t mind being enlightened though.
Edited 2007-01-15 12:12
Yes, I didn’t understand this either, or why the first post was accused of being trolling. Well, maybe the remarks about 1985 were a bit provocative, but its actually right. I really do think its an outdated business model in mobiles, and that the future is network mobility and application openness. It also really is very hard to imagine what Jobs was thinking of when he made those remarks about crashing the West Coast networks, and third party apps jeopardizing functioning.
As to existence, neither one exists right now, in the sense of being available for purchase now, but OM has a closer in release and purchase date than iPhone, which I thought my comment made clear.
There is no doubt the iPhone looks a lot nicer, and it has a big company with a history of successful consumer design behind it. But. But. OM is an awful lot less expensive, and an awful lot more flexible, and its manufacturer has a pretty decent track record too, of a different sort.
Edited 2007-01-15 12:24
Removed this comment, as I found what I was looking for. It looks like a nice phone, and I won’t mind having one, especially if it is cheaper than the iPhone, and is hackable too.
They really need to redo that website to make things easier to find.
Edited 2007-01-15 12:53
Hummmm a troll, a big one!!!!!!!
I want one of these OpenMoKo phones. They really look nice and I like the fact that they are completely open(bar the few proprietry? drivers).
BTW, Eugenia, when can whe expect a review of the Neo1973?
“Open Moko is the answer.”
I like the little bits of info I could find about it (the site is really anemic, information-wise). Well, everything except the name 😉 (in Spanish, my native language, it means “Snot”)
I really-really like the iPhone, but if Apple won’t let me make & install my own apps, then it’s a waste of good hardware.
Sounds great, but is MoKo the best name for a touchscreen device?
I looked over the slides and the only thing this phone needs is a portal that helps users find the best quality apps.
half of gig for mobile os? LOL
that weighs in at “considerably less” than half a GB
You, troll
but I look at my Treo 650, which locks up every few hours, and for which I have to check for extension conflicts, as if I were running System 7.
Maybe for a phone controlled is a better experience.
I would like to see the code…
They are some gpl tools and libs in osx. If they change it they have to show us the modification. no?
Most of OSX Kernel is
* This file contains Original Code and/or Modifications of Original Code
* as defined in and that are subject to the Apple Public Source License
* Version 2.0 (the ‘License’). You may not use this file except in
* compliance with the License. Please obtain a copy of the License at
* http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/ and read it before using this
* file.
‘Apple Public License’ – not GPL. I don’t know its details but i guess they reserved a right to keep the source… unfortunately. But this needs more investigation.
I’m not a lawyer but it seem that the APL is saying that you should release your modification to the code in the APL license and you should provide the source code too. For example:
2.2
…
(c) If You Externally Deploy Your Modifications, You must make Source Code of all Your Externally Deployed Modifications either available to those to whom You have Externally Deployed Your Modifications,
…
2.3
…
is available under the terms of this License with information on how and where to obtain such Source Code
…
I’m not a lawyer either. But I used to believe they always have a chance to ‘license’ their own code to themselves using different conditions. This is a Public license – it doesn’t mean Apple guys should use it themselves.
Does anyone have some better knowledge if Apple have to release iPhone OSX sources or not?
No, Apple doesn’t have to release iPhone OSX sources.
Apple can release its own code in more than one license, so their code can be release on APL (for parts of Intel Mac OS X) and on closed-version at the same time (for iPhone). The rest of the code (Darwin) in OSX is BSD-licensed. The BSD license allows anyone to pick the code, close it and sell it, allowing proprietary commercial use.
However, some old BSD licenses had an extra clause, requiring authors of all works deriving from a BSD-licensed work to include an acknowledgment of the original source. This is not the case of Darwin.
They would if there are any in it. By look at the source for Darwin; its all BSD stuff and the only GNU tool is GCC and they give back those changes.
this product is. This should refresh and liven up the smartphone market. I like the phone except for its closed approach to 3rd party software…I guess when they say 3rd party software they mean all software except Yahoo and Google since they probably paid through the nose to be on the “board” or get “exclusive” access to the Iphone. Whatever…still Nokia, Motorola and Sony Ericsson should sit up and take notice about this new player in town. Kudos to the Apple team a job well done I say. Personally being a gadget freak I am looking forward to IPhone version 2 with 3G etc etc etc.
But on the other hand I must say that besides the slick UI the SE P990i that i have right now does everything…except for the visual voicemail…and the sms texting in that “dialogue” format. I am not however sold on the idea of touchscreen texting faster than a keyboard…though I like the idea of the keyboard in use when you need it. BTW the problem SE had with the P990i’s have been fixed with the latest firmware and the phone is snappier and doenst crash and leak memory like it used to. Pretty sweet.
Just my 2 cents.
I bet that Linux kernel is much more appropriate thing to run on a phone. OSX kernel can even barely compete with Windows, Linux or Solaris performance-wise on the desktop, so I don’t see why all that fuss.
It seems that story about full OSX on a phone is just a gimmick. Certainly, API’s will be scaled down, and neither x86 and PPC apps will run on it.
Nevertheless it is interesting device and a good platform (joining the Symbian, WindowsMobile, Palm, NokiaOS and various Linux platforms like Qtopia), but, as other smartphones, it will be too expensive for mainstream. I don’t believe they are able to significantly hurt market share of established manufacturers (especially in the low and mid-range market) which is held by SonyEricsson, Nokia, Motorola, Samsung (and maybe few others).
1) You don’t license your own software to yourself. You own it. Anything Apple has that’s not GPLed they have no obligation to release to anyone.
2) The carriers tend to dictate the limited developer access model, although I’m sure Apple is happy to go along, as it gives them final say on the quality of aps in their phone.
3) “It depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.” Everyone has their own idea of what “optimized but full” means and no one seems to have gotten a straight answer from Apple over what their definition is.
4) Linux isn’t a particularly good or bad OS for ARM, if that’s the processor Apple is using. I don’t have any idea whether Darwin would be or not, but ARM 9 hates context switching, so I’d guess not, unless they’ve gone to an ARM11 core like the arm1026ej-s
By the way, one example of leaving things out but still being ‘full’ is not including any localization support for any language but US english. Including localization for only one language is a common optimization for small devices.
“Linux isn’t a particularly good or bad OS for ARM, if that’s the processor Apple is using. I don’t have any idea whether Darwin would be or not, but ARM 9 hates context switching, so I’d guess not, unless they’ve gone to an ARM11 core like the arm1026ej-s ”
Probably Apple switched to another kernel, for leopard that is, one that fits ARM + Intel + PowerPC well
Time will tell
“Probably Apple switched to another kernel, for leopard that is, one that fits ARM + Intel + PowerPC well”
According to the want ads Apple’s running for iPhone engineers, they’ve stuck with the Mach kernel. I think longterm, Apple made the decision to avoid cutting corners for performance gains when CPU speeds are likely to rise.
I am personally interested to see if the black interface is the one touted for Leopard.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t call that “optimised”, certainly not for a phone. Add on the extra apps that make the phone useful, and that 4 GB model is starting to look more like a standard 2 GB jobbie. Everyone asking for a cheaper 2 GB model is asking a total lack of storage space.
Hopefully, there’s a separate 0.5 – 1.0 GB flash chip in there to hold the OS. Otherwise, a few upgrades down the road, those with the 4 GB model are going to wondering why they can’t get more than 100 songs on their iPhone.
“Hopefully, there’s a separate 0.5 – 1.0 GB flash chip in there to hold the OS.”
Ask yourself this: has any firmware upgrade on an iPod reduced its storage capacity? Moreover, from a security standpoint, would you WANT the firmware in the same space as song/USB storage?
Don’t know, the only iPod I’ve had was a Shuffle that someone swiped off me within 6 weeks of getting it.
However, I have seen phones where upgrading the firmware/OS has reduced the available RAM/ROM in the phone. Don’t really see how this would be all that different.
And my girlfriend’s Creative Zen V Plus (2 GB) does not have 2 GB available, even when all music, videos, pictures, etc are removed. Don’t see why an iPod would be much different.
Don’t see why an iPod would be much different.
Protectionism. Apple doesn’t want people reverse engineering their firmware, and I’d bet Microsoft’s doing the same thing with the Zune.
Memory:
The Open Moko has 64MB of built in flash, with 64MB MicroSD. So, it ships with 128MB, expandable to about 2GB. iPhone is 4-8GB, not expandable. Luckily the Linux footprint is only 64MB, not the 300-500MB (educated guessing) of the mobile OSX.
Size:
Moko dimensions: 120.7 x 62 x 18.5 (mm)
iPhone dimensions: 115 x 61 x 11.6 mm
>Bigger in every dimension, and 60% thicker
Screen:
Moko: 2.8″ VGA touchscreen
iPhone: 3.5″ 1/2 VGA multi-touch
>Smaller, higher rez screen. VGA is intriguing, but its utility in a screen so small is rather limited. Expect to be squinting if you don’t have perfect vision. And no multi-touch
Connectivity:
Moko: Quad band GSM, GPRS, aGPS
iPhone: Quad band GSM, GPRS, EDGE, Bluetooth 2.0EDR, Wifi b/g
> Self explanatory as to how devastating this is to the OpenMoko Device.
Software:
Moko: Linux. Open source, open development.
iPhone: OS X. closed source, limited/controlled 3rd party development.
>This is where ideological differences strongly come into play. Many, especially on this site, would say the Linux solution is the future, and is far better. I would argue that it has more potential, but potential won’t sell devices next month. iPhone’s software is deh sexy, now (or whenever we can get our fingers on it).
Extras:
Moko:
1) Although already mentioned, GPS is worth mentioning again. If the iPhone doesn’t at least have GSM triangulation, and i would bet it won’t initially, it will be a serious disappointment. With GSM triangulation, this would be a non-issue. Garmin is crying
2) Standard mini-usb1.1 plug. This, other than the fact that its a standard plug, is a serious disadvantage.
3)Micro SD slot. Although this was also mentioned previously, the lack of memory expandability is probably iPhone’s greatest weakness.
iPhone:
1) Sensors. Ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, accelerometer. Proximity sensor seems pretty important to me- i wonder how the Neo1973 handles the issue of accidentally touching the screen when on a call. Maybe it has one, but there’s no mention of it. Accelerometer is pretty useful, as you can easily switch between wide screen and portrait interfaces.
2) iPod. With an iPhone, there is little reason to have a second iPod. This puts a twist in price comparisons, as Steve pointed out in his keynote. Would I want a separate $200-400 iPod and $200-400 smartphone, or combine them in a single package smaller than nearly any smartphone, with a larger screen than any iPod and nearly any smartphone? Plus, all the data syncing on the iPod, like contacts, calenders, etc., is actually very useful now because its on a device that i would actually want and use that info.
3) Random access voicemail. Until we hear differently, no other phone has this, and its a fix to a major annoyance.
4) Camera. 2 megapixel fixed focus. This is not a high quality camera, even in phone terms, but having one is pretty important. With so much flash memory, it will also be very cool to record, watch & edit/send VGA video. Its hard to believe the OpenMoko device doesn’t have one.
Price:
Neo1973- $350 unlocked
iPhone- $499-599 with 2yr contract
Neo1973 is much cheaper, but it doesn’t include all that built in flash memory. A 2GB microSD is $63 online, so to have decent storage you’re looking at $415. Still the iPhone is significantly more expensive. Its too bad you can’t get the Neo under a contract, because that would lower its cost by ~$150 ($200 base price).
Well, i would take any bet that the iPhone is going to be a huge success. I don’t know how it is on the other side of the big pond, but here in europe you couldn’t switch you tv on for a week without hearing from the iPhone.
Taking the price of an iPod of the iPhone isn’t a good comparison though, since the Neo 1973 (what a stupid name btw) is going to be capable of anything an iPod does as well and with a couple of big SDs you get as much storage as you want.
A big negative imho is the lack of possebility to change the batteries of the iPhone. While i think that is absolutely acceptable for an MP3 Player like the iPod, i don’t think that it is wise for an phone, because it disqualifies it in an instant when you realy need an reliable phone.
Well, i guess both have their markets and the iPhone definately has the much bigger market, but i find the Neo 1973 much more tempting.
Since the batteries on the ipod last 6-18months and are not replaceable. I am curious how long the non replaceable iphone batteries will last, for a $500 phone.
The FIC1973 ( the first OpenMoko phone model ) has bluetooth; it was unofficially announced a few days ago. There will be a more formal update and announcement within the week.
You also didn’t mention the battery situation – the iPhone’s battery is built-in… not so great. The FIC1973 battery is replacable, and charges through usb.
Also, while the usb is 1.1, it is important to note that it can operate in host mode – not just client mode.
Edited 2007-01-16 08:37
… i’m totaly *blown away*.
Same here, I actualy had to read that twice to make sure… Pretty scary.
I bet that Linux kernel is much more appropriate thing to run on a phone.
Linux features a purely monolithic design whereas Mac OS X utilizes a so-called hybrid kernel. While dismissed by some (I wonder who?) as “marketing” the underlying approach differs. While I’m not a kernel hacker it seems the modular nature of microkernel design allows for changes to be more easily made throughout.
“OSX kernel can even barely compete with Windows, Linux or Solaris performance-wise on the desktop, so I don’t see why all that fuss.”
How’s the audio latency in Linux these days? Last time I read anything on the subject Linux was seeing 4.3ms compared to OS X which ranked at 2.8ms.
“It seems that story about full OSX on a phone is just a gimmick.
Gimmick? Why is that? Apple has long had stated goals of an object oriented operating system that could be tailored to different environments.
“Certainly, API’s will be scaled down, and neither x86 and PPC apps will run on it.”
Pure speculation on both counts. While I doubt Apple would technology similar to Rosetta I don’t know it for fact and neither do you. As for x86 and PPC apps running on the phone – the fat application approach could feasibly be extended to include support for the iPhone. Many Mac OS X apps use the universal binary approach and run on both PPC and x86. That having been said we’ll likely see cross-compilation support in XCode if not a dedicated environment for the development of phone applications.
“Nevertheless it is interesting device and a good platform (joining the Symbian, WindowsMobile, Palm, NokiaOS and various Linux platforms like Qtopia), but, as other smartphones, it will be too expensive for mainstream.”
Don’t lump the iPhone in with the other failures yet. It hasn’t even had a chance. My second gen iPod cost more close to USD 500. My newest iPod with scores more functionality cost about half that.
“How’s the audio latency in Linux these days? Last time I read anything on the subject Linux was seeing 4.3ms compared to OS X which ranked at 2.8ms.”
Audio latency is just one tiny aspect of operating system performance and most likely rather an effect of soundserver architecture.
“Gimmick? Why is that? Apple has long had stated goals of an object oriented operating system that could be tailored to different environments.”
Well, obviously it can’t be tailored well to different environments… 128 MB would be very big for the task… halve an gig is horrible huge and nothing apples programmers should pat their shoulders for. But i guess with memory prices falling you can life with a little bit of sloppy engeneering.
Apple sources said that only signed apps will be allowed to run on the iPhone. While that might be subject to change if enough people complain, it still be far away from what you can do with an open device.
Sure, that won’t be an selling argument for rather tech-illiterate people, but having the freedom to tailor software to my needs is surely an killer argument for me.
I’m just so fed up with all that “no, you can’t play ogg, no you can’t play flac, no we don’t want your software to run on our hardware, no this, no that” that i will choose an open platform any day even though the iPhone is extremly cool.
Granted latency is only one aspect. I could add that the hybrid design of Mac OS X’s kernel allows for more rapid alteration of the kernel than monolithic design does. I could point out how Apple has support from a lot of commercial vendors that laugh at Linux users. That’s not my point – I was countering another poster’s comment about how Mac OS X “barely keeps up” with Linux and Windows when it actually bests the two in some arenas.
On the size 512 megabytes is actually VERY small for a fully functional modern operating system. Sure Linux can fit on 128 megs but it can’t run Adobe apps natively either. Think about the kind of media Apple is known for and 512 megs is actually not all that much at all. I mean my Mac OS X install shipped with 34 megs of desktop backgrounds (1/36th the reported size for the whole os on the phone).
Remember Mac OS X is like three operating systems in one – you have carbon/os9, openstep/mach, and bsd all in one. Given that an old install of OS 9 was about 150 megs it doesn’t really seem so bad after all.
On the signed apps bit – I really think Apple will open up eventually. If they do there isn’t much you can’t do. Sure you can’t build someone else’s code and call it your own operating system but I’ve no need to do that with a desktop OS to say nothing of a phone. If opened – it will actually beat open offerings in terms of functionality because there are a larger suite of APIs (Carbon/Cocoa/QT/Java/Mono) than Linux alone has access to. Better APIs too, imnsho.