iOS desktop, iOS server and iOS mobile

Entire post quoted below:

Well, he doesn’t specify his sources, but it’s not an unreasonable guess. What do you think?

::hopes iOS desktop is something similar enough to OS X that Scrivener still works::

I expect the it will actually be OSX. iOS is just an embedded derivative. Look at the jail break info and you will see what I mean.

I take all of these reports with a pinch of salt. What’s interesting about that particular article is that it seems to be talking only about rebranding Mac OS X to “iOS Desktop” rather than actually changing over to iOS.

There’s a lot of noise at the moment about iOS taking over from OSX - and I’ve certainly speculated about it myself - but you have to remember that even iOS 4.0, the latest iteration, is nowhere near capable of becoming a desktop solution. And what would be the point of trying to ramp up iOS to that point? Apple would end up having to essentially duplicate most of what they are doing in OS X already, using the same frameworks (Cocoa) that OS X uses already… In other words, they’d be doing work they’ve already done! It just makes no sense, especially when Apple seem more focussed on the mobile markets anyway - they may as well leave OS X as-is. But I could certainly imagine them rebranding it and touching up the interface a little to make it more in line with their mobile devices… Although I hope not. If they rebranded it “iOS”, what sort of computers would we all be using? They’d no longer be Macs, so what would they be? “iOS PCs”? “i’s”? Hmm…


iOS Server.

Those are the only two words that you need to say to realise just how conjectural and lacking in real data this is.

Well, I can think of a few reasons Apple might do it (which is not to say they will, of course).

  1. It would give them complete control of everything that went on the platform and allow them to keep ‘undesirables’ out.
  2. They could take a cut from every app developer
  3. It would give them complete control of their destiny.They could use their own chips across the board, optimised for their stuff without the fluff associated with having to support other platforms.
  4. They believe that they can use this control to keep viruses off the platform.
  5. They could kill any possibility of cloning once and for all.

That still doesn’t really address the issue of how they would have to completely replicate everything that Mac OS X does, which would be somewhat pointless (unless it were just a rebranding of OS X to iOS Desktop). I really think most of this is just wild speculation stemming from a combination of hyperbole and over-excitement over the iPad and iOS 4.0 and paranoia about Apple’s control freakery. Until Apple announce their 10.7 plans - which is some way off it seems - no one will know anything, and although I have to remain healthily sceptical about the future of OS X I would be very surprised if Apple really took it down the iOS uber-control route as some are predicting, whether from the standpoint of doomsday prophets or fanboys who would gladly sign their firstborn over to Apple and wish to embrace a future where Big Brother has control of their machines. It’s certainly not a future I would embrace, and I think they’d lose more customers than they’d gain from such a move - and they may be annoyingly tight-lipped and smug, but they ain’t stupid. :slight_smile:

Calm yourself. I was just giving a few reasons why they might do it. 8)
How do you know you won’t like this future Mac if you haven’t seen it yet? Think to the number of times you hear that Apple is planning something and there’s uproar which has completely died away (or turned to outright support) by the time the disaster lands.
And make no mistake, Apple wants nothing less than complete control of everything.

Personally, I think there is one glaringly obvious reason why such a move is off the table for the forseeable future at least. How would this machine run Windows apps?

A quick question. What do you think about Apple keeping Flash off the iPad/iPhone?

Eh? I was perfectly calm, I think you must have misread that. :slight_smile: My comment about “doomsday prophets and fanboys” was neither directed at you or anyone else in this thread, or on the forum, even - as I think was clear but it’s the only reason I can think of for you to telling me to “calm myself” - but was directed at the sorts of wild speculation that was quoted in the first post in this thread. Judging by your “calm down”, I’m assuming you took my comments as directed at you, when they weren’t!

What I find rather annoying is that across the web I’m seeing two common threads, neither of which are particularly helpful:

  1. People speculating that OS X’s days are over because Apple don’t care about computers any more (incidentally, I’m one of the people who have contributed to this sort of unhelpful speculation, just see the WWDC threads in the Latte section of the forum :slight_smile: ). These speculations take things to the extreme and imagine a future where OS X is replaced by iOS, a locked-down platform where you are limited in what you can do, where applications have to be approved by and profited from by Apple.

  2. People who speculate much the same as (1) but welcome Apple’s control, cheering on the idea that Apple will be able to check all applications “work” (regardless of how the app approval process doesn’t seem to prevent buggy programs, only programs that Apple disagree with in principle) and berating whinging developers for not wanting to have everything they do controlled by Apple.

I’m lost. What are you talking about here? What “future Mac” do you mean? None has been posited here beyond wild speculation that the Mac is going to be rebranded “iOS”… I don’t care if they rebrand (although I doubt they will because then they have to rename all their computers, and I can’t see MacBooks becoming iBooks again). On the other hand, it was you who suggested that if Apple were to do rebrand, then the reason might be to have complete control and to get 30% of all applications… Well, if that’s the sort of future “Mac” we’re talking about, then I can already safely say I don’t like it. How do I know I won’t like it if I haven’t seen it? Well, we’re not talking about a real future Mac, just the one you posited in your “why Apple might do it” post, and that’s what I was saying I wouldn’t like. So now you’re playing devil’s advocate to give a worst-case scenario and then asking how I know I wouldn’t like it! What sort of sophistry is this, Rayz? :smiley: So: I wouldn’t want to use a platform where the only way of installing software was via a pre-approved App Store for many reasons - it’s my computer, I like to install what I want and buy from where I want. And I’m pretty sure, knowing that you like other platforms too, that you wouldn’t be entirely favourable to such a locked-down version of a Mac either. Not that I think this will happen - I was just saying that I certainly wouldn’t like this scenario, which was the one you were playing devil’s advocate with in your previous reply. So I’m a little bit lost, because you set up a worst-case scenario and then acted bewildered when I said I wouldn’t like that but didn’t think it would ever happen!

Oh, I’m under no illusions there. But for all the fun speculation and Apple megalomania, I really can’t see them going this route with desktop solutions, because I think - hope! - that for every fanboy who would defend it and shout about what a great move it is, there would be someone else abandoning the platform. I can safely say that if such a thing happened, I’d try to get Scriv in the App Store, of course, but would then quietly concentrate on Windows or Unix or something. But I don’t think it will happen.

I’d be surprised if Apple care too much about that, and there could always be Boot Camp.

What has this got to do with anything? I think you’ll find plenty of comments from me around these parts on such things - I’m no Apple apologist, which is what you seem to be implying; I’m merely saying that realistically I doubt they will try to lock down OS X because it could be suicide for the platform. But for the record, I think they can just about justify keeping Flash of the iPhone if they really want to claim it can crash the iPhone - because they have an obligation to ensure a phone always works, given that it may be used for 999/911 calls etc - but keeping it off the iPad is just Steve Jobs waving his fist at Adobe at the expense of his users.

Argh! I see what you’ve done, and it’s gone something like this:

Rayz: Sets up straw man.

KB: Attacks straw man.

Rayz: Looks bewildered and asks KB why he’s attacking a straw man.

Away with your straw men!

Either that, or you’ve just read one post and assumed I was saying something I wasn’t. I don’t know - either way I’m confused by your reply!

i.e. I think all of this wild speculation is a little bit silly - although fun! - because Apple are notoriously tight-lipped and no one knows what they are up to with the Mac. I personally doubt very much that they will try to lock down desktops in the same way as iOS, although I’m not saying it’s out of the realms of possibility; but if they do, I’ll be orff because I like freedom on my computers and I bet I won’t be alone, though I have no doubt that there will be plenty of people gladly embracing a computing experience entirely controlled by Apple.

OKAY? :smiling_imp:

I shouldn’t get into these discussions, I really shouldn’t… But I hope that’s clarified things so that you can’t twist my meaning any further. :slight_smile:

All the best,

KB, I think you misread RayZ as much as you think he misread you*.

I think RayZ was just positing a potential future that you and I dread. One where there is no laptop, just an appliance like the iPad. Maybe it looks more like a laptop/netbook, but at the core is just an evil iPad. As much as you and I may think this is the stupidest thing imaginable, the Almighty Jobsy One doesn’t give a rats sphincter what we think. As is proven by the iPad.

You are welcome to join me here under the sand if you want. Just remember to bring extra cheese-its and beer.

  • [size=75]Which wouldn’t happen if you were writing 2.0!!!†[/size]
    † [size=65]Or changing a diaper. But I am kidding. Kind of.[/size]

I don’t think so - I know Rayz was only playing devil’s advocate, I was just bemused by the “calm yourself”, as though I had been ranting, when that hadn’t been my intention.

But an easy mistake to make, I know, given that I am rather font of ranting.

Rayz posited a future I wouldn’t like; I said I wouldn’t like it; then he asked me how I knew I wouldn’t like it. Well, I just wouldn’t, dammit! :slight_smile: (It’s like me saying, “I bet Steve Jobs wants to poke his finger in your eye,” and you replying, “Ooh, I don’t think he has any reason to do that, but I wouldn’t like it if he did,” and then me saying, “How do you know you won’t like it until it happens?”)

So yes, I’m joining you under the sand. I’m not willingly entering a world where the manufacturer of my computer has complete control over what I do with and install on it (cue people chiming in with misleading comparisons such as saying how I don’t mind Peugeot controlling what I can do with my car, etc, which I’ve read elsewhere and just makes me do this: :unamused: ).


P.S. Wow, there are quite a few people under this sand, huh? :slight_smile:

I think that was a typo… but a fitting one.

My thoughts on Flash: I’m on Apple’s side with this one, and not only because I loath just about everything about it. It’s obnoxious, encourages lazy and derivative user interfaces, doesn’t fit in with the rest of the operating system, blows up stuff (regularly), anything that takes a major chunk of CPU to draw widgets that it should be drawing with the native kit, is inefficient bilge, and because most people have figured all of that out by now, is mostly just used for ads (and waste-of-time games). But that bias aside, I’ve seen braggarts with Android based phones going on about how they can use Flash on their phones. They then go on to describe the experience, which seems to essentially make their phone implode with poor performance, bugs, crashes, and turning their batteries into molten slag worth 30 minutes of juice. “But at least I can do it, Apple fan bois,” they jeer. So, either Android is implementing Flash in a really awful way, or Apple has a point: it’s too inefficient for mobile equipment.

Apropos (as I was writing this!): Someone recommended I try out Pandora, so I did. Ugh. Badly done Flash interface. Music was playing in the background and after a while I hear this strange noise coming from beyond my headphones. I pull them off, and realise my laptop is practically belching out smoke thanks to running Flash in a tab all this time. Back to; better site anyway.

P.S. Watch out for oil sediments in the sand!

Wait, I’m not clear: does that mean you like Flash or not? It seems like you’re sitting on the fence. :slight_smile:

I have been wondering recently if Flash is what kills Safari. After a while, the WebKit plugin starts eating up 100% of the CPU and I have to quit Safari. But this never used to be a problem - the conspiracy theorist in me wonders if Apple have done it on purpose. :slight_smile: I’m not particularly fond of Flash myself - I have always, always picked the “non-Flash” version of a site if I’m given the option. The only problem with not supporting it on the iPad is that a lot of news sites still use it for video content, although I suppose you could argue that Apple are therefore forcing them to use a better solution.


This is kind of my point. Complete freedom costs. Yes, it would be great to run Flash on the iPad, but to make it work at a decent speed Jobs would have to give Adobe access to the OS internals, and he (quite rightly) would rather see Flash disappear from the web than give Adobe the chance to stuff up his customers’ machines. MS made that mistake and because of it, Windows picked up a reputation for instability which was really down to poorly-written drivers. To a lesser extend, Jobs has seen the same thing happen to OSX. He think there is a better way.

Now, my own personal feeling is that Macs aren’t going anywhere, but they will change. An Ipad isn’t that useful as a writing tool, in my opinion, but an ARM-based laptop that’s thin enough to shave with, cool enough to rest on your lap without making your thighs sweat and a twenty-hour battery life? Now that I could write with. Will it have multi-tasking? Yes! Will it have a mouse? Yes! Will it look like OSX? Yes, mostly. The big change is the processor, not the OS. Another transition from the company that has beome very good at them.
What will go is anything that Jobs believes will mar the experience, and some of that is going to hurt.

I think the new Finder icon is going to be a fluffy pink bunny rabbit too. With fangs. :slight_smile:

i.e. I have no idea what will happen. Let’s wait and see - it will be interesting either way, and I’ll just cross my fingers that whatever they do with the Mac, it will be able to run Scrivener. That’s all I’m really concerned about, and not just from a business/livelihood point of view - but also as a user, because I want to write using the Scrivener I designed, and not something I have to strip down to fit a downscaled OS. Fortunately we’re not putting all our eggs in one basket in the long run and there are other options of course. So… We’ll see.

Well, one would hope it is a lot more powerful than an iPad!

Yes, and anyone who believes that a fix to poor phone reception is to tell the customers they’re holding the phone wrong clearly doesn’t give a rat’s sphincter what you and I think.

And I don’t think I was playing devil’s advocate; It’ll be a great laptop, but the OS will be much more consumer-friendly. Everything will have to go through the app store and the file system will be hidden away completely.

But if I can now actually play devil’s advocate, what could they do to sweeten the deal for the developers/users who don’t want to leave Intel or MacOSX classic?
Sell it?
Open source it?
License it?

Of course, this is all just crystal-balling. They’re still making money from the Macs, so why change anything at all?

Brr. I really hope you’re not championing such a development. No access to the file system… So I can’t organise my files, back up everything where I want, how I want, and I can’t arbitrarily choose which program to open documents in - not easily anyway?

So we’re basically headed back towards fancy word processor/personal organisers with prettier interfaces? It shocks me that anyone would think this is a good idea, but no doubt there are those that do. I wouldn’t really care if such a thing was delivered if it didn’t mean forsaking the best actual consumer computing experience around - OS X.

But as you say, crystal balling into a pretty horrible computing future. I’d rather concentrate on the here and now, where I have a great laptop and operating system. :slight_smile:

All the best,

From a writer’s point of view, I would remember that we have been accustomed to the disappearing of real keyboards. Someone finds the sticky Aluminium keyboard very good. Someone else is even starting to love the iPad virtual keyboard. So, I’m sure in a few years I will be one of the very few to complain about the disappearing of advanced wordprocessors and file systems.

I’ve already partially switched to a Windows system, when I needed a really portable computer. Not happy to work on that thing, but I ended up customizing things and adapting myself to it. I’ll end up adapting myself to whathever will remain of the old technology – the one that does not suppose all I want is to buy the latest hit from Shakira, or the latest novel with a multicolor embossed cover*.

Keith, how is that porting to a VAX going? It is still full of university departments with those things locked in some underground room.


  • Criticizing form, here, not content. The best SF collection, in Italy, used to had magnificently minimal covers created by Karel Thole. Then, ownership of the publisher Mondadori changed, and now there is only high-fat novels, envelopped into that kind of childish toy-covers.