Developers Expect iOS and MacOS To Merge

I welcome the by _PimpDaddy7_ · 2010-06-23 01:03 · Score: 4, Funny

iMerge(TM)

Re:I welcome the by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:40 · Score: 0

per

More like an option by Gulthek · 2010-06-23 01:03 · Score: 5, Interesting

If I were Apple I'd make a desktop iOS a user option like the current Parental Controls. Locking specific users into a walled garden of uncomplicated settings and apps sure would be nice for grandparent support.

Re:More like an option by dniq · 2010-06-23 01:30 · Score: 2, Informative

There is already a Simple Finder option in the current OSX, which only provides the very basic functionality to the user. My mom is using - and loving - it. No chance to break stuff, and incredibly easy for her to use.
Re:More like an option by Trufagus · 2010-06-23 01:34 · Score: 1

I don't think Apple is known for giving its users options.
I'm not suggesting that Apple can force existing Mac owners to adopt iOS, but they amount of money they can make from a locked down user is so much more then for a regular free user that I would expect that eventually, all Apple products will come with iOS.
The most likely way to implement this is just to slowly reduce the resources put into the Mac line, and to continue to expand the iOS line until it replaces most of the Mac line (except servers).
Re:More like an option by WrongSizeGlass · 2010-06-23 01:40 · Score: 1

I'm not suggesting that Apple can force existing Mac owners to adopt iOS, but they amount of money they can make from a locked down user is so much more then for a regular free user that I would expect that eventually, all Apple products will come with iOS.
Actually, Apple doesn't make that much from the App store.
Re:More like an option by Leon+Buijs · 2010-06-23 01:42 · Score: 1

Pre-Mac OS X did have such an option, although IT didn't cover parental settings. That problem was not as much in the picture back then.
Re:More like an option by delinear · 2010-06-23 02:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

To say they don't make much from the App store is to completely ignore the fact that it's their main marketing tool now for all iDevices. Every advert is about what you can do with app X or Y with very little focus on the hardware.
Re:More like an option by 0100010001010011 · 2010-06-23 02:50 · Score: 1

Sounds like what Ubuntu is trying to make their system.
Basic controls. A "App Store" where you can just download apps and run them. I can see Apple merging the App store for people who find downloading a DMG and dragging and dropping a .app too difficult. (Say what ever you want, THEY EXIST and HAVE MONEY).
But hidden beneath that is Terminal and bash and all the other goodies that come with OS X. Just like they exist on the iPhone and iPod Touch.
From what I've seen, the sue machine that Apple is, really has left the jailbreakers and OSX86 guys alone. They may fix security issues that allow the jailbreaking, but that's it. Pystar got sued because they were trying to capitalize on it.
Re:More like an option by Gulthek · 2010-06-23 03:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

Yeah, that's the "current Parental Controls". This would be an order of magnitude simpler. I know, because I setup my grandmother with a Mac and even Simple Finder was too much. Multitasking, settings, windows, etc. Ideally we'd be able to setup a iPad-like screen with big buttons that runs one application at a time with absolutely zero user configuration possible (email accounts and the like having been setup by the admin account).
Re:More like an option by DrgnDancer · 2010-06-23 03:17 · Score: 1

But that's not direct profit. For the iDevices it's a good ad campaign, I'm not so sure about it being as valuable for a general purpose computer. Since it's doesn't make them much money directly, and would be seen as more of a hindrance than a help for general purpose computers (at least I think it would, and I love the concept on my phone), I can't see why they'd do it. Personally I think we *will* see a general decline in both Mac and PC general purpose computers in the coming decades (decades, not years), but not because Apple or anyone else presses the matter. I think people *in general* prefer the device model over the computer model, and as more and more capable devices become more and more common, I think we'll see a move away from general purpose computers.
I envision a situation where we all carry around a phone type device, much like a current generation smartphones. As powerful as what we now consider a desktop computer (though of course those will still exist for people, mostly people like us who work with them, and will be more powerful still), these devices will do everything a current phone can (phone, video conference, GPS, media player, etc) plus most of what a general purpose PC does. I expect they'll be a bit bigger than current phones, mainly because they will be so useful that people will want some screen real estate (I think tablets might be a dead end, but it will probably take a while to realize it, and they'll still be useful for specific applications).
When you're not mobile with your device you dock it. It becomes the electronic hub of the house. You have a keyboard, mouse, and monitor for it and use it like a simplified version of a computer. It'll get "normal" TV, allow you to use whatever the Web evolves into, play games, whatever. There will probably be some kind of additional storage it hooks into when docked as well. I doubt flash memory will ever be as efficient as hard drives for storing vast quantities of data, but it will have plenty of internal storage for a good subset of what it has when docked.
These will be what most people use for a "computer" most of the time. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not predicting the end of computers as we know them. There will always be servers, HPC systems used by researchers, and even PCs. It's just that not everyone will have a PC or two in the house. They'll be like those expensive kitchen gadgets that some people have. Plenty of people will have them, some people will even use them quite a bit, but they won't really be necessary and a lot of them will spend a lot of time gathering dust.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:More like an option by node+3 · 2010-06-23 05:00 · Score: 0

To say they don't make much from the App store is to completely ignore the fact that it's their main marketing tool now for all iDevices. Every advert is about what you can do with app X or Y with very little focus on the hardware.
And that's exactly the point. People seem to think Apple limit the iPhone to the App Store for native apps in order to make money from each app sold, but that's not the reason. The reason is to make the iPhone a more appealing platform to consumers and developers.
All this nonsense about how Apple will now do this for the Mac is based on this flawed assumption. They may (and probably will) do something in 10.7 that simplifies things for the user, but they absolutely will not lock down the Mac like the iPhone unless that would make the Mac more compelling, and it's very clear that right now it would not.
Apple doesn't want to control its users, it wants to control the quality of its products, and it's both difficult to fault them for that (let alone call them "evil" like so many do here on slashdot!), or to argue that it hasn't worked out well for them.
Re:More like an option by falconwolf · 2010-06-23 08:44 · Score: 1

People seem to think Apple limit the iPhone to the App Store for native apps in order to make money from each app sold, but that's not the reason. The reason is to make the iPhone a more appealing platform to consumers and developers.
If the idea is to make the iPhone more appealing Apple would allow anyone to install any software on iPhones. One reason I would not buy an iPad, even if I had a billion dollars, is because Apple restricts the software I install on it to only the software Apple offers in it's app store. Now if instead Apple had released a tablet like the Modbook Pro I'd be in line to get one.
Apple doesn't want to control its users, it wants to control the quality of its products, and it's both difficult to fault them for that
But Apple does want to control its users other wise it would allow users to install software other than what the app store offers. Apple would not be blocking Adobe from offering Flash to users.
Falcon

--
Should there be a Law?
Re:More like an option by node+3 · 2010-06-23 10:44 · Score: 1

If the idea is to make the iPhone more appealing Apple would allow anyone to install any software on iPhones. One reason I would not buy an iPad, even if I had a billion dollars, is because Apple restricts the software I install on it to only the software Apple offers in it's app store.
The set of people for whom this is true is exceptionally small. On the other hand, having a single source for apps, with an absolutely simple method for buying, installing and deleting apps appeals to almost everyone.
So no, allowing installation from anywhere does not increase the net appeal of the iPhone. It definitely would increase the appeal to some people (like yourself), but not overall.

Now if instead Apple had released a tablet like the Modbook Pro I'd be in line to get one.
And Apple would not have sold 3 million of them in the past 80 days.

But Apple does want to control its users other wise it would allow users to install software other than what the app store offers. Apple would not be blocking Adobe from offering Flash to users.
The problem with this notion that "Apple wants to control its users" is that there's absolutely no rational explanation for this. To what ends is this control aimed? Does Steve Jobs just want to poke his head into your life? It makes no sense. It doesn't even make any financial sense, which would at least be rational (but offensive).
The only explanation that makes any sense, the only explanation that fits with what Apple and Jobs have said in public, and the only explanation that fits with the actions Apple has taken, is that the control they do exert (and it's not that much) is aimed towards making the iPhone (and iPad, etc.) a better product. Apple's success with the average person suggests that this approach is working well for them. Just because there are some people who prefer absolute control does not negate the effectiveness of this approach with the overwhelming majority of people for whom software "freedom" is neither a moral imperative, nor a practical requisite.
The iPad isn't for you. That's absolutely fine, don't take any of the above as meant to convince you otherwise. The only thing this is about is to point out why Apple does what they do, not to convince you that you have to like it.
Re:More like an option by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 12:06 · Score: 0

That's been a user account option on MacOS for a while now. I don't recall exactly what year that happened.
Re:More like an option by falconwolf · 2010-06-30 06:05 · Score: 1

The set of people for whom this is true is exceptionally small. On the other hand, having a single source for apps, with an absolutely simple method for buying, installing and deleting apps appeals to almost everyone.
I highly doubt it's a small market. A quick look at all of the software available for computers proves that's wrong. I'm not the only one that doesn't like it, heck I've heard other slashdotters complain the only source for software for iPhones is Apple. While a simple one-stop source for most apps may appeal to some, I bet when it's explained the only software that can be installed is software from that one source, and that source arbitrarily approves and rejects the software it offers many of those who do like a single source will not like it any more.
Now if instead Apple had released a tablet like the Modbook Pro I'd be in line to get one.
And Apple would not have sold 3 million of them in the past 80 days.
So!!! Apple sells more than one configuration of MacBook/ MacBook Pros too. While Apple only sells two models of iPads with 3 configurations each, and they are not user configurable, they also sell 3 lines of laptops, MacBooks, MacBook Pros, and MacBook Airs. Each line is user configurable. If they wanted to Apple could do the same with iPads. Just as Axiotron does Apple can replace MacBook parts to make tablets. And Apple can do it cheaper than Axiotron, then sell them through Apple channels, that is on Apple's online store, in Apple brick and mortar stores, and in third party retailers.
The problem with this notion that "Apple wants to control its users" is that there's absolutely no rational explanation for this. To what ends is this control aimed? Does Steve Jobs just want to poke his head into your life? It makes no sense. It doesn't even make any financial sense, which would at least be rational (but offensive).
I agree, and if I were an Apple shareholder I'd be pushing the board, and trying to get other shareholders to do the same, to do as I've outlined. Or if not to provide a study showing why theses steps would not be profitable.
If you hate Apple, sudo mod me down. That's how you prove I'm wrong, isn't it?
I know this is not part of the post but I want to say I neither hate Apple nor mod people down because I disagree with them. I love some Apple products, specifically Mac Pros and MacBook laptops. What I don't like is some of what Apple does or does not do as well as some board members, executives, and other workers. The same applies to almost all businesses, even Microsoft. British Petroleum I'm not sure about. I definitely don't like a lot I've seen or heard, such as cutting corners to save money.
Falcon

--
Should there be a Law?

LOL by p.rican · 2010-06-23 01:04 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Where's my mod points when I need them............

--

/. --"Demented and sad....but social" -Judd Nelson

Oh Please by WrongSizeGlass · 2010-06-23 01:05 · Score: 4, Funny

If it's not one thing it's another. Apple is dying. Apple is dead. Apple can't recover. The iPod can't save Apple. The Mac can't come back. The iPhone can't save Apple. The 'walled garden' will be the death of Apple. The iPad's failure will kill Apple ... and now the MacOS & iOS are going to merge resulting in pushback, backlash and eventually Apple's demise.

These are different markets and different products. I can't rule out an "Apple appliance" that will serve as a desktop type of computer with iOS running on it ... phasing out MacOS over the next decade? maybe ... but merging the two? Not very likely.

Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is the kind of babble we've been hearing about Windows for over a decade here now. I swear even the smallest of issues and another retard is ranting that it's another nail in MS's coffin and that they'll be toppled any day now.

I swear if I listened to all the fanboi rumblings I would have given up on Windows, moved to Linux and after a few years of frustration from their lagging behind I would now own a Mac.

I can only imagine what the ravings would have been like had Slashdork been around during the Amiga years.
Re:Oh Please by FuckingNickName · 2010-06-23 01:15 · Score: 1

If you need to relate to past stories then they should be about how Apple restricts developers/users and not the tenacious ramblings of Dvorak and his ilk. Your "and then Apple will die!!!" strawmen add nothing.
Is Apple showing any signs of dying? No.
Does Apple tend toward restricting developers in a way considered stifling by many developers? Yes.
Is TFA unlikely speculation? Possibly, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth thinking about.
Re:Oh Please by jimicus · 2010-06-23 01:17 · Score: 4, Funny

If you listened to all the fanboi rumblings, you'd have given up years ago and bought an abacus.
Re:Oh Please by WrongSizeGlass · 2010-06-23 01:19 · Score: 1

I thought Apple would release an "iPhone Runtime Environment" application with 10.6 (obviously I was wrong) but I won't rule it out for the future. It would allow Apple to take their 30% cut of people buying additional copies of their iDevice apps so they can run it on their desktops and save/exchange/sync data. Apple's rumored 'Wacom-type' touch pad would work hand and hand with it.

I don't know if Apple would ever release a Windows version of the iOS runtime. On one hand it would expand the market to include a lot more desktops that could buy & use iOS apps but it would hurt the "buy a Mac because you can only get this type of functionality on a Mac so buy a Mac" hook.
Re:Oh Please by Henriok · 2010-06-23 01:23 · Score: 1

The difference between all the absurd statements and this new statement is that the former are uttered by competitors to Apple, by "analysts" obviously not familiar to Apple, "journalists" trolling for clicks or by raving idiots. This time it's an analysis offered by Mac developers that's been in the forefront of Mac indie development for ages and is on first name basis with the Mac community and probably have lots of personal friends within Apple. And they are not predicting the demise of anything..

--

- Henrik

- when the Shadows descend -
Re:Oh Please by Exitar · 2010-06-23 01:23 · Score: 0, Troll

And as soon as Jobs will announce in some future keynote:
"We are merging iOS & MacOS during the next year since personal computers are things of the past."
all the Apple fanbois will tell
"Hail Steve! Good move! We were waiting for it! Let's hurry and burn our computers!"
Re:Oh Please by bashibazouk · 2010-06-23 01:25 · Score: 1

I did but had to give it up when I could not get the new gaming graphics card I bought to work with it...
Re:Oh Please by betterunixthanunix · 2010-06-23 01:27 · Score: 1

"I don't know if Apple would ever release a Windows version of the iOS runtime."

Why wouldn't they? It would be a potential new revenue stream for them, and one which they would have a lot of control over, so if it wound up being unprofitable they could just shut it down. They could even divide the market along "Apple products only" lines -- so that some apps would only be approved for Apple products, and some for Apple or Microsoft (I doubt that libre operating systems will get much support).

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:Oh Please by Lord+Bitman · 2010-06-23 01:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

The "walled garden" won't be the death of Apple. The alternative of a similar garden without walls will.

--
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Re:Oh Please by ceoyoyo · 2010-06-23 01:29 · Score: 1

Let's see, they asked a bunch of IOS developers whether they thought their particular platform of choice was going to take over. Surprisingly, many said yes.
This has always been an idiotic conspiracy theory and completely forgets that IOS is a cut down version of OS X. Same language, same classes except for a few UI ones. Are the two SDKs going to merge? They already are. IOS is slowly gaining more and more functionality ported over from OS X.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:37 · Score: 0

Isn't Apple the most wealthy IT company in America these days?

The iPad's failure will kill Apple
You sir, do not read the news, 2 million units sold in 59 days is not a failure, no matter how much you want it to be.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:43 · Score: 1, Interesting

but merging the two? Not very likely.
Why not? The desktop/laptop is stagnant and flat to little growth, you can see this in the way they gloss over it in their quarterly reports. The iOS is freeking rocking in money. So yeah they may have a hammer and try it out. At the very least a skin that makes the macosx look like the ios with a translation layer.
Right now it is the 'gold rush' with these small apps. That will die down in a year or three. With a decent group making apps people really want instead of zillions of little crap apps. Right now it is a fad/novelty. That will change. There is real money to be made in the lock in.
The 'simple to use' market is huge. We as engineers think it is awesome to be able to tweak everything. Most people do not use that junk. They just want those 5-10 apps they use all the time to just work. They have over the years learned all these crazy gyrations to use these things. For example last year I could have given my gf something like an iPad and she would have been just fine. But now she is 'locked in' to the windows platform because I bought her some games she really likes. She jumps thru the windows hoops so she can play her games. She doesnt give one wit about how to change the power on the 802.11n card, or how many fps her video card can do she just wants to play her adventure games.
Apple, windows, hardware, and linux fan boys miss the mark on this every time. People want to use applications. Users will jump thru the hoops you create to use them (i double smoosh this picture, the computer wants a startup and shutdown phase). I am not saying there isnt a place for more complex interfaces. But simple easy to use ones are the best 99% of the time.
Re:Oh Please by WrongSizeGlass · 2010-06-23 01:48 · Score: 1

You sir, do not read the news, 2 million units sold in 59 days is not a failure, no matter how much you want it to be.
You obviously missed the point of my post. I was repeating all of the proclamations thrown about declaring the death and demise of Apple, even ones as recent as "The iPad's failure will kill Apple". I don't buy into them and I don't see an end to Apple's success as long as Steve Jobs is guiding the company. I even sent an iPad to my web designer's kids for 'half Christmas'.

The iPad sold 3 million units in 80 days. That's pretty impressive and certainly not the iFailure declared by many.
Re:Oh Please by XxtraLarGe · 2010-06-23 01:48 · Score: 1

You sir, do not read the news, 2 million units sold in 59 days is not a failure, no matter how much you want it to be.
Read what he said in context. He wasn't making the claim, simply reiterating a claim others had made that turned out to be false. There are a whole lot of people out there that really hate Apple and want to see them fail.

--
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Re:Oh Please by elrous0 · 2010-06-23 01:50 · Score: 1

Obviously, you're right. I mean, what would Apple have to gain from locking down the MacOS anyway...aside from a huge *shitload* of money?

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Re:Oh Please by Ukab+the+Great · 2010-06-23 02:14 · Score: 0

According to Slashdot trolls, BSD is dying.
Apple's OS is a BSD.
Therefore we can logically deduce that Apple's been dying for the last 10 years.
Re:Oh Please by mdwh2 · 2010-06-23 02:14 · Score: 1

resulting in pushback, backlash and eventually Apple's demise.
Does the article actually say this? It's down at the moment, but I don't see this claim in the summary at least.
People are saying that such a thing would be bad, from their point of view, not Apple's.
I can't rule out an "Apple appliance" that will serve as a desktop type of computer with iOS running on it ... phasing out MacOS over the next decade? maybe ... but merging the two? Not very likely.
Well hang on a mo, that's pretty much the same claim, if not worse - the end result will still be that Apple's PCs (branded "Macs") will now be running IOS. They may or may not brand that OS "Mac OS" (just as in the past, the "Mac OS" brand has referred to more than one different operating system). The criticisms that now we'll have desktop and laptop computers too running with a locked down model where Apple get to control what software you're allowed to run, would still apply.
Re:Oh Please by Dog-Cow · 2010-06-23 02:16 · Score: 1

I don't know why you'd think that people would buy their apps a second time. Right now you can sync any app to any number of devices, as long as they sync using the same computer.
Re:Oh Please by mdwh2 · 2010-06-23 02:20 · Score: 1

And there are people whining about Linux all the time. Newsflash: there are fans of all platforms, who criticise other platforms.
As for the Amiga, yes there'd have been fanatic ramblings against the Amiga too. In fact, there still are - just check out all the whining we get every once in a blue moon there's an AmigaOS article.
Re:Oh Please by sglewis100 · 2010-06-23 02:22 · Score: 1

Why not? The desktop/laptop is stagnant and flat to little growth, you can see this in the way they gloss over it in their quarterly reports. The iOS is freeking rocking in money. So yeah they may have a hammer and try it out. At the very least a skin that makes the macosx look like the ios with a translation layer.
What? Stagnant and flat? Maybe overall, in the industry, but there are a couple of segments growing at the expense of the regular players, namely netbooks and... APPLE.

Q2 2010 - Apple sold 2.94 million Macintosh® computers during the quarter, representing a 33 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter.
Q1 2010 - Apple sold 3.36 million Macintosh® computers during the quarter, representing a 33 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter.
Q4 2009 - Apple sold 3.05 million Macintosh® computers during the quarter, representing a 17 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter.
Q3 2009 - Apple sold 2.6 million Macintosh® computers during the quarter, representing a four percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter.
Q2 2009 - Apple sold 2.22 million Macintosh® computers during the quarter, representing a three percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter.
Q1 2009 - Apple sold 2,524,000 Macintosh® computers during the quarter, representing nine percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter.

If anything, I'd say sales have picked up steam. What isn't exaggerated is the death of the desktop... people are buying netbooks, notebooks and now iPads, and eschewing the traditional computer in an office that can't move. But Apple's decline in desktop sales has been more than outweighed by sales of notebooks, iPads, iPods and iPhones. If the PC market truly begins to shrink, at the expense of a mobile device landscape whose mindshare and possibly marketshare is dominated by Apple, then I think they're happy with that. For one, it would mean they still make a hefty profit. For two, they do so WITH impressive marketshare, but just hovering at the 8-10% of the PC market. Third, if EVERYBODY continues to buy iOS devices, even as the desktop market shrinks, it stands to reason Apple's marketshare and overall volume will increase. I suspect with their margins on iMacs, MacBook Pros, iPads, iPods and iPhones, they don't really care which 3 or 4 products the consumer ends up buying.

Wouldn't you love to have their problem?
Re:Oh Please by Bing+Tsher+E · 2010-06-23 02:25 · Score: 1

It would allow Apple to take their 30% cut of people buying additional copies of their iDevice apps so they can run it on their desktops and save/exchange/sync data.
It's pretty unlikely that people would need to buy additional copies. The current policy allows people to install their App Store downloads on multiple devices, I believe to up to 4 devices (have never tried it, just own one iPod Touch.) Why would they all-of-a-sudden not allow one of the four to be a virtual device?
Re:Oh Please by JasterBobaMereel · 2010-06-23 02:26 · Score: 1

...Microsoft is dying ... it's a slow painful and lingering death
They had 98% of the browser market now they don't
They had nearly 100% of the PC operating system market and were making inroads into the server market, now are losing ground
Their innovations on Vista and Win7 are mostly copies of things that Apple or Some Linux builds had already done, or if not did very soon after
The only novel things they seems to have added are either for the Corporate market (and the home and small business users do not want/need/use) and are very expensive versions of things done better elsewhere ...

--
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
Re:Oh Please by Bing+Tsher+E · 2010-06-23 02:30 · Score: 1

With a decent group making apps people really want instead of zillions of little crap apps.
The 'zillions of crappy little apps' are indeed a problem. At least with the 4.0 update, they give us a way to 'rope in' some of the apps and get a little control of the sea of icons, with the new 'folders' feature (wow! a new feature from Apple! folders to put icons in!)
Re:Oh Please by mdwh2 · 2010-06-23 02:33 · Score: 0, Troll

The iPad sold 3 million units in 80 days. That's pretty impressive and certainly not the iFailure declared by many.
Given the vast amounts of media coverage and free advertising worldwide for many months, starting before the device was even announced, it would be abysmal if it had sold anything less. It's not a failure, but I'd say it's not living up to the hype and claims of it being revolutionary that were made.
There are plenty of other tablets, netbooks, etc on the market that also aren't failures. Where's the media coverage, complete with three stories a day on Slashdot, about them? Indeed, some of these devices, even from market leaders like Nokia, don't even get a single news story for their actual product releases.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:39 · Score: 0

Let's see, they asked a bunch of IOS developers whether they thought their particular platform of choice was going to take over. Surprisingly, many said yes.
If had RTFA, you would know that they were Mac OS X developers, a few of which had written iOS apps.
Re:Oh Please by westlake · 2010-06-23 02:41 · Score: 3, Interesting

The "walled garden" won't be the death of Apple. The alternative of a similar garden without walls will.
I doubt it.
Operating System Market Share
Windows 91%
Mac 5%
Linux 1.1%
iPhone 0.6%
iPod Touch 0.1%
iPad 0.1%
These are global stats, not US, remember.
Apple's "walled garden" - despite the price of admission - is well on its way to becoming a larger presence on the web than the Linux PC or mobile device.
Re:Oh Please by Junior+J.+Junior+III · 2010-06-23 02:44 · Score: 3, Funny

Please, this talk of walled gardens and apples is only going to fuel Jobs's God complex. Let's come up with some other metaphors.

--
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:45 · Score: 0

I even sent an iPad to my web designer's kids for 'half Christmas'.
Umm... Wow. You, sir, are the official winner of this week's Money To Burn award -- congratulations!
For as long as there are people willing to throw money around like confetti, you are probably right that Steve Jobs has nothing to worry about. I wonder what you give to your sysadmin, your accountant, your plumber, janitor, and refuse collector? Or is the web designer special?
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:53 · Score: 0

Find me one single proclamation saying the iPad would lead to the demise of Apple. There, I challenge you and I suspect, if you do manage it, it'll be some 14 year old kid's rage-blog. I didn't see anyone saying the iPad would be the death of Apple, I saw plenty of people saying it's a pointless device which will sell millions, in fact the only people I've seen saying anything about the iPad being the death of Apple are from Apple supports such as yourself claiming that others have said this but never offering any shred of evidence, presumably to make it look like Apple always overcomes the complaints when in fact you're just altering the nature of the complaints to fit your skewed opinion. So, you're welcome to prove yourself now, but until then I'm calling BS.
Re:Oh Please by daveime · 2010-06-23 03:05 · Score: 1

is well on its way to becoming a larger presence on the web
In the same way that pissing in the ocean may make it slightly more salty.
Re:Oh Please by BrokenHalo · 2010-06-23 03:08 · Score: 1

Heh. I fart in the general direction of your abacus. I bought a slide-rule.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:09 · Score: 0

"Why wouldn't they?"
Because they make all their money on hardware sales. Apple is in the business of selling an experience centered around devices.
Re:Oh Please by BrokenHalo · 2010-06-23 03:13 · Score: 1

Why wouldn't they?

Well, why would they?

It would be a perfect opportunity for Microsoft to sabotage Apple by breaking the iOS runtime with every service update or patch. After all that's what they used to do to Samba a few years back.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:14 · Score: 0

You seriously need to wake the fuck up.
Re:Oh Please by Gulthek · 2010-06-23 03:16 · Score: 1

Doubt it. It turns out users like the inability to install viruses along with all the crappy screensavers and free games they want to install. Yes, the walls keep the users in; but they also keep the device secure.*
* More secure than an open desktop with a user who wants to browse the Internet for silly software (esheep, blinking lights, free screensavers, etc. etc.)
Re:Oh Please by BrokenHalo · 2010-06-23 03:27 · Score: 1

The iPad sold 3 million units in 80 days.

Yep. And I'd say that for a maxi-sized iPod Touch, that's doing pretty well. Apple's marketroids have certainly got it down.

Next: ice to the Eskimos, rice to Japan...
Re:Oh Please by jonbryce · 2010-06-23 03:48 · Score: 1

I guess there already is such a machine - called the Apple TV, and there are rumours that the next version of it might run on an ARM chip.
Re:Oh Please by demonbug · 2010-06-23 04:17 · Score: 1

Doubt it. It turns out users like the inability to install viruses along with all the crappy screensavers and free games they want to install. Yes, the walls keep the users in; but they also keep the device secure.*
* More secure than an open desktop with a user who wants to browse the Internet for silly software (esheep, blinking lights, free screensavers, etc. etc.)
Who cares if the system is secure if all you are doing is browsing for blinking sheep screensavers?
Re:Oh Please by Draek · 2010-06-23 04:38 · Score: 1

It turns out users like the inability to install viruses along with all the crappy screensavers and free games they want to install.
Which is why the OSX platform is thriving while Microsoft is on its way to bankrupcy.
Ohhh, wait.

--
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 04:46 · Score: 0

You missed Android 0.11%
If iDevice can gather close to 1%, I have little doubt androids and chromes will do the same, if not much more. The rise of Android is phenomenal. When it comes to the Chrome mini-whatevers, price will be an unbelievable temptation.
Kudos to Apple for possibly killing the myth of backwards compatability. People want internet access and media BS. For games, I suspect that is a distant 3rd (if not 4th beyond random apps).
Re:Oh Please by insertwackynamehere · 2010-06-23 05:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yup, that's how people sell things
Oh wait no, this is Slashdot "MOMMY THEY CHEATED WITH MARKETING AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH"
Re:Oh Please by insertwackynamehere · 2010-06-23 05:02 · Score: 1

Dude look at any Apple thread on Slashdot and all people did was say the iPad was going to tank. Maybe not be the death of Apple, but the parent was exaggerating. When the iPad didn't tank people quickly changed their views, doublethink style, to "oh we always knew it would sell millions but it still sucks on principle"
Re:Oh Please by Xugumad · 2010-06-23 05:54 · Score: 1

Errr... aren't those stats based on web hits? So, Linux servers (which I'd assume is the majority of Linux installs) won't show?
Re:Oh Please by ClaraBow · 2010-06-23 05:58 · Score: 1

Does this abacus platform run IOS4? That would be sweet!
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 06:11 · Score: 1, Funny

I think the gays need these products, and we should be a liberal enough civilization to allow gays to choose their own lifestyle, as long as they aren't actively making out in public or otherwise disturbing the peace.
I've never minded the homosexual lifestyle and in this spirit I think we should be happy for them to choose Apple products, after all, you wouldn't expect them to choose women or Windows if they really were born gay right? And more and more, we're finding out that ones sexual and electronic manufacturer preference are often set early in childhood if not even before birth!
Let the gays have their computers and I think we'll be a better society for it. Lets here it for macfaggots!
Re:Oh Please by CyberZCat · 2010-06-23 06:12 · Score: 1

Apple's "walled garden" - despite the price of admission - is well on its way to becoming a larger presence on the web than the Linux PC or mobile device.
Pretty sure he was referring to Microsoft's new advertising slogan actually.
Re:Oh Please by mea37 · 2010-06-23 06:40 · Score: 1

Which is probably why he said "linux PC's or mobile devices" rather than "linux installs".
I'm not sure if the stat is meaningful. I guess I'd have to think about what mobile devices are running Linux before I'd want to comment further. (Beating out the Linux desktop in terms of web presence isn't a terribly meaningful benchmark IMO, so it'd have to be the mobile devices...) On the flip side of the coin, you can use an iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad without surfing the web, too...
But for whatever the stat is worth, it was presented with sufficient weasle-wordage to be accurate.
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 07:07 · Score: 0

Rather deceptive. Most of the Windows usage is for drones, for unmanned computers, for simple cash registers, things like that. Big deal. These are not users.
Re:Oh Please by Jeremi · 2010-06-23 07:14 · Score: 1

Who cares if the system is secure if all you are doing is browsing for blinking sheep screensavers?
All the people who have to deal with the resulting spam from your botnet node care....

--

I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Re:Oh Please by Jeremi · 2010-06-23 07:24 · Score: 1

Obviously, you're right. I mean, what would Apple have to gain from locking down the MacOS anyway...aside from a huge *shitload* of money?
Seems to me that Apple would lose 95% of its market share on the Desktop, as all the traditional Mac users realized their computers could no longer do the things they wanted them to do, and abandoned ship.
Desktop computing in general, and MacOS(X) in particular, have many years of expectation built up about what they should be capable of doing. If Apple were to try to remove features from MacOS/X to reduce traditional Macs to the level of an iPhone/iPad, the backlash would be severe.

--

I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Re:Oh Please by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:14 · Score: 1

now the MacOS & iOS are going to merge resulting in pushback, backlash and eventually Apple's demise.

I can easily believe that OS X will be merged into iOS, or even be replaced by the latter completely, with consequent lock-down of the desktop similar to what we see on iPad. But I don't see why this would mean Apple's demise. I mean, it didn't for iPad, quite the opposite in fact, so why would it happen here?
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 08:16 · Score: 0

While I completely agree with you, I am very please with how far Ubuntu has come (and I'm only on Karmic). I was also surprised when I tried to explain the improvements in Vista and Win 7 and couldn't sell them to my wife. She looked at me like I was an idiot. I believe the Windows-Linux gap is shrinking.
Re:Oh Please by westlake · 2010-06-23 10:55 · Score: 1

I'm not sure if the stat is meaningful.
What the stat means is that a broad spectrum of websites globally are seeing as many hits from Apple's "walled garden" of mobile devices as they are seeing from anything running Linux.
The numbers look even more impressive when you realize that the iPhone and iPod Touch have only been on the market three years.
Re:Oh Please by exomondo · 2010-06-23 11:40 · Score: 1

I thought Apple would release an "iPhone Runtime Environment" application with 10.6 (obviously I was wrong) but I won't rule it out for the future. It would allow Apple to take their 30% cut of people buying additional copies of their iDevice apps so they can run it on their desktops and save/exchange/sync data. Apple's rumored 'Wacom-type' touch pad would work hand and hand with it.
But what iFashionable apps would you want to run on your desktop? For the vast majority it's gimmick apps, casual games, touchscreen-specific apps or cutdown versions of desktop apps made to run on mobile devices. I doubt apple would see benefit in doing this since such a huge percentage of the available apps would make no sense to run on a desktop.
Re:Oh Please by exomondo · 2010-06-23 12:50 · Score: 1

...Microsoft is dying ... it's a slow painful and lingering death
blah blah blah...sure they have lost a little percentage ground in markets they previously held very stongly, but their profit continues to soar and they have made inroads into many other markets, for example mobile and console gaming. Neither Apple nor Microsoft are dying...both are going very strong and in different directions, sure they compete in markets like desktop and mobile but where one has focus and significant marketshare the other does not and vice-versa, nor is there any indication that it will change.
Re:Oh Please by Apple+Acolyte · 2010-06-23 15:13 · Score: 1

I got to the conversation late (and was disgusted by that moronic early troll post that got +5ed), but first of all Jobs already confirmed in one his terse personal email replies that the Mac is not being phased out or replaced by the iOS. Yes, it's troubling that nearly all the focus at this year's WWDC was on the iPlatforms and that there weren't even any design awards given to Mac developers. But Apple has heard that people were disappointed by that, so I expect to see a different setup in the future that is more respectful of the Mac platform.

Some of the lower end Mac models like the MacBook may get replaced by iPad-like successors in the future, but Apple would be quite dumb indeed to kill the Mac. A touch sensitive AIO desktop like the iMac but running iOS will probably debut some time in the near future - it's only a natural progression of the concept. But to go from assuming that to thinking the entire Mac line will be replaced is alarmist or stupid or both. Mac OS X can't be hybridized with iOS to create a limited computing environment because the vast majority of Mac users would balk at that prospect and switch to Windows immediately. You can't take the Mac and Mac OS X - a general computing platform - and morph it into a limited computing platform like the iOS iPlatform devices are and not expect much of the user base to revolt. Apple has pissed on loyal Mac customers a number of times, but a stunt like that would break the camel's back. Apple isn't that dumb (even though it acts like it sometimes) - the company knows that Windows 7 is a very respectable release and that people who demand regular PCs aren't going to accepted an iPlatform replacement instead.

Everyone needs Get a Grip. Btw, the post below me asks where Mac applications will be developed if Mac OS X and the iOS were to merge. If such an unlikely scenario were to occur, apps would be developed on that new platform. The better observation to make is, if Apple ports its iOS development tools to Windows then and only then could we say with certainty that the Mac would be on the way out. Right now the iOS is dependent on Mac OS X development. If that changes in the future all bets are off.

--
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
Re:Oh Please by jcr · 2010-06-23 18:42 · Score: 1

IOS is slowly gaining more and more functionality ported over from OS X.
Actually, that's a two-way street. Apple's developing technologies for both platforms, and continuously looking at what makes sense to migrate from one to the other. The key difference between them is that iOS is a 32-bit environment with performance and capacity constraints for portable devices, and the Mac is a 64-bit environment with far fewer limitations. I'll be developing software for both of them for the foreseeable future.
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:Oh Please by ceoyoyo · 2010-06-23 18:52 · Score: 1

Sure, when Apple finds something works particularly well on the phone they implement it on the desktop, if appropriate. I'm having trouble thinking of a major example of that though.
On the other hand, comparing IOS 4 to the first iPhone OS 2 API, quite a bit has wandered over to the iPhone. I noticed the Accelerate framework is in there now. If only they'd make PDFKit available.
Re:Oh Please by jcr · 2010-06-23 20:51 · Score: 1

when Apple finds something works particularly well on the phone they implement it on the desktop, if appropriate. I'm having trouble thinking of a major example of that though
Core Animation.
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:Oh Please by Lord+Bitman · 2010-06-23 21:06 · Score: 1

nope

--
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Re:Oh Please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 21:11 · Score: 0

Making an operating system in which viruses have no place to go and nothing to do is completely unrelated to who you allow to write software for your operating system.
It's like claiming that your highschool is safe from guns and knives because you have metal detectors and random locker checks / personal searches.
Re:Oh Please by ceoyoyo · 2010-06-24 04:34 · Score: 1

True, although they tried it out publicly in OS X before announcing the iPhone.
Re:Oh Please by JasterBobaMereel · 2010-06-24 20:29 · Score: 1

Mobile - Non smartphone is still dominated by non-microsoft OS's
Smartphone is dominated by Apple and Android

--
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
Re:Oh Please by exomondo · 2010-06-27 10:45 · Score: 1

Mobile - Non smartphone is still dominated by non-microsoft OS's Smartphone is dominated by Apple and Android
So? That doesn't mean MS is dying, in fact they actually have a sizeable chunk of the smartphone market. Just because a company isn't dominating one market they are in - though they are dominating in others - does not mean they are dying.

Adobe et al... by courteaudotbiz · 2010-06-23 01:05 · Score: 1

You really think that Adobe will want to sell its CS products and give a cut to Apple? HA!

Re:Adobe et al... by elrous0 · 2010-06-23 01:36 · Score: 1

You really think they'll have any choice?

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Re:Adobe et al... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:58 · Score: 0

Yeah, what software company would sell their products through a retail outlet with an established store and give them a cut of the revenues for an increase in sales. That's just batshit insane.
Re:Adobe et al... by Zelgadiss · 2010-06-23 03:07 · Score: 1

Yupe, and this will be healthy for the software industry. /s

Five years from now.... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

... they won't even be selling Macs anymore. Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin, the big bucks are coming in elsewhere.

Remember, the name of the company no longer even contains the word "Computer."

Re:Five years from now.... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

It doesn't contain "computer" because Apple is in the electronic gadget, movie, and music industries. They didn't remove computer because they want to stop making computers they removed it because they do a lot more than just computers.
Re:Five years from now.... by Third+Position · 2010-06-23 01:55 · Score: 1

It's also possible they could split the company into a consumer electronics company and an IT company. Apple has a lot of opportunities to expand into servers and enterprise products, which they've largely forgone to concentrate on consumer electronics. If the Mac becomes superfluous to their consumer electronics business, I could see them spinning it off as a separate entity, and letting it concentrate on pursuing those opportunities.

--
American Third Position
Finally, a real choice!
Re:Five years from now.... by 0racle · 2010-06-23 02:02 · Score: 1

Apple has never done well with its 'IT' offerings. They don't seem to know how to do it, I don't think they care.

--
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Re:Five years from now.... by Third+Position · 2010-06-23 02:11 · Score: 1

Well, that's what I'm saying - their IT products haven't done well because it's not a market they've put a lot of effort into pursuing. They've been a consumer electronics company, and they've oriented the Mac platform to that. However, if it no longer makes sense for them to pursue a consumer market in computers, they're quite capable of taking the Mac platform in another direction. Or spinning off a company to concentrate on that.

--
American Third Position
Finally, a real choice!
Re:Five years from now.... by fermion · 2010-06-23 02:29 · Score: 1

Apple got into trouble in the 90's by fixating on a computing product rather than the customers use of the computer. This meant that the only people buying the computers were people who always used Apple product, and a few vertical markets. This was not a very large market share.
Apple now sells systems that allow user to get stuff done. The big desktop is not a big part of that anymore. Embedded devices are a huge part of their market, and will only grow. There will be a time when the general purpose computer is not a big part of any consumer oriented company. Apple will probably be one of the first to cut back on the general purpose computer, as it has to generate revenue to fund research.
I do not see consumer GPC is wide existence in 10 years, any more than the kit computers of thirty years ago exist today.

--
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Re:Five years from now.... by King_TJ · 2010-06-23 02:30 · Score: 1

Whatever .... People have been predicting the demise of the "personal computer" for quite some time now. First it was the idea that nobody would bother with a dedicated box sitting on a desk anymore, as powerful as portables became. Then it was the idea, a la Sun's whole "The Network Is The Computer" slogan, that the personal computer would become irrelevant and die, because people would need no more than a "thin client" consisting of a display, input device(s) and network connection. Everything they'd do or save would be done and stored off-site on big servers elsewhere. Now it's this idea that just because Apple designed a new OS that works well at turning mobile phones, music players, and tablet devices into "alternatives to using a standard notebook computer", it's going to mean the end of them marketing traditional "personal computers" to anyone.
In reality? All of these models can co-exist quite nicely, and almost everyone would rather have ALL of these choices available to them than pretending one obsoletes the other.
About the only trend I've seen is that practically every device you use that once consisted of specialized parts now has a little computer someplace in it. You see this immediately if you take a good look at machinery on the typical shop floor in an industrial environment. Everything from blast furnaces to waterjet cutting machines to devices made to punch holes in steel beams? Their "control panels" are basically desktop computers running DOS or Windows or Linux, interfaced to the mechanical parts of the machine, and placed in a custom enclosure so they don't look like a desktop PC anymore.
Heck... my Canon EOS Digital Rebel camera runs DOS in its firmware, and every Android cellphone out there is really just a little tiny PC running Linux. Every car or truck out there has a computer doing all the engine fuel management and monitoring a bunch of its mechanical systems to record and report failures.
The way I see it though? The more specialized little computers we've got out there inside of everything else, the more it perpetuates a need for a full-blown desktop computer, so someone can sit comfortably at it for long periods of time to do the development work required to build, maintain and update the code in all those other little computers!
Re:Five years from now.... by pmontra · 2010-06-23 02:32 · Score: 4, Insightful

They'll keep selling Macs because it's the only platform you can use to write an i* app. You won't be able to write them on i*s because they are locked down devices by design and that doesn't play well with the needs of a developer.
Re:Five years from now.... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2010-06-23 02:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why would they want to spin off the Apple brand name into a business they obviously don't know how to do, and have failed at with each previous attempt? That's called 'brand-name dilution' and it's looked down on in marketing circles.
There isn't 'Magic Apple Fairy Dust' that can be sprinkled on a new 'IT Division' that will make it successful. They're just not good at the enterprise biz and have finally figured it out.
Re:Five years from now.... by MrDiablerie · 2010-06-23 02:59 · Score: 1

I don't see them ever stopping production of computers. The publishing, video and audio worlds are all dominated by Macs and Mac specific software. Why would they want to give up that revenue?
Re:Five years from now.... by RivenAleem · 2010-06-23 03:34 · Score: 1

Remember, the name of the company no longer even contains the word "Computer."
Neither does Dell Inc., what is your point?
Re:Five years from now.... by bonch · 2010-06-23 03:36 · Score: 1

Mac sales have grown each quarter. University students aren't going to be doing their homework on iPads. They'll want laptops.
Re:Five years from now.... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 04:00 · Score: 0

Of course, every app for your PS3, Xbox, or Wii was written on a Windows PC... but by all means, keep the faith, bro.
Re:Five years from now.... by Culture20 · 2010-06-23 05:01 · Score: 1

They'll keep selling Macs because it's the only platform you can use to write an i* app.
And since the supply-side of Macs will be lower (probably lower than the demand), and the economy of scale will be gone, Macs will cost $6,000+ again, but they will include a free iapp developer's license and a sticker.
Re:Five years from now.... by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:27 · Score: 1

They'll keep selling Macs because it's the only platform you can use to write an i* app. You won't be able to write them on i*s because they are locked down devices by design and that doesn't play well with the needs of a developer.
If "proper" OS X is only marketed at developers and such, this would still mean very significant changes. Quite obviously, this would mean that there would be many more iOS devices (including desktops) than OS X boxes. Consequently, most entertainment and productivity software would switch to iOS as the more popular platform. Which, in turn, means that the utility of full OS X for day-to-day use would diminish significantly.
Re:Five years from now.... by Roger+W+Moore · 2010-06-23 18:19 · Score: 1

They'll keep selling Macs because it's the only platform you can use to write an i* app.
That is also the reason why they can never wall off the Mac - where would you develop your Mac applications? The only way they can keep iOS walled is that you cannot develop iOS apps on iOS itself. If you have to develop your apps on the same platform that you are running then you have to allow unapproved binaries to run hence the OS cannot be walled off.
Re:Five years from now.... by Tim+C · 2010-06-23 22:20 · Score: 1

Are you saying that Apple with replace OS X with iOS, essentially stop selling general-purpose computers, and port the iOS SDK to Windows, thus forcing all of their developers to buy Windows PCs?

--
It's official. Most of you are morons.

At Ease by tepples · 2010-06-23 01:06 · Score: 5, Informative

If I were Apple I'd make a desktop iOS a user option like the current Parental Controls.

Apple tried this before; it was called At Ease.

Re:At Ease by Ephemeriis · 2010-06-23 01:22 · Score: 5, Informative

If I were Apple I'd make a desktop iOS a user option like the current Parental Controls.
Apple tried this before; it was called At Ease.
And it genuinely kicked ass at the time.
I had a Macintosh Performa 6300 that was being used as a shared family computer back then. At Ease allowed me to set up a relatively safe and secure way to share that computer with our kids, without giving them access to absolutely everything.

--
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
Re:At Ease by AHuxley · 2010-06-23 01:22 · Score: 1

Did http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EWorld or something around that era have a whitelist like network too?

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:At Ease by jonwil · 2010-06-23 01:35 · Score: 1

I remember that software on the school Macs (back when the school HAD Macs)
And I still remember being able to use some sort of "delete file" option in one of the Microsoft Office for Mac applications to delete the At Ease software file and defeat the software. No clue if they ever solved that loophole.
Re:At Ease by 0100010001010011 · 2010-06-23 02:00 · Score: 1

Yes! Performa 600 here, everyone in my family but me used it. I gave myself Finder access.
For those that say to use Simple Finder... some people need something even simpler than that. Something without multitasking (other than say a few background apps). My mom got frustrated as hell when she tried to borrow my or my siblings laptops and we all had different Exposé settings.
Re:At Ease by drinkypoo · 2010-06-23 02:12 · Score: 1

My mom got frustrated as hell when she tried to borrow my or my siblings laptops and we all had different Exposé settings.
Why not just give your mom an account? Or are Exposé settings not per-account?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:At Ease by 0100010001010011 · 2010-06-23 02:37 · Score: 1

We were home at Christmas, she just grabbed a laptop and asked to check her mail (which she normally just does at work). I do have a guest account now for the same reason.
Re:At Ease by demonbug · 2010-06-23 04:13 · Score: 1

I had a Macintosh Performa 6300 that was being used as a shared family computer back then. At Ease allowed me to set up a relatively safe and secure way to share that computer with our kids, without giving them access to absolutely everything.
I never understood this point of view. Why wouldn't you want the system wide open and available for your kids to tinker with? How are they going to learn anything if you keep them confined to this walled garden? What would it have been like for our generation if our Commodores or Apple IIs or whatnot didn't let us do anything but run those idiotic learning games that schools tried to force on us? I sure as hell wouldn't have developed an appreciation for or interest in computers while being confined to a few "permitted" applications with no access to the underpinnings of the system.
I could perhaps understand this if you had one computer at home that you use for ultra-important tasks, but I really can't think of anyone with this limitation. Anyone whose life or livelihood is that dependent on a working computer at home has one dedicated to this ultra-important task and one (or more) for the kids and others to screw around with - it isn't like kids that are likely to screw up your system are really going to need the latest and greatest hardware.
Re:At Ease by mdarksbane · 2010-06-23 04:20 · Score: 1

For 90% of young kids having the whole system open means they're just going to have to search through the start menu to find the games they want to play.
There are plenty of reasons to bring people on step by step to a full system instead of throwing all of it at them at once.
Re:At Ease by Ephemeriis · 2010-06-23 04:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

I could perhaps understand this if you had one computer at home that you use for ultra-important tasks, but I really can't think of anyone with this limitation.
At the time I had this Performa running At Ease, we owned exactly two computers. One was a Mac, and one was a PC. And the only reason we had the PC was because we'd found a working one at a garage sale. This was years ago, before everybody and their dog had a personal computer. At the time, it was unheard-of to have two computers in a household.

Anyone whose life or livelihood is that dependent on a working computer at home has one dedicated to this ultra-important task and one (or more) for the kids and others to screw around with - it isn't like kids that are likely to screw up your system are really going to need the latest and greatest hardware.
I'm not necessarily talking about IT professionals. Plenty of folks have just a single computer in the household. If that one computer gets hosed, they're all out of luck. It won't be life-threatening... But there'll be no email, facebook, whatever. And most folks aren't able to do their own repairs, so it'll take a trip to the shop to get it fixed. Definitely an inconvenience.

I never understood this point of view. Why wouldn't you want the system wide open and available for your kids to tinker with?
I've already mentioned that we had the two systems - one of which was an old Tandy PC.
The kids were restricted to only using the Mac (and At Ease) after they killed the PC. My son saw all these white papers on the C: drive that couldn't be opened with anything, so he deleted them to make room. All those white papers ended in things like .DLL and .SYS Had to reload the whole system from disk. Lots and lots of disks. Was not fun.

How are they going to learn anything if you keep them confined to this walled garden?
Most people aren't terribly concerned with their kids learning how to tinker with a computer. They have a computer that they use for Internet/email/facebook/whatever... And the kids may be allowed to use it... But they sure as hell don't want the kids taking the thing apart to see how it works.

What would it have been like for our generation if our Commodores or Apple IIs or whatnot didn't let us do anything but run those idiotic learning games that schools tried to force on us? I sure as hell wouldn't have developed an appreciation for or interest in computers while being confined to a few "permitted" applications with no access to the underpinnings of the system.
At school that is precisely what I had available. We were only allowed to run a few, specific programs. The computer lab was locked when not in use, and the disks were kept in another locked cabinet. You basically weren't allowed to have any fun.
At home, my mother had an Epson PC of some sort, running some flavor of DOS. I was not allowed to use it. That machine cost multiple thousands of dollars and was exclusively for her work. Nobody touched it but her.
When I decided I wanted to learn how computers worked myself, I saved up my money for the better part of a year and bought a used Mac SE/30 from a repair shop. I tinkered with that thing to my heart's content. Had all sorts of fun with Hypercard.
The point being - it is not unreasonable for the parent in the household not to want their children to destroy their computer. And if the kids are that curious, they can get their own computer to play with.

--
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
Re:At Ease by catmistake · 2010-06-23 07:54 · Score: 1

What I find surprising is there is not a flood of Springboard-like environments from third party devs for Mac OS X, yet. The platform is wide open right now, no one needs Apple's permission or approval to develop and distribute applications for Mac OS X, nor is Springboard likely patentable... seems odd to me no devs have made this incredibly obvious interface for Macs.

--
The Admin and the Engineer

It's somewhat expected. by mitchell_pgh · 2010-06-23 01:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

I believe Sasser sums it up rather nicely: "I could see a gradual, slow merger between iOS and Mac OS X styles and approaches," he said. "It doesn't make sense for them to be developing two of everything, one good, one not as good--two calendars, two address books--it's got to merge somehow."

Apple should learn from Microsoft's mistake of trying to have two rather diverse platforms (Windows and Windows mobile). Granted, Microsoft seems to be moving in a better direction these days with their mobile platform, but they could have been much further along if they would have used this method.

Re:It's somewhat expected. by AdmiralXyz · 2010-06-23 01:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm going to be blunt about this: your comment is completely wrong. It makes perfect sense to have a separate operating system for desktops and mobile devices, because they're two completely different things. Trying to run an OS on one designed for the other leads to frustration and unusability. In fact, I think Windows Mobile failed because it wasn't enough of a mobile operating system: it had things like a desktop, the Start Menu, and full multitasking, which make perfect sense in a desktop operating environment and are a terrible idea on a mobile one.

iOS and Mac OS X already do share a lot of code already, but that's just code reuse - proper programming practice. They've got two totally different user interfaces and paradigms, each working best for its target device. Trying to run one on the other would be unusable, and say what you want about Steve Jobs, but it will be a cold day in hell before a product comes out of his company that can be described as "unusable". Such a merger is a horrible idea, there's no evidence it is ever going to take place, and this article is just so much FUD to get the Slashdot crowd ranting and raving about Apple's walled garden.

--
Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by bill_mcgonigle · 2010-06-23 01:22 · Score: 1

Probably with the DoJ watchdogs on their tail (anemically, but there), Microsoft didn't dare start a Windows AppStore.
Ironically, it's the linux distributions that have had the 3rd-party software distribution infrastructure for ages. Is anybody selling commercial software running yum/apt repos with SSL client identification required?

--
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Re:It's somewhat expected. by M.+Baranczak · 2010-06-23 01:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

"It doesn't make sense for them to be developing two of everything, one good, one not as good--two calendars, two address books--it's got to merge somehow."
It doesn't make sense for Ford to be making both cars and trucks. It means they have to have at least two separate lines for most of the components. They should just merge the two concepts.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Kjella · 2010-06-23 01:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

I guess it depends on which parts you're talking about - a certain OS kernel that runs everything from mobile phones to supercomputers seems to get a lot of praise around here. Presentation can be a rather thin layer compared to everything below you can share.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:It's somewhat expected. by moosesocks · 2010-06-23 01:43 · Score: 1

Except that's not the case. iOS and OS X already share a ton of code, with the exception of the highest-level UI stuff, which Jobs has repeatedly argued is necessary to do separately for each form factor. In order for MacOS and iOS to merge, Apple would have to do a 360 on this policy. Otherwise, they already are more or less the same OS (I'd even argue that they're already more closely related than KDE and GNOME are to each other).
The "walled garden" approach to the App Store may have had a time and place, although almost anybody would argue that that time has passed. I honestly don't see it lasting much longer, particularly in light of competition from Android phones, and the fact that Google, HTC, et al are being particularly aggressive in terms of hardware and software improvements.

--
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Re:It's somewhat expected. by tverbeek · 2010-06-23 01:44 · Score: 5, Insightful

"Microsoft seems to be moving in a better direction these days with their mobile platform"
You haven't been following very closely then, have you? It's a jumbled mess of mutually incompatible systems, all with the label "Windows" on it. They almost seem to be trying to emulate the diversity of Linux systems. Microsoft's mistake, however, isn't with having multiple OSes, but having multiple OSes that are all UI clones of each other (without the common code base) regardless of the platform.
Jobs and his lieutenants have talked at length about what a mistake it was to try to put desktop Windows (with extensions) on tablets. This is why the TabletPC platform has been such a snoozefest in the market: it's the wrong UI for the hardware. Apple could have released a MacBook Touch (a laptop with a touch screen or a slate, either running OS X) five years ago, but they knew it wouldn't work, so they didn't. The same story applies to Windows Mobile: wrong UI for the hardware. Same outcome: dismal sales for something with the Microsoft brand on it.
Clearly Apple believes that "iOSX everywhere" is the wrong approach. Adobe CS would make no sense on a phone or slate, and neither would Tap Tap Revenge make sense on a desktop or server. They put a whole lot of effort into developing a new OS for slates and phones, using the parts of OS X that fit that platform, and engineering new parts for the rest. They'd be fools to throw out the parts of OS X that still make all kinds of sense for the desktop or traditional laptop just to merge it with iOS, and I see no evidence that they're fools of that sort.

--
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Re:It's somewhat expected. by ahankinson · 2010-06-23 01:49 · Score: 3, Informative

You mean like the Mach kernel that both the iOS and OS X share? Or the BSD-based Darwin subsystem? Or some of the Cocoa frameworks?
Re:It's somewhat expected. by AdmiralXyz · 2010-06-23 01:56 · Score: 1

He's talking about Linux (who the hell runs OS X on a supercomputer?), although that's not really accurate. The Linux kernel running on your Android phone and the one running on the Cray Jaguar are almost certainly very different, and tuned to perform tasks very differently. That's what rocks about Linux: instead of building a kernel from scratch for your specific purpose, and going through the years of hassle and bugfixes in ground-up kernel development, you've got a stable base that everyone understands, which you can then adapt to your purpose. Of course we can't say for sure, but the same thing probably goes for iOS and OS X, I'd be very surprised if the two had the same task scheduler, for instance.

--
Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by 0100010001010011 · 2010-06-23 02:07 · Score: 4, Informative

Virginia Tech's System X
I mean it's not like they broke into the top 10 or anything:
Ranking seventh in the Top 500 list of the world's most powerful computer systems, System X was built at a fifth of the cost of the second-least expensive system in the top 10.
Not only that, but every computer that ships with OS X has the ability to become part of an XGrid. All you have to do is enable a checkbox in the Sharing control panel and that's it. XCode will seek out other XGrid computers and use it to compile.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by toygeek · 2010-06-23 02:27 · Score: 1

Yeah, they really need to bring back the Ranchero in a 4 door supercharged version. And make it run Linux!!!!!!!!11!!!w

--
Nobodies Prefect
Tidbits for Techs Technology Blog
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Graff · 2010-06-23 02:56 · Score: 1

Apple should learn from Microsoft's mistake of trying to have two rather diverse platforms (Windows and Windows mobile).
The article is mostly nonsense. The two operating systems are already pretty much the same and run on nearly the same codebase. There are just a few differences where it makes sense for there to be a difference between a desktop-oriented operating system and an appliance-oriented operating system.
Now, would it be cool if there was an option to run the appliance interface on a "regular" computer? Maybe, and maybe Apple will give developers a way to bundle an app so one package can run on both iOS and Mac OS. Until then it's trivial to develop an app that easily compiles into both an iOS version and a Mac OS version.
I see that they complain about not having regular expression support in Cocoa, well they must not realize that they are on a POSIX-compliant operating system which includes regex. There are also easily-found frameworks out there which provide an Objective-C regex API.
Anyways, it seems that the article is just a teaser for Ars's paid, premium service. This is probably why they made it so sensationalistic, so they could draw people in to pay $5 a month for their site:

(If you'd like to read what these developers had to say about recommended resources for Mac OS X developers, thoughts on Macs for scientific computing, benefits of RAD languages and tools, adopting new developer tools in Snow Leopard and iOS 4, and more, the full transcript of the live chat--jokes and all--is still available to all Ars Premier subscribers.)

--
Sapere aude!
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:26 · Score: 0

If anything Linux proves the point: Most of the kernel developers only care about performance on supercomputers and as a result, Linux performance on desktops and mobiles is now dreadful. If you point this out you get a response along the lines of "Well it works fine on my 16 core development workstation. Stop complaining."
Re:It's somewhat expected. by spire3661 · 2010-06-23 03:33 · Score: 1

They are not completely different things. They both are computers adapted for the environment they are intended to run in. The rules for making a calendar application dont radically change when considering both systems. There is no reason applications cant be dual coded to handle both environments. You can cross control paradigms (touch vs mouse/KB) if you plan smartly. Is it that hard to separate applications into back/front ends? backend runs on both operating systems, the UI interprets the data as relevant to the device. Isnt this how things should work?

--
Good-bye
Re:It's somewhat expected. by ground.zero.612 · 2010-06-23 03:36 · Score: 0

It makes perfect sense to have a separate operating system for desktops and mobile devices, because they're two completely different things.
This premise is just Plain Wrong[TM]. The OS provides software a mechanism to do work. That's all it does. What you are actually trying to complain about is the UI. The UI is just a layer on top of the OS.
Since my Palm Pre Plus is powered by an ARM Cortex A8 CPU, it is in fact just a "purpose built" general purpose computing device. The OS it runs is a custom Linux distro named WebOS. This particular OS has itself a bit of "purpose built" technology, namely the touch based UI. Do you really think all these Android and webOS phones should have had wholly new OSs that somehow focus entirely on the user input? And let's be honest, iOS has it's roots in FreeBSD too right? Your logic would dictate that Android, webOS, AND iOS should not exist in their current *nix OS based forms, but should instead be distinctly unique OSs.
Statements like this:

Trying to run an OS on one designed for the other leads to frustration and unusability.
... are thus, completely misleading and serve to undermine the real issue, which you hinted at but never really elaborated on:

They've got two totally different user interfaces and paradigms, each working best for its target device.
This is actually correct, and, IMHO how it should be. Because IMHO in today's world there are actually few reasons to maintain multiple general purpose CPU OS codebases, but many reasons to develop multiple UIs for a given OS. just my $.02

--
"Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
Re:It's somewhat expected. by david_thornley · 2010-06-23 03:50 · Score: 1

This suggests to me that Sasser has no idea how Apple does things.
Apple has been making money by providing systems that are well-designed, consistent, and suitable for particular purposes. This means that they can't go for a one-size-fits-all model. The iPhone does different things from an iMac, and therefore it has to be designed differently, and therefore the OS has to be different. It makes sense to have two different calendars, one for a desktop or laptop with a large screen and a mouse, and one for a handheld with a touch screen. Design only one calendar, and it will be clunky on either an iPad, a Macbook, or both. Apple can't remain a premium brand by making too many compromises for false efficiency, and they can't rake in those profits without being a premium brand.
The object lesson from Microsoft is that merger doesn't work. Windows 7 is the only MS operating system I've ever really liked, to be honest, so I'd have to call it a big win for Microsoft. However, a mobile device like a phone designed like a Windows 7 laptop is going to be bad. To succeed in the future, Microsoft had better learn from Apple. Otherwise, Microsoft's going to have to continue to live on Windows and Office and Xbox for the foreseeable future, and that's not where the growth is right now.

--
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Re:It's somewhat expected. by stewbacca · 2010-06-23 04:18 · Score: 1

Better analogy...it doesn't make sense for Ford to make three versions of the same car: Ford Fusion, Mercury Montego, Lincoln Whateveritscalled, yet they do. I don't get it, but there must be some branding logic that goes into it.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by atrocious+cowpat · 2010-06-23 05:44 · Score: 1

"[...] say what you want about Steve Jobs, but it will be a cold day in hell before a product comes out of his company that can be described as "unusable.""

Well, there was the infamous "Hockey Puck"-mouse.
I worked at a multimedia roadshow and workshop in 1999 and could see first hand how a large sample of users (of various levels of skill) interacted with this abomination. We ended up having to buy clip-on thingies for the mice so people would be able to use them(*). Say what you will about Macs and the Mac OS (I've always liked them), but I've yet to see a good mouse produced by Apple (and that includes the current generation mice).

(*) Yes, we could have just used any other USB-Mouse, but for some (contractual? sponsor?) reason we were required to use only Apple equipment.

--
sig? Oh, that sig...
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 06:32 · Score: 0

The VT machine is seven years old (G5-based). There are currently no Apple machines on the Top 500 list, and I wouldn't expect to see them reappear any time soon.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 06:41 · Score: 0

Well, there was the infamous "Hockey Puck"-mouse.
Yes, and people whining about it were spaztic idiots, since you can find the top of the mouse by touching the cord, in a darkened room while drunk.
Next?
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Uberbah · 2010-06-23 06:43 · Score: 1

Changes nothing.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Robert+Frazier · 2010-06-23 06:53 · Score: 1

Interestingly, the article from Virginia Tech says, "System X is currently running at 12.25 Teraflops, (20.24 peak), and was last ranked #47 (November, 2006) in the TOP500 list of the world's most powerful supercomputers."
Somehow, the VT claim about it being 47th got translated in the Apple article to it being 7th. Also, this was from 2006. I can't find the VT computer in the top 100 of the most recent list.
Best wishes,
Bob
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Robert+Frazier · 2010-06-23 07:00 · Score: 1

Interestingly, the Virginia Tech article says, "System X is currently running at 12.25 Teraflops, (20.24 peak), and was last ranked #47 (November, 2006) in the TOP500 list of the world's most powerful supercomputers."
Somehow the VT claim that they were 47th on the list got transmogrified in the Apple article to a claim that VT's computer was 7th on the list. (The case of the disappearing "4"?) Also, this was 2006. I couldn't find an Apple computer in the 1st 100 of the most recent list.
Best wishes,
Bob
Re:It's somewhat expected. by 0100010001010011 · 2010-06-23 07:27 · Score: 3, Informative

Did you not even read System X's history on their website?
1) Computer technology improves. I don't think any computer that was in the top 10 in 2006 was in the top 10 in 2010.
2) When it was "last ranked", in 2006 it was #47. When it was built, in 2003, it was ranked #3. When it was rebuilt in 2004 with the current G5s, it was ranked #7 (which is what the Apple article is about).
Re:It's somewhat expected. by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2010-06-23 07:28 · Score: 1

It doesn't make sense for Ford to be making both cars and trucks. It means they have to have at least two separate lines for most of the components. They should just merge the two concepts.
Why couldn't you write an analogy we can all understand? I drive an El Camino, you insensitive clod!!

--

"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's somewhat expected. by catmistake · 2010-06-23 07:50 · Score: 1

Actually, System X ranked third when first introduced. Also, most aren't aware yet of Virginia Tech's new all Mac System G, and the new list

--
The Admin and the Engineer
Re:It's somewhat expected. by itsphilip · 2010-06-23 08:00 · Score: 1

It doesn't make sense for Ford to be making both cars and trucks. It means they have to have at least two separate lines for most of the components. They should just merge the two concepts.
They did, along with other automakers. It's called a crossover, an SUV built on a car frame usually from a sedan in the company's lineup. They're increasingly popular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossover_(automobile)
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 08:36 · Score: 0

>It doesn't make sense for Ford to be making both cars and trucks. It means they have to have at least two separate lines for most of the components.
Mechanic geek here. Actually, there is a lot of parts compatibility there... more than you think, just not the parts you normally look at as an end user.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 08:39 · Score: 0

Uhh, that's what an SUV is. You know, the nation's most popular vehicle segment? Hello?
That said, just because all the desktop software plays nice with its mobile analogues doesn't mean it makes more sense to merge OS's. This whole thing is dumb. Macs switch to intel? I could buy that, that made some sort of sense. iPad? I'd been expecting that to be announced at every macworld or wwdc since at least 2000. The iphone? I figured it'd be a heck of a challenge for them, but they did it right. This? Uhh, no.
What WILL we see? App store for mac os x. Totally optional, just like I can still buy cds and rip them myself in iTunes. This should be obvious.
Re:It's somewhat expected. by danaris · 2010-06-23 14:28 · Score: 1

Well, there was the infamous "Hockey Puck"-mouse.
Yes, and people whining about it were spaztic idiots, since you can find the top of the mouse by touching the cord, in a darkened room while drunk.
Next?
Um...that really wasn't the main problem with the puck mouse.
The problem was that it gave you carpal tunnel just by touching it. :-P
(And I'm usually a pretty unapologetic Mac fan...trust me, for most people with normal-sized hands, the things were awful.)
Dan Aris

--
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.

FUD by whisper_jeff · 2010-06-23 01:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you're uncertain what FUD stands for, please re-read the summary. Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt.

Re:FUD by Chrisq · 2010-06-23 01:31 · Score: 4, Funny

If you're uncertain what FUD stands for, please re-read the summary. Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt.
Or Female Urination Device..
Re:FUD by elrous0 · 2010-06-23 01:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

I remember when people were first speculating that the iPad might be locked down. A lot of Apple fans called that FUD too.

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Re:FUD by imakemusic · 2010-06-23 01:43 · Score: 1

I was afraid that might be what it means...but I wasn't sure.

--
Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
Re:FUD by slick7 · 2010-06-23 02:00 · Score: 1

If you're uncertain what FUD stands for, please re-read the summary. Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt. Or Female Urination Device..
Or Feckless Utilization Demigogery.

--
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
Re:FUD by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:35 · Score: 1, Insightful

And at that time it was.
Re:FUD by impaledsunset · 2010-06-23 03:03 · Score: 1

Don't worry, FUD is absorbed by the reality distortion field, too. The walled garden is well protected from attacks coming from facts, common sense or FUD. You're safe inside.
Re:FUD by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:16 · Score: 0

I remember when people were first speculating that the iPad might be locked down. A lot of Apple fans called that FUD too.
Citation needed. Most of the ridiculous assertions attributed to Apple fanboys are exaggerations.
I defy you to post a link to a post by a raving fanboy that backs up your memory.
Pretty much everybody, whether anti-apple or pro-apple, said that the iPhone would work just like the iPod Touch and iPhone. They just disagreed as to whether this was A Good Thing or Evil Incarnate.
Re:FUD by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:25 · Score: 0

Or alternatively, Fuck U Dumbsonsofbitchesincessantlycommunicatingsolelywithacronyms.
Re:FUD by bonch · 2010-06-23 03:41 · Score: 1

What does that have to do with this? You cited a completely unrelated situation where something was called FUD, and that's supposed to mean this story submission isn't FUD? The article is nothing more than some third-party developers speculating that elements of UIKit will end up in OS X eventually. The "DRM-free" part was added by the Slashdot editor.
It's 2010, and Slashdotters still obsess over DRM and things being "locked down." The world just does not care. It's only idealistic Slashdot posters who think it's some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives.
Re:FUD by stewbacca · 2010-06-23 04:28 · Score: 1

Reading through this thread (and slashdot in general), it is perfectly clear that FUD no longer means FUD.
FUD is a marketing term. It is used to spread and encourage false assumptions about a competing product. It's diversionary logic. Don't look at OUR flaws, just look at what the competition isn't doing right! In this summary's case, the FUD is claiming that Apple wants to merge all their devices into one OS, thus crippling the desktop (there's nothing really to support this assertion, and the general consensus would be that if Apple did, it would be bad, but since there's nothing to indicate they really ARE going to do this, then it's FUD).
In politics, you keep saying the same thing over and over, even if it's blatantly false, until it is accepted as truth by the least critical of thinkers (think "Obama wasn't born in the US", for example).
FUD, is NOT, however, a term you can inject into your slashdot discussion to prove you are right about something because the other person is using FUD (when they aren't using FUD). And by you, I mean slashdotters in general, not your fine example.
But in any case, yes, this summary is a nice example of FUD, especially since the last line negates all the fear, uncertainty and doubt that baited us all into reading the article in the first place.
Re:FUD by stewbacca · 2010-06-23 04:31 · Score: 1

It's 2010, and Slashdotters still obsess over DRM and things being "locked down."

I miss the glut of articles bemoaning the HDMI cable and it's built-in DRM evilness.
Guess that turned out to be a bunch of FUD as well because frankly, you never hear about that anymore and, surprise, the HDMI cable is ubiquitous and efficient.
Re:FUD by neoform · 2010-06-23 04:50 · Score: 1

I remember when people were first speculating that the iPad might be locked down. A lot of Apple fans called that FUD too.
If they were wrong once about the ipad features, they pretty much guarantied to be wrong about some insane future prophecy about the demise of the mac os.

--
MABASPLOOM!
Re:FUD by Jesus_666 · 2010-06-23 04:57 · Score: 1

But locking down the iPad makes sense. The iPad is explicitly designed and marketed as an iOS device that does what the iPhone does, only with a bigger screen. Dekstop computers, however, do completely differnet things. Development, for instance. Apple is not going to let people compile and run random software on iOS or a similarly locked-down OS because doing so completely circumvents the lockdown. So Apple has the choice between either continuing to ship OS X as a general-purpose operating system, completely reworking their development toolchain so that it works on Windows and/or Linux or selling console-style developer kits.

I find the latter options unrealistic.

--
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Re:FUD by Culture20 · 2010-06-23 05:31 · Score: 1

What does that have to do with this? You cited a completely unrelated situation where something was called FUD, and that's supposed to mean this story submission isn't FUD?
Not completely unrelated. GP was talking about iPads (built by Apple), and how the speculation was that they would run iPhone OS and be locked down as tight as iPhones, despite being what people (even Apple fanbois) wanted: a Mac OS X (open) machine. Since Jobs and company have stated that iPads are the *future of computing*, many people are speculating that Mac OS X will eventually morph into iOSX. fanbois are crying "FUD! FUD! Apple would never lock us out of our computers!" In three to five years, Macs will be classified as "iOS development devices" and the fanbois will cheer, pat themselves on the back and say: "we were right! The devices are locked tight, but they never locked us out of computers. Computers are so 'Aughties' anyway."

It's 2010, and Slashdotters still obsess over DRM and things being "locked down." The world just does not care. It's only idealistic Slashdot posters who think it's some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives.
And only idealistic environmentalists think pollution is some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives, and only government officials think terrorism is some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives, and only RIAA thinks that piracy is some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives, and only MADD members think drunk driving is some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives, and only leprechauns think gold theft is some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives, and only Chris Mathews thinks that internet predators are some huge deal that's affecting everybody's lives. Some of these people are right, even when other people don't care.
Re:FUD by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 07:04 · Score: 0

I don't spend as much time reading tech discussion forums as I used to, but I totally missed these claims. I'm an Apple Fan, and I knew it'd be locked down.
Citation needed, methinks.

Probably not by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2010-06-23 01:10 · Score: 1

I suspect the next few OSX and iOS revisions to start merging and sharing APIs, and maybe OSX will go away, but it won't be replaced by iOS.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:Probably not by TheKidWho · 2010-06-23 01:18 · Score: 1

Yes, this would be interesting. It might even be nice to be able to use certain iOS apps on OS X since many of them are very useful utilities.
Re:Probably not by AHuxley · 2010-06-23 01:40 · Score: 1

As the usability, complexity and programability of Apple moved to the one button mouse of the Macintosh..
so will the usability and programability of Macintosh move to the one touch of a 32 in glossy screen.
Buy the needed app with the functionality you wanted or thought you wanted and rub the screen.
Relive the first Mac OS days but with many more apps and in full true retina color.
Buy, touch, type, touch, buy, touch, type .. sleep... touch, type, touch, buy ... work ... touch, type, touch, buy ... sleep ...zero
Over time you will grow to understand multi-touch interface in more detail and become an expert Apple user.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:Probably not by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 01:44 · Score: 2, Insightful

They already share APIs - iOS is heavily based on OS X with a touch UI on top.
This article is just total FUD. It's the same sort of "analysis" as that story from a couple of months ago how Apple "will definitely" move to an App Store model for OS X. There's just no sense in it at all, given the direction that Apple are taking OS X.
They forked OS X, for want of a better term, and created iPhone OS (now iOS), and continued development on OS X itself. There is nothing to suggest they will merge the two again. Why suddenly cut out the creative suite, office, other third party pro apps, games, the new Steam client (finally games are becoming top tier)? There's just no compelling business reason to move to iOS on the desktop; and ultimately Apple are in this business to make money.
Re:Probably not by tepples · 2010-06-23 02:10 · Score: 1

There's just no compelling business reason to move to iOS on the desktop
That's what critics originally said about the laptop. But then Apple brought out an iOS device instead of a netbook.
Re:Probably not by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 02:11 · Score: 1

So the iPad is a laptop?
Re:Probably not by tepples · 2010-06-23 02:21 · Score: 1

The iPad itself is not a netbook (low-end laptop), but it attracts users who would have otherwise bought a netbook. The fear here is that Apple will gradually add features to the iPad to the point where it can be used as a primary laptop, then stop selling the MacBook.
Re:Probably not by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 02:40 · Score: 1

No, the Macbook will stay where it is (it is a huge, huge seller). The Air might go away though, which is the main area that the iPad is cutting into.
Re:Probably not by Jesus_666 · 2010-06-23 05:05 · Score: 1

Aren't netbooks a particularly thin-margin sector? It makes more sense for Apple to expand their wildly popular i(Phone)OS device range with a UMPC than to enter a hotly-contested market where a low price is paramount. Apple do "decent price/performance ratio" but they don't do "cheap".

--
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)

Consumers are dumb! by samsonov · 2010-06-23 01:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think the mentality of most home users are that they want Apple to tell them what apps can run on their device(s). Let's hope the power users talk some sense into Apple. I for one don't like the idea of only being able to consume apps that are published via the App Store...

--
"You killed my yogurt!" --Fred Fredburger

Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:12 · Score: 0, Interesting

It seems Apple is now the new Microsoft / IBM / Conservative / Christian. They build products that are popluar, sell well, and work, but it seems some people have to find fault with that. So sad. I guess that is why the US seems hell bent ditching what made it great (hard work, great products, marriage between a Man and Women) and running to socialism that has a 100% proven track record of failure. Maybe Steve will pull a Galt and close Apple down and let the industry sell junk.

Re:Apple by UnknowingFool · 2010-06-23 01:26 · Score: 1

Yes let's take speculation from a group of people not associated with nor represent Apple and twist their musings into an absolute truth. If you read the article, developers are guessing that Apple would introduce more iOS interfaces into OS X than completely changing the OS.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.

cisco? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:13 · Score: 0

why is a cisco tag in this story? this ios have nothing to do with cisco ios

Deus Ex Macintosh by Darric · 2010-06-23 01:13 · Score: 2, Funny

Will this be like when IcarOS and DaedalOS merged into HeliOS?

Re:Deus Ex Macintosh by AnotherShep · 2010-06-23 03:49 · Score: 1

No, in this case people might actually care.

More Apple stories, please! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:13 · Score: 1, Insightful

It's been 5 or 10 seconds since the latest one was posted.

Xcode without the certificate tax? by tepples · 2010-06-23 01:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

I'd bet that half of the people reading this Slashdot story are mostly concerned about one feature: the ability to use Xcode and distribute what you make without starting a company and paying $99 per year to Apple. If Mac OS X loses this, watch GNUstep (Free clone of Cocoa's predecessor) suddenly attract a boost in activity.

Re:Xcode without the certificate tax? by betterunixthanunix · 2010-06-23 01:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

"If Mac OS X loses this, watch GNUstep (Free clone of Cocoa's predecessor) suddenly attract a boost in activity."

A boost, perhaps, but nothing that would even register on Apple's radar.

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:Xcode without the certificate tax? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 05:11 · Score: 0

@Tepples
Developing for OS X and iOS does not require a company to be formed. It's why iPhone development is more successful than Verizon's BREW system. That and the fact the Verzion kept 75% of the money per app.
Re:Xcode without the certificate tax? by BitZtream · 2010-06-23 05:46 · Score: 2, Interesting

Why would that happen? People who buy Macs can afford the $99/year, why would they buy a mac then subject themselves to a crappier dev library and documentation rather than just paying $100 for the real thing?
You gotta stop thinking like people who buy Apple devices are poor and trying to get everything they can for 'free'. Its not Linux. Mac people actually just pay for stuff.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:Xcode without the certificate tax? by tepples · 2010-06-23 05:59 · Score: 1

People who buy Macs can afford the $99/year, why would they buy a mac then subject themselves to a crappier dev library and documentation rather than just paying $100 for the real thing?
I apologize for being unclear. If Apple were to require Mac users to pay $99 per year in order to run apps that Apple has not approved, a lot of people who currently use a Mac would switch to something other than a Mac.
Re:Xcode without the certificate tax? by Culture20 · 2010-06-23 06:23 · Score: 1

You gotta stop thinking like people who buy Apple devices are poor and trying to get everything they can for 'free'. Its not Linux. Mac people actually just pay for stuff.
Elitist much?
Re:Xcode without the certificate tax? by Spaseboy · 2010-06-23 07:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

I guess maybe that's true if you're planning on releasing an app for free, which even that can be done with a profit on iOS thanks to iAd and other in-app ads. The iOS gold-rush has not even come close to seeing its peak, with a relatively low market penetration compared to other platforms.

I've used Slashdot since the 90's and there's always been this whole concept that shareware devs deserve to be paid. So now, basically all shareware-type apps on a platform are making mad money and people are screaming because apple rejects like, 2% or something?

If you have a good idea and you can program decently enough that your app won't crash in basically a single-tasking environment, buy a Mac, pay an extra $99 and get rich. Um, where's the downside? Because you're a 40 year old dev used to paying hundreds for other IDE's and making no money and now a 14 year old has made more in a few months than your lifetime earnings? Buck up.

--
"I don't want more choice, I just want nicer things!"
-Jennifer Saunders as Edina Monsoon

pure flamebait by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

My how slashdot has fallen. Pandering to the anti-apple zealots so blatantly? Why do all of my favorite sites(/.,ars,reddit) seem to be declining in quality so rapidly, and in unison? I am beyond disappointed. A new low for slashdot.

Re:pure flamebait by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:17 · Score: 0

My how slashdot has fallen. Pandering to the anti-apple zealots so blatantly? Why do all of my favorite sites(/.,ars,reddit) seem to be declining in quality so rapidly, and in unison? I am beyond disappointed. A new low for slashdot.
I take it you liked it better when it was mostly blatantly pandering to the anti-Microsoft zealots in exactly same way?
Re:pure flamebait by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:31 · Score: 0

Maybe because the alternative is that you are the one living in a bubble of delusion and that's too scary a prospect to face? I guess you were also one of the ones saying "phones don't need multitasking" and "the iPad will be a fully functioning tablet computer" before Apple pulled the rug on you as well?
Re:pure flamebait by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2010-06-23 07:32 · Score: 1

Why do all of my favorite sites(/.,ars,reddit) seem to be declining in quality so rapidly, and in unison?
As of the time I posted this, this article has 325 comments. Slashdot is ad-driven. Us noisy fanboys are Slashdot's gravy train.

--

"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

WTF by .tekrox · 2010-06-23 01:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

Who the hell dreams up this crap...?

Steve and the cat he's petting are pleased by elrous0 · 2010-06-23 01:15 · Score: 0

In a statement released today, Steve Jobs said "You will bow down before me, world...no matter that it takes an eternity! YOU WILL BOW DOWN BEFORE ME!!"

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.

Re:Steve and the cat he's petting are pleased by L4t3r4lu5 · 2010-06-23 02:40 · Score: 1

Steve Jobs would not be an evil mastermind who sat in a chair and stroked a pet. He'd be the kind who flew through the air, blowing stuff up with lasers coming out of his nostrils, but not letting anyone know because of the distortion field.

If anything, he'd be more like Zod. And people would be told to kneel before him, not bow.

I mean hey, he even looks like Zod!

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/

Holy crap, it's real! by bemymonkey · 2010-06-23 01:16 · Score: 1

I was going to make a joke about the change to the name "iOS" meaning that iMacs will also run it on one of the last Apple articles... never thought it would come true. :|

Then again, I'm not a Mac user, so meh... :p

Re:Holy crap, it's real! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:27 · Score: 0

mother-may-iOS

Misleading summary by adamwright · 2010-06-23 01:16 · Score: 5, Interesting

The article discusses how developers expect iOS and OS X to merge from an API perspective - cross pollination between the developments (mostly from iOS to OS X) will lead to a unified development environment. This is *not* the same as the DRM/App Store, which is just the distribution method chosen for the iPhone and iPad. There's nothing technical about this - it's a business choice to make this the sole channel, one that doesn't seem to make sense for desktop computing, and one that I doubt they'd pursue.

Whilst I expect an App Store on the Mac, I would be shocked if it were the only distribution method available. In truth, I suspect we'll see a situation similar to downloading apps via Safari now - the first run, you get a warning about possible unsafe code, you tell it you're fine with that, and then everything carries on as normal. The Mac still represents a vast chunk of their revenue - only marginally less than iPhone in terms of income, and probably more in terms of profit. They're not going to kill a fully functioning golden goose, though I do expect some experimentation with it.

This experimentation is long overdue. For most people, something much simpler than a full desktop would be ideal - my iPad passes my parental approval filter far more than their desktop computer, the complexity of which causes more trouble than benefit. Now, the iPad is *not* a suitable desktop replacement - using my parents as an example again, there's no really useful document processing, no ability to hook up their TomTom, no easy printing. However, I can certainly see some hybrid iMac/iPad (or Android setup, I don't care who makes it) being a *much* better proposition for them than buying another desktop of the current ilk - be it Windows, Mac or Linux.

Re:Misleading summary by betterunixthanunix · 2010-06-23 01:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

"it's a business choice to make this the sole channel, one that doesn't seem to make sense for desktop computing, and one that I doubt they'd pursue."

Well hang on...why wouldn't the walled garden work for desktop applications? Users do not seem to mind it for the iPad, which is really a tablet computer (I am sure someone will disagree with me, since it is not "marketed" as one), nor do users seem to mind it for video game consoles, nor for a certain large web community. We are already hearing people saying that traditional desktops are for "serious work," not for "consumers."

So why not? Why not have Apple impose an "approval" process for Mac OS X desktop applications? I see no reason why Apple could not create a spectrum of computers -- iPads at one end, and high end workstations at the other, with various levels of application approval processes needed. In that world, you would have to pay thousands of dollars for a top of the line Power Mac workstation to be able to install "unauthorized" applications; a "consumer level" notebook would require an extra payment for "unlocking" to install those applications (or perhaps you would have to "upgrade" to another version of Mac OS); and an iPad would have no options for unapproved programs.

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:Misleading summary by am+2k · 2010-06-23 01:45 · Score: 1

Now, the iPad is *not* a suitable desktop replacement [...] there's no really useful document processing
There's Pages. That should be enough for all of the basic needs. You'll probably have to hook up a real keyboard though.

no ability to hook up their TomTom
TomTom offers a fully-featured iPhone app, so no need to hook anything up.

no easy printing
Sure there is one way. ;)
Re:Misleading summary by kimble3 · 2010-06-23 02:12 · Score: 1

I cant remember when/where it was, but Steve Jobs has publicly stated that their will be no App Store for the Mac and he was pretty emphatic about it too...
Re:Misleading summary by Dog-Cow · 2010-06-23 02:27 · Score: 2, Informative

The (current) iPad does not have a GPS receiver.
Re:Misleading summary by am+2k · 2010-06-23 02:35 · Score: 1

Apple's spec page disagrees (for the 3G model), but what do they know?
Re:Misleading summary by Space+cowboy · 2010-06-23 02:46 · Score: 1

Mine does. As does every 3G-enabled iPad.

Simon

--
Physicists get Hadrons!
Re:Misleading summary by Cajun+Hell · 2010-06-23 02:56 · Score: 1

Well hang on...why wouldn't the walled garden work for desktop applications? Users do not seem to mind it for the iPad,

Because deep down, those users are telling themselves, "It's ok that this thing sucks, it's just a mobile, it's 'not a personal computer' and I still have my personal computer for whenever I need more power and flexibility."

--
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Re:Misleading summary by adamwright · 2010-06-23 03:11 · Score: 1

Well, what you suggest is possible. My feeling that it's unlikely to happen are based on inertia of expectations. People have preconceived ideas of how a desktop computer should work, and these differ from mobile phones. Overcoming this sense of "It's not working right", especially with peoples libraries of existing software, will be almost impossible.
This doesn't mean that a new class of machine between an iPad and a Mac couldn't be created - an entry on your spectrum, if you like - where app approval is required. When you create a new class of device, you get to set the expectations. The closer you get to a extant "slot" in peoples minds though, the more the inertial drag of pre-existing conceptions will narrow the choices you can impose on people before they rebel. Incidentally, I suspect this is why everyone, including myself, still sees the iPhone as phenomenally free - it's a mobile phone, so I don't judge it against my Macs or other desktops - I judge it against my other phones. Perhaps, in time, peoples expectations will be changed so that the iOS app approval process seems terribly restrictive. This will be an interesting one to watch, from a sociological perspective.
Re:Misleading summary by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

Because deep down, those users are telling themselves, "It's ok that this thing sucks, it's just a mobile, it's 'not a personal computer' and I still have my personal computer for whenever I need more power and flexibility."
Previously you could say the same thing for iPhone vs other stuff - "it's just a cellphone, it's not really a computer". But now iPad came out, and it's "just a slate, not really a computer" - but notice how the dividing line has crept up.
This kind of division is entirely subjective, and, furthermore, easily manipulated - and Apple is really, really good at marketing. If they release a locked-down desktop and call it, say, "entertainment hub", I bet you'll see the same "not a computer" arguments applied to that. And users will buy it in droves, and will be quite happy with it, because it really does pretty much everything they need to do (or, at least, think that they need to do). So, again - why not?
Re:Misleading summary by Apple+Acolyte · 2010-06-23 15:01 · Score: 1

I got to the conversation late (and was disgusted by that moronic early troll post that got +5ed), but first of all Jobs already confirmed in one his terse personal email replies that the Mac is not being phased out or replaced by the iOS. Yes, it's troubling that nearly all the focus at this year's WWDC was on the iPlatforms and that there weren't even any design awards given to Mac developers. But Apple has heard that people were disappointed by that, so I expect to see a different setup in the future that is more respectful of the Mac platform.

Some of the lower end Mac models like the MacBook may get replaced by iPad-like successors in the future, but Apple would be quite dumb indeed to kill the Mac. A touch sensitive AIO desktop like the iMac but running iOS will probably debut some time in the near future - it's only a natural progression of the concept. But to go from assuming that to thinking the entire Mac line will be replaced is alarmist or stupid or both. Mac OS X can't be hybridized with iOS to create a limited computing environment because the vast majority of Mac users would balk at that prospect and switch to Windows immediately. You can't take a general computing platform and morph into a limited computing platform without much of that platform's user base revolting. Apple isn't dumb (even though it acts like it sometimes) - the company knows that Windows 7 is a very respectable release and that people who demand regular PCs aren't going to accept an iPlatform replacement instead.

Everyone needs Get a Grip. Btw, the post below me asks where Mac applications will be developed if Mac OS X and the iOS were to merge. If such an unlikely scenario were to occur, apps would be developed on that new platform. The better observation to make is, if Apple ports its iOS development tools to Windows then and only then could we say with certainty that the Mac would be on the way out. Right now the iOS is dependent on Mac OS X development. If that changes in the future all bets are off.

--
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so

And if they do that by wiredog · 2010-06-23 01:18 · Score: 4, Interesting

what will we develop mac applications on? Windows boxes?

--

Best Slashdot Co

Re:And if they do that by iammani · 2010-06-23 01:28 · Score: 1

I suppose a developers version would be available (if this was ever going to happen)
Re:And if they do that by AHuxley · 2010-06-23 01:50 · Score: 1

Apple will sell you a Mac Mini Pro or Mac Pro.
You will then rent a closed network only version of OS X that will allow you to code and be creative for the current generation of idevices. Then upload your app for approval when done.
If your software is approved by Apple, it will join the app store.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:And if they do that by mjwx · 2010-06-23 02:50 · Score: 1

what will we develop mac applications on? Windows boxes?
IOS development already requires an OS X Mac which is includes the IDE. It would not be a stretch of the imagination for this IDE to be turned into iDevelop which is included with desktop and laptop versions of IOS. Apple does not need an x86-64 development environment for developing IOS applications, it just needs a development environment. This can easily be an environment running on an ARM based Imac or Macbook running IOS.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:And if they do that by kikito · 2010-06-23 03:23 · Score: 1

You will have to pass the Apple Developer Approval program before being allowed to know that.

Nothing to see here.. by Rytr23 · 2010-06-23 01:18 · Score: 2, Informative

Simply garbage, which is not surprising considering the source. That is all.

--
So many injustices..so little time..

Re:Nothing to see here.. by Steauengeglase · 2010-06-23 01:40 · Score: 1

The summary or TFA?

Apple is dead, long live Apple! by thijsh · 2010-06-23 01:19 · Score: 1

What you forgot to mention is that there are billions of people who love Apple's 'walled garden' (perhaps 'fenced pasture' would be a better suited term for a prison for a content flock of sheep). It's no longer a niche brand... shouting 'imminent demise' is a bit of early drama...

Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by clang_jangle · 2010-06-23 01:27 · Score: 1

So while for you it might be "a prison" perhaps for Apple's happy customers it's a "playground". Really, just buy what you like and stop worrying about what other people are buying. It's supposed to be all about choice, remember ?

--
Caveat Utilitor
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:29 · Score: 0

Billions?
Sure! 0.000000001 Billions!
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by thijsh · 2010-06-23 01:42 · Score: 1

Yes! Hence the term 'fenced pasture', it seemed appropriately lesser than a 'walled garden' (jumping over the fence is always an option). The term 'prison' only applies to the digital restrictions, software and music for example which are locked up pretty good.

My point is that there is a valid business for people who don't give a fuck about these digital restrictions and it's a valid choice if you don't. I have no predisposition here, I care equally less for the choice of people choosing Apple as they care for it...
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:00 · Score: 0

"It's All About Choice(TM)" - yeah, that should be Apple's new ironic marketing slogan!
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by delinear · 2010-06-23 02:05 · Score: 1

If it's all about choice, why are you advocating walled gardens? Or can't Apple offer the choice of an alternative phone OS without walling their users in?
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Hijacked+Public · 2010-06-23 02:17 · Score: 1

Because they choose not to?

--
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:22 · Score: 0

Whoosh...

Guess some people only understand "choice" when they agree with all choices.
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by mdwh2 · 2010-06-23 02:28 · Score: 1

The same argument applies to all walled gardens - whether it's Facebook, DRM, or whatever.
Clearly, being a walled garden is entirely separate to how many people buy something or not. I don't see how that means the term is incorrect. Some people like walled gardens, after all...
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by daveime · 2010-06-23 02:46 · Score: 1

Fenced Pasture for all the iSheeple. Perfect, just perfect.
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Zelgadiss · 2010-06-23 03:05 · Score: 1

There won't be a choice if iOS ends up a dominating as Windows.
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by DrgnDancer · 2010-06-23 03:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

He's not. He's saying that you have a choice: to buy or not buy an iDevice. He, like me, is tired of hearing "it's all about choice" from people who then turn around and say, "of course if you chose Apple you are an evil mutant fanboi hypocrite that I shall never, ever shut up about." My *choice* to buy an iPhone was just that. At the moment I'm happy with the *choice*, if that changes I can *choose* to go buy and Android phone. Therefore no *choices* have been taken away from me at all.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by insertwackynamehere · 2010-06-23 04:37 · Score: 1

People who don't understand computers like I do are sheep. BRIDGIN THE GAP <("<)
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by insertwackynamehere · 2010-06-23 04:40 · Score: 1

FUCK I wish I hadn't posted here already, I was going to mod this insightful and whoever modded it flamebait can go take their Loonix fueled spergmodding and commit suicide :)
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by thijsh · 2010-06-23 04:50 · Score: 1

People in general are sheep, and - to put it bluntly - don't give a fuck about shit. Now get off my lawn!
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Scoth · 2010-06-23 09:04 · Score: 1

From now on, I'm going to refer to jailbreaking as "Fencejumping".
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 11:42 · Score: 1

So you mean right now, with Windows as dominant as it is, I cannot get a Linux box, a Mac box, an Android phone, or phone running any other OS, because Windows is so dominant?
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by the_B0fh · 2010-06-23 17:08 · Score: 1

just wanted to check - you do realize you can buy DRM free music from itunes store, right?
and - just to be clear, who did you think forced apple to implement drm on music, RIAA, or Apple itself?
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by thijsh · 2010-06-23 18:15 · Score: 1

Yes, and yes. But I have other problems with iTunes (or Quicktime). I'd rather download MP3's from other sites that offer it too... Most have better quality, price and no crappy software needed.

But to be fair, if the RIAA hadn't demanded the DRM Apple would most likely 'offer' it themselves, they have a clear advantage by only letting people play their tracks in iTunes and on their iPods... The mentality that a user does not own his hardware/software/media fits Apple like a glove.
Re:Apple is dead, long live Apple! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 23:49 · Score: 0

It's true -- you wouldn't believe the hoops I had to jump through to get a FOSS OS!

Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by cgenman · 2010-06-23 01:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

"It doesn't make sense for them to be developing two of everything, one good, one not as good--two calendars, two address books--it's got to merge somehow."

I can't imagine how a calendar developed for a 2" touchscreen could have the same interface as a calendar developed for a 21" keyboard-and-mouse, and not have it be terrible. Similarly, a copy of Word on the iPhone and a copy of Word on a PC would necessarily need to have very different interfaces... You can't get hover tips on a touchscreen, people don't gesture with keyboards, mice aren't multitouch, and iPhone screens are tiny.

The idea that you can write one app and have it work on such disparate devices shows a fundamental lack of understanding of good design.

--
The ______ Agenda

Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:39 · Score: 0

mice aren't multitouch,
They are now.
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by Graff · 2010-06-23 03:08 · Score: 1

I can't imagine how a calendar developed for a 2" touchscreen could have the same interface as a calendar developed for a 21" keyboard-and-mouse, and not have it be terrible. Similarly, a copy of Word on the iPhone and a copy of Word on a PC would necessarily need to have very different interfaces... You can't get hover tips on a touchscreen, people don't gesture with keyboards, mice aren't multitouch, and iPhone screens are tiny.
Which is exactly why Apple based all of its APIs, both iOS and Mac OS, around the Model-View-Controller (MVC) design pattern. This way you can have your view logic separate from your model and controller logic and you can customize your view based on the device it is presented upon. It allows you to easily re-use your code between different devices and you can develop views specifically optimized to be shown on a certain type of device.
Since both iOS and Mac OS are Cocoa they share almost all of the same API with a couple of differences mostly related to the user interface. It's trivial to have a project with a target for iOS and a target for Mac OS that share the same model and controller code but that have different view code optimized for the target device.

--
Sapere aude!
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:18 · Score: 0

"mice aren't multitouch"
yes they are http://www.apple.com/magicmouse/
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by Gulthek · 2010-06-23 03:20 · Score: 1

Maybe I'm coming at this from too much of a web developer's perspective, but it sure seems to be that the *display* of an application is a very different thing than the *model* of the application. Surely in the world of GUI application development the UI isn't hardcoded to the model?
I can write a web application that uses the same backend, with widely disparate frontends depending on the accessing device or the specific context requested by the client (i.e. they want to display the desktop view on their phone or vice versa).
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by hiroko · 2010-06-23 03:38 · Score: 1

"...could have the same interface as a calendar developed for a 21" keyboard-and-mouse"

That's a big mouse.

--
Just because you can't, doesn't mean you shouldn't.
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by spire3661 · 2010-06-23 03:42 · Score: 1

Cant you write a backend/frontend approach and toss relevant UIs at whatever device is accessing? I dont see why this would be incredibly difficult. A calendar is a calendar, it schedules shit. Get a backend scheduler, and then give it hooks for multiple UIs. UIs are not applications, and there is no reason why we cant code applications to work in multiple environments, at least for basic stuff like a calendar. The idea that you cant separate operating code from the UI shows a fundamental lack of understanding of whats possible.

--
Good-bye
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by Pherlin · 2010-06-23 04:21 · Score: 1

What? Threatening to beat a user with my keyboard is a gesture... right?
Right?
Re:Doesn't make sense to develop 2? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 05:59 · Score: 0

People at Nokia would disagree.
UI means User Interface, not the entire program.

Palladium 2.0 by 0xdeadbeef · 2010-06-23 01:23 · Score: 1

What, did you think because the actors changed the play would be different?

Re:Palladium 2.0 by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:39 · Score: 1

It's not really Palladium - all the fuss about strong hardware protection etc proved to be meaningless, but also unneeded. Why bother, if the relatively primitive protection as e.g. implemented on iPhone/iPad is enough of a deterrent for 95% of users out there, so long as it's built from ground up (i.e. on OS level)? The remaining 5% can jailbreak all they want, and no-one will care.

One part fact, one part FUD by Kjella · 2010-06-23 01:25 · Score: 1

a certain expectation that iOS and MacOS will merge, leading to a single DRM locked OS on your MacBook and your iPad.

Without a doubt, Apple will try to make them more similar to develop for. This is plain obvious and the same like for example the Qt toolkit has been adding multitouch support while still being a Win/Mac/Linux GUI toolkit. Or Microsoft making Windows and Xbox360 similar to develop for, if you want another example. This is clearly beneficial both for developer time, a consistent user experience, creating reusable code and more.

The other part, does the DRM lockdown come to OS X? Well, that's not really a related question, it'd be fairly easy to lock down OS X to only run signed software and quite easy to make a version of iOS that doesn't. This is more a matter of what Apple can get away with marketwise, with software developers, with anti-trust regulation than any technical issue. But there's no doubt that Apple at the moment is warming up the frog, by showing that yes consumers will take a locked down platform.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

Apps will disappear by kylant · 2010-06-23 01:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

I believe that apps on mobile phones are a transitory phenomenon. They are/were necessary to make content available on the relatively small screens and to implement touch input (as most websites at the time were built for mouse input). The functionalities of most apps these days can be implemented as websites (HTML, Ajax, ...) and this will be the best solution to fix the compatibility problem (different apps for Android, iOS, Symbian, Windows Phone 7 (?), Bada (?),...) and to avoid vendor lock-in. Will we really need an app to access news content? Will the NYT really build and maintain apps for 4 or more different platforms? I believe what we need are properly coded websites that adapt to different screen sizes and input devices.

There will probably be a market for high-end applications on your phone (navigation?, media player?) but honestly, how many of those are on your phone?

Re:Apps will disappear by nyctopterus · 2010-06-23 02:02 · Score: 2, Informative

Nearly all the apps on my iPod touch are games. And no, you cannot currently do what they do this with HTML5 and Javascript (or, at least, they would be very slow to write and have terrible performance).
Re:Apps will disappear by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:11 · Score: 0

The functionalities of most apps these days can be implemented as websites
I just couldn't disagree more. When I look at the things I do on my personal computer, I'll admit I spend a lot of time in my web browser, but there is so much I'm doing outside of it too. And it's not just because no one has made a website for that yet; it's that it just doesn't make sense.
Multimedia: streaming over internet will probably never match reading from local disk or nearby (LAN) flleserver. Compare watching Youtube or hulu to watching that 12 Gigabyte .mkv movie file you torrented. It's not in the same league. 10 years from now, it still won't be in the same league. There's only so much airspace bandwidth. For mobiles, that means you're going to need local storage, filled up either by a cable when the thing is sitting in its charger, or at least time-shifted (3 days to torrent it, 2 hours to watch it, so you need a torrent app).
Personal communication: you've got to have local storage for the crypto keys. This is why gmail etc still don't stand up to dedicated email clients. And we have chat apps, VoIP software, etc. For many people, websites can't ever replace these things.
Games: similar to multimedia, you just can't render things remotely and then shove frames to a screen over a WAN. Or even if you have a fast enough WAN, it's still just technologically dumb and wasteful.
And there will be a lot more than that, as people's expectations of their mobiles increase. Look at every app on your desktop computer which ends up not fitting into a web scenario very well. Some day, you're going to want that app on your mobile. If the mobile can't run apps, then you're fucked. Apps aren't going away.
Re:Apps will disappear by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 04:24 · Score: 0

Check out Apple's in-house iPhone web app framework, PastryKit (http://daringfireball.net/misc/2009/12/user_guide_demos).
Re:Apps will disappear by kylant · 2010-06-23 04:41 · Score: 1

I just couldn't disagree more. When I look at the things I do on my personal computer, I'll admit I spend a lot of time in my web browser, but there is so much I'm doing outside of it too. And it's not just because no one has made a website for that yet; it's that it just doesn't make sense.
I guess I haven't made myself clear then. When I'm talking about "apps" I mean the small applications that are running on mobile devices these days. I am not talking about full blown applications on your PC. This is also why I believe there is hardly any benefit in merging desktop-platforms with "app-devices".
I believe there is a difference between content-creation devices and content-consumption devices or, if you prefer, 'lean-back' and 'at your desk' devices.
There is a need for applications and we won't see Chrome-OS making PCs redundant any time soon.
Re:Apps will disappear by Just+Some+Guy · 2010-06-23 04:48 · Score: 1

I believe that apps on mobile phones are a transitory phenomenon. They are/were necessary to make content available on the relatively small screens and to implement touch input (as most websites at the time were built for mouse input).
The iOS 4 update broke the radar displays on two different weather apps I have. Living in "tornado alley", weather apps and doppler radar are pretty important pieces of daily life. When the weather radio went off last night, I tried pulling up the Weather Underground website and it redirected me to their (new?) mobile site.
Except for the initial page load time, it was every bit as nice as the standalone apps I'd been using. It has animated doppler radar, you can pinch the screen and drag it to zoom and move around, and it pretty much feels exactly like a native app. If this is what the future of web applications has in store, I'd have to agree with you completely.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?

Oh, come on! by salgiza · 2010-06-23 01:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

The article is about how some of the APIs (UIKit, mainly) in iOS are probably going to be included in future versions of MacOSX, and suddenly the summary is about MacOSX becoming a big iPhone full of DRM! Slashdot: where not even the editors bother to read the articles! (Either that, or someone hates Apple too much...)

Re:Oh, come on! by schnablebg · 2010-06-23 01:31 · Score: 1

Mod parent up. Summary is plain-wrong.
Re:Oh, come on! by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 01:52 · Score: 1

It's a troll summary about Apple - no change there. Just par for the course.

You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by gig · 2010-06-23 01:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

The main difference between Mac OS and iOS is you can't code on iOS. It's partly a security feature and partly an anti-complexity feature. iOS is for a non-coding approach to all tasks. You may not know this, but a Photoshop pro writes a ton of code. The home user working with their photos doesn't need to.

Another feature of iOS is no custom drivers. The USB audio interfaces that work with iOS are the "class compliant" ones that work with the system's universal driver. This provides stability and ease of use, but it limits the quality to consumer-quality 16/44 stereo. Audio pros still need a system to hook on an 8 channel 24/192 interface. OS X has a pro audio subsystem the likes of which you can't find anywhere else. Are we going to just abandon that and tell music producers to use toy Windows? The iPod app on iOS is filled up by people using Mac OS.

The mouse is going away, no doubt. But you will still have a consumer OS and a pro OS. Web developers need Apache and Ruby and PHP to make websites for iOS users, movie makers and graphic artists need to code workflows, and app developers need to code apps and Apple needs to code OS X itself. The idea that Mac OS can go away is just so fucking stupid and ignorant and disrespectful when you consider how much of our fucking culture is made on Macs.

Anyone who thinks there is no longer a need for Mac OS is an iPad user. Get an iPad ASAP and enjoy! STFU about Mac OS otherwise. You probably don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by discord5 · 2010-06-23 02:34 · Score: 1

This provides stability and ease of use, but it limits the quality to consumer-quality 16/44 stereo. Audio pros still need a system to hook on an 8 channel 24/192 interface.
Pardon my ignorance, but what is the point of a 192KHz sampling rate? The maximum frequency you can push through that is 96Khz, which is way above human hearing. In fact, the human hearing range is between 20Hz and 20KHz, so even 44KHz sampling rate should be more than enough. Or am I missing something important?

The mouse is going away, no doubt
From my cold dead hands, sir!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by A+Friendly+Troll · 2010-06-23 02:43 · Score: 1

Audio pros still need a system to hook on an 8 channel 24/192 interface. OS X has a pro audio subsystem the likes of which you can't find anywhere else. Are we going to just abandon that and tell music producers to use toy Windows?
You will have a very hard time finding music producers who *don't* use Windows (I have personally never met one). It's not the nineties anymore. All major DAW software and hardware runs on both operating systems, but the vast majority of VSTs are Windows-specific, and that settles the deal.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 02:57 · Score: 1

Sampling rate is a measure of the number of data points per unit time, rather than a description of the analog signal frequency.
44.1k is 44,100 data points per second, 192k is 192,000 points in the same time interval - giving you a more accurate representation of an analog wave.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by jbeach · 2010-06-23 03:13 · Score: 1

The producer I know has both Mac and PC systems in case he needs either, due to incoming formats from musicians.

He's also facing a bit of a problem from Macs: new Mac software is requiring new Mac hardware, which in turn won't fit the perfectly-fine hardware DSP cards he spent a lot of money acquiring.

I'd recommend a hackintosh for him, but I don't know of any uniformly easy target boxes for a motherboard that might fit his older cards...

--
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Graff · 2010-06-23 03:21 · Score: 1

The main difference between Mac OS and iOS is you can't code on iOS. It's partly a security feature and partly an anti-complexity feature. iOS is for a non-coding approach to all tasks. You may not know this, but a Photoshop pro writes a ton of code. The home user working with their photos doesn't need to.
Huh? This makes no sense at all. Yes, Apple toyed with the idea of having no interpreted code in iOS 4 but they relaxed that restriction before it even came out of beta. You can now use interpreted code, such as LUA, in your apps.
There is absolutely no restriction in the iOS API itself that doesn't let you "code on iOS", it was a prohibition against your app being sold in the App Store and it was designed to stop people from subverting Apple's API by writing their program in another language with a thin translation layer on top. If Apple went ahead with the original restriction it would have been very heavy-handed, the current rules are much more reasonable.

Another feature of iOS is no custom drivers. The USB audio interfaces that work with iOS are the "class compliant" ones that work with the system's universal driver.
iOS can certainly have custom drivers if they needed it, its core is still Darwin. The thing is that right now iOS is only used on closed systems like the iPhone and the iPad. There's not much need to have a custom driver for a device that really can't have additional hardware installed on it. As such, Apple doesn't provide a way to install any custom drivers but you can certainly jailbreak your device and add custom drivers galore if you want to.

--
Sapere aude!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Graff · 2010-06-23 03:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the point of a 192KHz sampling rate? The maximum frequency you can push through that is 96Khz, which is way above human hearing. In fact, the human hearing range is between 20Hz and 20KHz, so even 44KHz sampling rate should be more than enough. Or am I missing something important?
A lot of people don't really understand how to apply the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem and so they look at the "jaggy" sampled waveform and think that it will sound horrible if it is output. It's true that if you output the samples directly then you are going to hear artifacts but if you apply the Whittaker-Shannon interpolation formula then you get back the original waveforms and the output will sound nearly identical to the original.
Of course this is all best-case and since we live in the real world with imperfect low-pass filters and non-infinite past and future data we will still get artifacts if we sample at the minimum rate. That's (part of) the reason why we sample at 44.1 kHz instead of 40 kHz, to allow some overhead to account for these non-ideal factors. You absolutely do NOT need to sample at 192 kHz, if you do you are just wasting storage space on your digital media. I believe the default for a DAT is 48 kHz and that's pretty much the maximum you should ever use.
That is, unless you are doing recordings for bats and dogs to listen to...

--
Sapere aude!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Gazoogleheimer · 2010-06-23 03:47 · Score: 1

Creative multimedia software isn't locked to that operating system... ...but otherwise you have some very good points (well, other than that whole 'mouse is going away' bit.)
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Tacvek · 2010-06-23 03:47 · Score: 1

Yes, but read up on the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem which states that a signal with a maximum frequency component of F Hz, can be completely dtermined by sample at any rate which exceeds 2F.
This therom is completely valid for only for periodic signals with infinite samples, but for real world signals at finite number of samples it is an extremely close approximation. To be safe it is common to add about 10% to the doubled frequency. At that point the errors of the sound system in recreating the sound should outweigh the error from the approximation except in contrived signals.
Obviously sampling a signal with a frequency component greater than half the sampling frequency can be problematic, especially if those frequencies were high amplitude, but again in practice this is generally not much of an issue, and a simple analog lowpass filter can alleviate the issue.
So in total while a 192kHz sampling rate will result in an output waveform closer to the original than a 44.1kHz sampling rate, it will not actually make much difference in practice.
Now using 24/44.1kHz rather than 16/44.1kHz I could understand since those extra bits for encoding each sample could make quite a bit of difference. Of course I'm comparing uncompressed wave files there. Lossy compression algorithms might just kill off that difference.

--
Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by TeknoHog · 2010-06-23 04:08 · Score: 1

Sampling rate is a measure of the number of data points per unit time, rather than a description of the analog signal frequency.
44.1k is 44,100 data points per second, 192k is 192,000 points in the same time interval - giving you a more accurate representation of an analog wave.
Please, learn your Nyquist before commenting on this topic.
One way to look at this, without going into Fourier analysis, is to think about overtones. The human hearing limit of about 20 kHz includes overtones. You cannot hear the difference between different waveforms at 20 kHz, because that would include overtones of 40 kHz, 60 kHz, etc.
However, oversampling does have its uses. It compensates for the quantization error, which is inherent when you have "infinitely many" analogue levels, and discrete digital levels. However, the effect is not so great, since doubling the samplerate is equivalent to one bit in sampling levels.

--
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by david_thornley · 2010-06-23 04:11 · Score: 1

Brush up on your signaling theory. Sampling rate is a description of the maximum analog signal frequency. If you sample at X data points per second, you can perfectly recreate all frequencies of X/2 or less. 44KHz sampling will faithfully recreate frequencies up to 22KHz, and will fail on higher frequencies. 192KHz sampling will faithfully recreate frequencies up to 96KHz, and will fail on higher frequencies.
Basically, you can break an analog wave down to its frequency components mathematically, or for that matter physically (as it's done in the human ear). From that you can arrive at mathematical results, which do in fact apply to the human ear.
There are reasons why you might want to handle higher frequencies, but for music playing any frequencies beyond the range of human hearing are unnecessary.

--
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by manicb · 2010-06-23 05:50 · Score: 1

Sorry, this is just nonsense. Logic and Digital Performer are well-regarded, and they are mac exclusive. Pro Tools is cross-platform but doesn't really like VSTs - you have to use a wrapper. Add the fact that the top commercial plug-ins (Native Instruments, Arturia etc.) are cross-platform and it really isn't that persuasive a problem. You can pick whichever platform you prefer, and people do. I'd rather have Core Audio than Synth1.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Uberbah · 2010-06-23 06:28 · Score: 1

He's also facing a bit of a problem from Macs: new Mac software is requiring new Mac hardware
I call bullshit. The requirements for proapps like Logic and Final Cut Studio are are an Intel-based Mac with 2 gigs or more ram recommended.
If your friend has expansion cards, that means either a Mac Pro or an Xserve, the only Macs with expansion slots. The Mac Pro and the Intel XServe were released in 2006. 2006 is not "new".
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by boondaburrah · 2010-06-23 06:47 · Score: 1

While it's true you can't really hear a huge difference over 48khz, it really depends on what you're doing. If you're recording audio, you should probably sample at 96khz so that when you pass it through a plugin that does something temporally with the audio, there's less artifacts. It's true those algorithms fix most stuff, but for anything that sounds "nearly identical," there will be generational loss. 192 khz is for when you feel insane (I've had these moments, but always noticed having no disk space afterwards)
It's a little bit the same way HD downscaled to SD looks better than SD that was recorded as SD originally.
For playback, you don't need 96khz, unless you have thousand-dollar speakers. (I tried some out, the difference exists). In reality the quality comes down more to how good the recording engineer was before you can blame the sample rate.
Also I was under the impression that it was 44.1khz because of the video hardware they hacked together to see what they were doing while developing CDs?
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 06:53 · Score: 0

While using 192kHz is probably overkill for normal recording and playback of music, many sound designers and other electronic sound artists slow down the samples for effects. Using a 192kHz sampling rate enables full fidelity even if slowed down to 25% of its original rate. Of course, getting a mic that'll respond to frequencies up to 96kHz might be a little difficult!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by boondaburrah · 2010-06-23 07:00 · Score: 1

I've actually never met any audio guys who *use* windows. They've all been mac users, except for this one guy who used linux (his setup was rather strange, though).
My main issue with windows is I have a hell of a time with the audio subsystem. With Mac it just works (yay CoreAudio!), Linux took minimal twiddling with Jack (still not for non-geeky types though), but Windows would always work some days and not others. There were also annoying crackles and pops that would keep showing up no matter what settings or buffer size I used. Same stuff happened on XP, Vista, and 7 - with the same hardware (that works fine on Mac and Linux) Maybe Windows audio doesn't like firewire? - that sounds bad.
It's true that most of the DAW software and such work fine on windows, but I just don't trust the audio back end. I could see it being used for mixing and non realtime-critical tasks though - when I would need those specialized plugins.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 07:11 · Score: 0

It all has to do with practical anti-aliasing filters. Let's say you're sampling at 40 kHz and your signal contains a sine wave at 23 kHz. The Nyquist frequency is 20 kHz, so that 23 kHz signal now shows up as 3 kHz. That's bad. So, you want to filter the input to the analog to digital converter so that there is very little spectral content above 20 kHz.
Now, you can develop filters that are essentially "brick-wall" filters... that is to say they will not cut any spectral content below 20 kHz but will entirely block spectral content above 20 kHz. The problem is, there is no such thing as a free lunch. The more abruptly the filter moves from pass to reject, the more spectral content close to the cutoff frequency is phase shifted. So, while you may be preventing aliasing, you're distorting the frequency content close to the cutoff. By having higher sampling rates, we can have have our low pass filters on the adc input have a more gradual effect, starting at a cutoff that is far above the range of human hearing. For example, at 196 kHz, our Nyquist frequency is 98 kHz. We could use a low pass filter with a cutoff of 40 kHz, which would roll off nicely before 98 kHz and would hardly affect any spectral content in the human hearing range.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Graff · 2010-06-23 07:30 · Score: 1

I was under the impression that it was 44.1khz because of the video hardware they hacked together to see what they were doing while developing CDs?
Yes, 44.1 kHz was a multiple of the scan rate and the active lines in a field:
Explanation of 44.1 kHz CD sampling rate
It also serves as some overhead for the Nyquist-Shannon sampling. There is no such thing as an ideal low-pass filter so you'll get some leakage of frequencies over 20k, plus the theorem states that you need infinite past and future data to 100% recover the waveform. Going to 44.1 kHz and getting 10% overhead is a good rule of thumb, although going to 48 kHz and getting 20% can't hurt.

If you're recording audio, you should probably sample at 96khz so that when you pass it through a plugin that does something temporally with the audio, there's less artifacts.
Yeah, if you're doing a lot of post-processing then going for an even higher sampling rate can help a bit but it's really diminishing returns. 96 kHz is definitely overkill and 192 kHz is just idiotic.

For playback, you don't need 96khz, unless you have thousand-dollar speakers. (I tried some out, the difference exists).
Some thousand-dollar speakers are worth the cost although there is a lot of snake oil at that price point. Caveat emptor on pricy acoustic gear! However, 96 kHz will sound almost exactly the same as 44.1 kHz no matter how expensive the speakers.
On the other hand, a bad audio player will have poorly designed digital to analog converters which won't interpolate the digital signal in such a way as to reconstruct the original signal faithfully. In that case a 44.1 kHz signal can sound worse than a 96 kHz signal because of zero-order hold, aliasing, and other factors.
This doesn't mean that expensive equipment is automatically better, just that a lot of times you get what you pay for on the extreme low-end. Most mid-range equipment does a decent job reproducing the original signal.

--
Sapere aude!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 07:41 · Score: 0

Also it is quite handy if you plan to do any audio manipulation, like pitch changing, time stretching etc. or realtime "flextime" as it is called in Logic, which is super handy if you've only got one shot at vocals but don't know what key your final needs to be in etc...
I use this all the time and you get much better results with higher sampled audio (when slowing or pitching down especially) than with 44k
That said, usually even 48Khz is enough of a freq. buffer to afford anything but the most wild-ass editing
-S
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Graff · 2010-06-23 07:42 · Score: 1

By having higher sampling rates, we can have have our low pass filters on the adc input have a more gradual effect, starting at a cutoff that is far above the range of human hearing. For example, at 196 kHz, our Nyquist frequency is 98 kHz. We could use a low pass filter with a cutoff of 40 kHz, which would roll off nicely before 98 kHz and would hardly affect any spectral content in the human hearing range.
192 kHz is still massive overkill. Nearly all humans can't hear above 20 kHz (in fact most can't hear over 16 kHz) and a 10% or 20% roll-off is pretty much just fine to cover most low pass filters. You can comfortably low-pass at 20 kHz and sample at 48 kHz (a DAT standard rate) and not notice any difference between the original signal and the sampled and reconstructed signal.

--
Sapere aude!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by A+Friendly+Troll · 2010-06-23 08:41 · Score: 1

ASIO works perfectly fine. You can get sub-millisecond latency on some systems. Firewire could be an issue there, yes... What you've encountered is uncommon.
Anyway, Windows runs everything perfectly fine. I have lots of friends who regularly perform live EDM acts on regular Windows laptops, and there have never been any problems with that, either.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 09:39 · Score: 0

[imperfect low-pass filters and non-infinite past and future data we will still get artifacts if we sample at the minimum rate. ]
That's (part of) the reason why we sample at 44.1 kHz instead of 40 kHz, to allow some overhead to account for these non-ideal factors. You absolutely do NOT need to sample at 192 kHz, if you do you are just wasting storage space on your digital media.
192/24 is the norm for professional audio recording, editing and mastering. The sampling rate used in AD-conversion, in practice, affects not only frequency bandwidth but also jitter, echo, etc. The 2 octaves overhead allows for subsequent processing, re-sampling, and pitch-shifting/time-stretching. Pitch-shifting 2 octaves down, for example, effectively converts a 192 kHz recording to 48 kHz; the extra bandwidth offers a sound designer flexibility.
Doubling or quadrupling the cost of storage is also not as important to an audio engineer, composer or sound designer as it might be to a consumer, since data storage represents a small fraction of the total cost of a decent studio.
That said, there is, granted, no point in storing albums at 192/24 for listening purposes. 44.1/24 or 48/24 is pretty much indistinguishable from higher sampling rates.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Graff · 2010-06-23 11:18 · Score: 2, Interesting

The 2 octaves overhead allows for subsequent processing, re-sampling, and pitch-shifting/time-stretching. Pitch-shifting 2 octaves down, for example, effectively converts a 192 kHz recording to 48 kHz; the extra bandwidth offers a sound designer flexibility.
No, it does not unless you are starting with frequencies ABOVE 20 kHz which would normally be inaudible to human ears.
If we are talking about sounds that a human can hear then you do not need the additional samples to shift the pitch down. Signals that are at 20 kHz and were captured at a sample rate of 40 kHz can be shifted down 2 octaves to 5 kHz without losing any quality since a 5 kHz signal would only need a sample rate of 10 kHz. It doesn't matter that your signal is effectively 10 kHz, that downshifted signal is 5 kHz and doesn't need a higher sample rate.
If, instead, you are pitch-shifting upward you don't want to go over 20 kHz anyways because no one could hear it! The maximum sample rate you need for anything that humans are going to listen to is 40 kHz. Yes, some overhead is nice because you will lose some resolution when manipulating the data but 192 kHz is absolutely ridiculous, even 96 kHz is overkill.
If you really need these huge sampling rates then I'd take a good, hard look at your equipment because something is wrong with it. I'm an instrumental/analytical chemist and I work with signal theory constantly in building and tuning instruments. We never have to resort to over 9 times the sampling frequency of the signal we want to capture, 2 or 3 times gives extremely accurate results no matter how much post-processing we need to do.
Just to put this all in perspective the highest note on a standard piano is C8. It has a frequency of 4,186 Hz (in 12 tone equal temperament) which means that you need a sample rate of 8,372 Hz to capture it. If you sample at 40 kHz you will not only get its first harmonic but also the second, third, AND fourth harmonics - and nearly the fifth! The only reason we need to sample at a rate of 40 kHz in the first place is that transient sounds like cymbals, buzzes, hisses, and clicks often include higher harmonics in the 15 - 20 kHz range and if you don't capture those then you lose some of the character of the music. By sampling at a rate over 40 kHz we accurately capture those signals and preserve the original recording in such a way that humans can fully enjoy it.

--
Sapere aude!
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by jbeach · 2010-06-23 12:39 · Score: 1

I'm not sure exactly what you're "calling bullshit on". As I originally stated the setup he has works perfectly fine on the Mac, but he is facing the need to upgrade. So your notion for the **current requirements** for Logic or FCP have no bearing - since we're talking about the software which works on his older box.

And by the way, he doesn't use either Logic or FCP for recording, which is what the DSP cards are for. He uses ProTools.

But let's say that his box must be from before 2006. So? Exactly how does that prove I'm "bullshitting" in some way, when i say that a software upgrade is going to force him through a hardware upgrade of not just his box, but all his DSP's?

--
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by Uberbah · 2010-06-28 11:30 · Score: 1

So your notion for the **current requirements** for Logic or FCP have no bearing - since we're talking about the software which works on his older box.
I'm not sure you were aware of what you actually wrote:

new Mac software is requiring new Mac hardware

And by the way, he doesn't use either Logic or FCP for recording, which is what the DSP cards are for. He uses ProTools.
...which also only requires an Intel Mac. Which means a 4 year old Mac Pro would work just fine. Which means we're back to a 4 year old machine not being "new" by any stretch of the imagination.
Re:You can't code on iOS you fucktwits by jbeach · 2010-06-28 12:30 · Score: 1

I think we must not be communicating properly or something. It might be my fault.

My friend has an old computer, with software and hardware DSP's on it which work perfectly fine for all his audio needs.

He's going to have to upgrade his software, probably for new capabilities people will request as well as to be able to receive files in new formats which are not backwards compatible.

This new software will not run on his older Mac computer, very probably because recent versions of most Mac programs require a recent mac OS, which in turn will only run on an Intel box, which in turn won't take his older DSP cards, which he has invested quite a lot of money in.

This very probably means he has a computer that's older than 4 years. It's still a useful tool in every productive way.

The above seems entirely in step with what I wrote, and (as far as I can tell) explains why he will have to upgrade his computer, which he otherwise would not have to.

However if I am in fact missing something, please let me know.

--
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.

no way by Debaser42 · 2010-06-23 01:28 · Score: 1

there's no way this is going to happen. apple has always had its fingers in both major markets - consumer driven and creative / production driven. Before apple remade itself as a consumer electronics provider (from its original inception as a consumer computer provider), it was associated with high-end creative work. Everyone used apples. Now its become more and more popular as the quality consumer computer company while also being a consumer electronics company. These two are mutually exclusive as far as software, but share a common brand - ease of use, beauty, power. The difference between the two is that OSX is easy to use for both basic grandma-checking-email-type consumers and (power/normal/IT/etc) other users. Why would apple make an iMac or a Macbook pro with iOS? It makes no sense - it would cripple the actual hardware. The only way anything like this might happen at all is if apple just gave up on making what we consider to be "traditional" computers for profit margin (I'm sure they make a majority of their money on iPhone/iPad/iPod related purchases (app store included). If that happens, I'd be really sad but at least we have Ubuntu, which feels more and more like OSX every day.

Re:no way by jbolden · 2010-06-23 03:30 · Score: 1

Just to add on here by creating Darwin as a separate level they have been able to appeal to the IT / power user as well. The power of Unix when you want it and a normal business PC the other 95% of the time.

monopoly and censorship are just some of things ap by Joe+The+Dragon · 2010-06-23 01:29 · Score: 1

monopoly and censorship are just some of things that apple will face if they try to do this even right now the FCC does not like the cell phone lock in / lock down.

But doing this to a laptop / desktop?? M$ was not able to pull this carp with IE and was forced to stop forcing OEM from loading it's os on all systems. and apple things they can force DEV's to pay $99 year just for free apps or $99 /year + 30% for payed apps?

Steve commented on this by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:30 · Score: 4, Informative

http://www.macstories.net/news/steve-jobs-no-mac-app-store/

Re:Steve commented on this by wzinc · 2010-06-23 01:34 · Score: 1

Yay common sense! Thank you Anonymous Coward...
Re:Steve commented on this by kthreadd · 2010-06-23 01:51 · Score: 1

He also said once that there would be no video iPod.
Re:Steve commented on this by Uberbah · 2010-06-23 06:07 · Score: 1

Because the technology wasn't up to at the time, that's why. It was the same with flash storage until the price/capacity became competitive with HDD based mp3 players.

Both good and bad. by LWATCDR · 2010-06-23 01:32 · Score: 1

I don't think IOS will replace Mac OS/X but I am really shocked that there isn't an Mac App store.
Why and app store?
Because people would like and use it. Right now if I go to Best Buy or any place else that sells software there may be a small section of Mac software. Also it is expensive to produce retail software. You have to have a pretty box, Press CDs get the stores to carry it... And I will bet you the stores take at least as much as Apple does. Yes you can always put up a website and sell your software online but then you have to run a store, maybe deal with sales tax, and hope people find your software.
So it really is a win for commercial developers.
For the consumer has some security that the software has been checked and most likely isn't malware. With the iTunes store it is really easy to make the purchase. It is easy to find what you like and to get some idea of the quality by reading the reviews. But the main thing is the ease of getting and installing the software.
Just like with apt-get and synaptic people will tend to go with the what is easy. Sure I may download the latest version of some app for Linux and do the install by hand but for the most part I and probably most other people just use what is in the repositories.
So yes I can see how an app store for the Mac would be very popular and widely used. As long as they keep allowing me to also install from other sources like a CD and or downloads I see it a win win.
What I don't see is IOS replacing OS/X. OS/X is Steve's baby and it really is well loved so nope.
App store yes OS/X no.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.

Re:Both good and bad. by Moridineas · 2010-06-23 01:50 · Score: 1

Relevant to nothing, I'm completely amused by how people refer to Mac / Apple products! For instance IOS vs iOS or IPhone vs iPhone.
The other day someone yelled at me for typing osx instead of OS-X (which is wrong, btw) ... and here we have OS/X.
What does it all mean? ;-)
Re:Both good and bad. by Bing+Tsher+E · 2010-06-23 05:14 · Score: 1

OS/X means either 'The Tenth Version of MacOS' which is laughable because they're what? on the sixth iteration of that... or it means 'OS Unknown' as X is sometimes used, because the guys at Apple in charge of developing OSes are still working on Taligent or Pink, or Sagan, or Buttheadastrononmer or whatever the name of the new MacOS was being called back before they gave up, admitted they couldn't write a real Operating System, and just allowed themselves to be taken over by NeXT, who themselves didn't write an OS, just took Mach and schlepped some stuff on top of it.
*whew*
Re:Both good and bad. by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:43 · Score: 1

I don't think IOS will replace Mac OS/X but I am really shocked that there isn't an Mac App store.
I would be really shocked if every major desktop platform wouldn't provide something like Apple's App Store within the next few years. The business case has been eloquently demonstrated by iPhone, and there really isn't any reason to not go there now that the waters have been tested.

No, thank you... by XxtraLarGe · 2010-06-23 01:33 · Score: 1

I really don't see this happening any time soon. The biggest reason why Apple puts up the walled garden on the iPhone is because of AT&T. There aren't any such restrictions on the Mac. You can download XCode for free & develop for the Mac freely and distribute it however you like, use undocumented API's, shun the UI guidelines or whatever. It would be cool if there was an application store for the Mac via iTunes to distribute your desktop applications, I'd hope that the same restrictions wouldn't be in place, since they wouldn't have the "it is on someone else's network" excuse.

--
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.

Complete sense by Enderandrew · 2010-06-23 01:35 · Score: 1

This makes complete sense. You can use all your iPhone/iPod/iPad apps on your iMac. Your iMac has a multi-touch capacitive screen and accelerometers.

Oh, wait.

Apple takes pride in the right interface for the right device. This will never happen.

--
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.

Re:Complete sense by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:57 · Score: 0

You think the UI is the same as the OS. Aww, bless.
Re:Complete sense by Enderandrew · 2010-06-23 04:19 · Score: 1

The UI is part of the OS.
iOS already runs on a modified Mac OS kernel. So they're already related, but that is as far as they'll go.
The two won't fully merge as predicted here.
Microsoft tried to model their mobile OS on their desktop OS, which turned out to be really stupid. Apple had the sense to design the OS around the device.

--
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.

Not going to happend, uses same OS's already by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:36 · Score: 0

iOS and Mac OS X already use same operating system. The XNU. The XNU is open source operating system what use Mach 3.0 as microkernel, I/O kit and drivers. Network protocols (TCP/IP and other low level OS protocols) and filesystems are from FreeBSD.

The XNU operating system is possible to get work as it is. But to get it actually run Apple's closed source technologies in Mac OS X or in iOS, you need to use Darwin. Darwin itself is a XNU + Apple's development tools (like GNU's own development tools) and configs what help you to compile XNU operating system right.

What would Apple get by merging iOS and Mac OS X software systems? Nothing. You can not make one software system what works well in mobile devices or in servers and desktops!

Servers are managed trough CLI (command line interface) over SSH (usually). And Desktops are controlled by keyboard and mouse, while mobile devices and tablets are controlled with fingers.

For all those you need different approach for user interface. Even that you have same OS in all, you can get different workspace for all devices. And the device itself is part of the user interface. Touchscreen, keyboard, mouse... they are the user interface as well as what is drawn by software to the screen.

Apple would not gain anything by merging them. Only thing what Apple could actually do, is to make a appstore for Mac OS X as well. That would be a such nice thing what I would respect. But then Apple should not tie developers to sell, or users to install software only from there. Why I would like to see Appstore for Mac OS X? Because then I could get one simple place to find wanted software. But I do not want to force now free Mac markets to be so tight that you can not market your software with your own page. (unless that is placed there so every app can have own site, support, forums etc).

Re:Not going to happend, uses same OS's already by am+2k · 2010-06-23 01:54 · Score: 2, Informative

If you'd read the article, you'd know that they were talking about merging UIKit into AppKit, not the OS as a whole (bad summary there, though).
A lot of stuff in UIKit is done the way it'd be done in AppKit were it created today. For example, in UIKit every view is automatically OpenGL-backed (via Core Animation). In AppKit, you have to enable that on a per-view basis, because it can cause problems (for example, WebViews always stay blank that way). Further, the Obj-C 32bit runtime on Mac OS X is the old one from the NeXTSTEP days. In 64bit and on iOS (which is 32bit), they're using a completely rewritten and not backwards-compatible one that allows many nice things like automatically generated instance variables, better exception handling and a few more things since iOS4 that are covered under their NDA (they're explained in the WWDC videos).

Stupid Flamebait Topic... by Iftekhar25 · 2010-06-23 01:36 · Score: 1

This is a stupid, flamebait, troll's topic. "iOS and OS X will merge, THEREFORE... all apps will be solely distributed by Apple in a walled garden."

Where's the logical connection there? How do you get from one to another? Why not conclude that since iOS and OS X will merge, the app distribution model will completely open up like on OS X? Mac OS X doesn't even have an activation key, for goodness sake. Apple is the patron of many an open source project, including WebKit which is the most prolific rendering engine on mobile devices. No, no, the geek outrage on /. is reserved for the App Store.

If anything, Apple has shown itself to be responsive to the market. From opening up the SDK, to multitasking, to a host of other issues, they wear their ignorance on their sleeve and they have shown themselves to be responsive, and when the market speaks, Apple will, I believe, listen.

If it doesn't, it will fade away into obscurity like many tech companies before it. Sheesh.

This topic (and most of the ensuing Apple-hating group think on slashdot) is sheer bullshit. I got karma to burn, make my day.

Who writes these summaries? by UnknowingFool · 2010-06-23 01:38 · Score: 1

After reading the article, it seems some developers interviewed by Ars Technicia is speculating that Apple might introduce more iOS interfaces into OS X. However any merger if at all will take a long time. The start of the article however immediately told it may be lacking technical details.

Though concrete answers are hard to predict, the truth is that the Cocoa APIs are built on the 20+ year-old NextStep and use Objective-C, a language that until recently lacked many features common to modern development environments, such as automatically managed memory.

You mean like C++ which is still used by many programmers. Yes, there are newer languages out there but many environments like Windows, PS3, etc use C++.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.

Same story. by Raven42rac · 2010-06-23 01:40 · Score: 1

This is the same tired /. opinion piece which doesn't really engender much discussion, Apple has made it pretty accessible to make OS X and iPhone/iPod touch apps for about a decade. Any speculation about how locked a hypothetical merged OS would be is silly at best, and just serves as *Nix user FUD.

--
I hate sigs.

iOs layer in OSX by fentagh · 2010-06-23 01:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

I wouldn't mind it as a dashboard replacement.

Re:iOs layer in OSX by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:07 · Score: 0

That would be useful, I think

IOS? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 01:43 · Score: 1

wtf? why are they running a router os on a phone? :D

apple and sheep by FunkyELF · 2010-06-23 01:43 · Score: 0, Flamebait

If Apple had an App Store for OSX but also allowed you to install stuff from alternative sources, they would still make a killing on all those sheep who would pay $0.99 to change their own desktop wallpaper to a photo they took themselves.

Re:apple and sheep by Moridineas · 2010-06-23 01:52 · Score: 1

You do realize that people who start wildly ranting about "sheep" or "sheeple" or my personal favorite "sheepeople" instantly lose credibility?
Re:apple and sheep by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:31 · Score: 0

You do realize that nobody gives a shit?
Re:apple and sheep by FunkyELF · 2010-06-23 05:06 · Score: 1

Score: 5.... looks good to me.
If you look beyond the word sheep, you'll see I am making a point.
Apple wouldn't need to lock you into the App Store exclusively on OSX to make money. Hopefully people never click on those pop-ups for installing smiley faces on their computer but Apple fans wouldn't think twice for shelling out $3 to get a nice set of smileys for whatever their mail program is called if it came from iTunes instead of a popup.
For the their phones, you will never be allowed to install unapproved apps.
Re:apple and sheep by Bing+Tsher+E · 2010-06-23 05:08 · Score: 1

People who wildly rant instantly lose credibility. We all know that. However, using the word 'sheep' in a post is not inherently a form of wildly wanting. GP made an on-topic comment and it had some credibility.
However, I do notice that you wildly ranted and used the word 'sheep.'
Re:apple and sheep by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 05:11 · Score: 0

Score: 5.... looks good to me.
apple and sheep (Score:2)
?

Apple fans wouldn't think twice for shelling out $3 to get a nice set of smileys for whatever their mail program is called if it came from iTunes instead of a popup
Way to completely understand the "Apple fans" demographic. Let me put it this way--I don't think you're Steve Jobs, and I think he probably has as good an understanding of these issues as anybody :p
Re:apple and sheep by Moridineas · 2010-06-23 05:13 · Score: 1

You really think what I wrote was a rant? That's a kind of tough definition of rant... I even referred to Sheepeople!
The point about the OP that made the post a rant was the categorizing (which OP continues to do in 2nd reply to me) of apple users as dumb sheepeople.
Re:apple and sheep by Ash-Fox · 2010-06-23 05:38 · Score: 1

Pay no notice to the above comment, it used the S word too!

--
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.

Even if this happens... by joh · 2010-06-23 01:47 · Score: 1

...this new OS would need to be much more than the current iOS. You'd need to be able to *develop* iOS apps on it, for starters.

Anyway, everybody who thinks that the future will just an extrapolation of the past should think again. Computers *will* change drastically. The traditional PC will sooner or later just be some office machine or developer machine, with most actual users on things that are more like appliances. There is no way around that and the time is ripe for that. Smartphones and tablets will be the "personal computers" very soon.

Stop clinging to the past. Since when have geeks been so conservative? Apple has dragged a whole industry into the future screaming and kicking and even Google is just breathlessly running after it. There is no need to follow Apple but it's pretty much clear that just sitting on your ass and pretending that things are good as they are is of no use.

Re:Even if this happens... by Moridineas · 2010-06-23 02:09 · Score: 1

Stop clinging to the past. Since when have geeks been so conservative?
Everybody is conservative about things they like! I absolutely agree that many geeks (just read some of the comments here!) are being absolutely moronic about Apple, but I don't think it's terribly surprising. Their world is changing and they're scared of the changes. We're all scared of changes to some degree, but some people are scared of men marrying men, some are scared of the environment tomorrow being different than it is today; some are scared of Islam being the biggest world religion, and some are scared of Apple.
The Internet is never going to be the same as it was 10 years ago, no matter how much we may miss it. Computers are never going to be like they were 20 years ago, no matter how much we may miss it. That's life!
I think more than Apple, most are scared about what it means that so many people DO like the iPod and so many people DO like the iPhone and iPad despite what they see as their obvious and numerous flaws. People get morally indignant! It's almost like there's a degree of cognitive dissonance going on...
Re:Even if this happens... by joh · 2010-06-23 02:28 · Score: 1

I think more than Apple, most are scared about what it means that so many people DO like the iPod and so many people DO like the iPhone and iPad despite what they see as their obvious and numerous flaws. People get morally indignant! It's almost like there's a degree of cognitive dissonance going on...
On the other hand, maybe there is also some dissolving of cognitive dissonance going on... Many people love to toy around with computers and a long while this was considered cool and fresh and new. But more and more this is becoming very stale and boring. Everyone and his dog does it and, frankly, there is nothing cool about it anymore. In the best case it's work. There are people who find that just scaling back their involvement with computers and instead just using them frees much time to do other things. Maybe things that are more interesting and fresh and new. And once you start to do that you may find that many flaws of the iPhone and the iPad are not flaws at all because you just don't need to do these things at all anymore.
It's very much like a computer game: Sooner or later you've just played it through and while you may have fond memories and play it again now and then, it's just plain over. The good old PC with all its freedoms and requirements and time-eating habits is also something you can be done with. This does not mean you won't use it anymore but the fun may be out of it. Computers are *everywhere* today anyway, so why waste your precious time on them if you don't have to? Geekyness is not limited to computers in any case.
Re:Even if this happens... by Moridineas · 2010-06-23 02:40 · Score: 1

I actually completely agree with your comment, and I think to a large degree that's exactly what happened in my life. I grew up in the 80s and remember being obsessed with trying to optimize my autoexec.bat and config.sys to get the optimal mix of memory for every game; running Norton speeddisk daily, etc. Later, building my own computers and spending hours researching each part. I used to HATE Mac OS and ran os/2 (my favorite thing I remember from OS/2 is that the config.sys file had tons of device drivers...maybe like 80 lines. If you put them in alphabetical order, they loaded MUCH faster at boot time!) for years, etc.
Now I use a macbookpro at home, work, and travel and have an iphone. It's just not worth it anymore! I too have really fond memories of those days, and of the early days of the Internet, etc. But you're right, it's stale and boring now, and computers are moving to a stage where it's more about what you can use computers to do, rather than what you can do on computers (if that makes sense). Other than at work I check my email and IM (etc) far less often than I did 5-10 years ago.
Re:Even if this happens... by jbolden · 2010-06-23 03:33 · Score: 1

If you try and remember a little clearer. The reason you optimized config.sys and autoexec.bat was to get a little more memory so that applications you wanted to use would work. In other words
time + knowledge = needed features
What's changed is that those needed features are available without the headache.
Re:Even if this happens... by Moridineas · 2010-06-23 03:47 · Score: 1

No, that's actually not right.
Getting an autoexec.bat/config.sys setup that worked for any given program was not the same as completely OPTIMIZING for a given program. Afterall, for most of the days of DOS, a single autoexec/config could provide the drivers and config you needed that would run for most programs. Knowing exactly what drivers were needed, how to load mscdex into the right memory zone, etc goes beyond merely working to toying with the computer. There's no need to run SpeedDisk every day!
People obsessed with this level of optimization still exist. Look around for registry tweaks and you'll easily find people doing extreme (and imho much of it not at all beneficial) stuff. For that matter look at the forums of case modders and builders. They're a still unique and small group who are still interested with the computers as computers rather than computers as tools. Of course they are very well represented on places like slashdot...

This is the future by wcrowe · 2010-06-23 01:49 · Score: 1

I think this is the direction most commercial operating systems are headed. By controlling the apps which can be run under the OS, you have a better chance of maintaining integrity. And, of course, there is the plus that it provides an extra revenue stream.

I'm not saying it's right and I'm not saying it's wrong. It's just the way things are going to be like it or not.

--
Proverbs 21:19

Meet the new Apple Linux hardware by erroneus · 2010-06-23 01:50 · Score: 1

Recently, I got a MacPro for the wife... Dual 2.66GHz dual core xeon. Clean, nice design. Got MacOSX Snow Leopard on it. I want one too... but I wouldn't run MacOSX on it. I have played with the Hackintosh and real Macintosh... I just don't have a use for it. So if Apple manages to make true "netbooks" with iOS (tm Cisco?) then I will buy one... and put Linux on it.

Re:Meet the new Apple Linux hardware by MistrBlank · 2010-06-23 04:33 · Score: 1

You missed the part that Cisco gave up the trademark on the iOS to Apple. It was quietly reported around the WWDC, just thought I'd let you know so you can remove the question mark on future posts.

Damn Son. by Steauengeglase · 2010-06-23 01:56 · Score: 1

I heard that Chris Foresman said OS X is an old nasty grandma and that he is gonna hit up some Objective C when you are away over the weekend. Then he said, People who have a MacBook want an iPad. Yep, he was talking about you, said you were too poor to afford an iPad. I'll bet he also said he can kick your ass. Probably live chattin' about that right now.

Bill? by mario_grgic · 2010-06-23 02:00 · Score: 1

Is that you?

--
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.

Not according to Steve by copponex · 2010-06-23 02:02 · Score: 1

http://techie-buzz.com/apple/steve-jobs-the-times-they-are-a-changin.html

Yep, freedom from programs that steal your private data. Freedom from programs that trash your battery. Freedom from porn. Yep, freedom. The times they are a changin’, and some traditional PC folks feel like their world is slipping away. It is...

And later in the same e-mail thread:

Microsoft had (has) every right to enforce whatever rules for their platform they want. If people don’t like it, they can write for another platform, which some did. Or they can buy another platform, which some did.

As for us, we’re just doing what we can to try and make (and preserve) the user experience we envision. You can disagree with us, but our motives are pure.

Hmm. Purity. "Freedom" from using your devices however you want. Sounds like a philosophy with only one possible outcome. And the sad thing is, people will line up around the block to lose the right to administer their own computer. And pay a 30% on top of that for the logo that adorns their shiny new chains.

Re:Not according to Steve by M.+Baranczak · 2010-06-23 03:33 · Score: 1

And pay a 30% on top of that for the logo that adorns their shiny new chains.
If you want those in black, that's an additional $150.

Steve denied it already by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:04 · Score: 1

http://www.slashgear.com/steve-jobs-denies-os-x-app-store-confirms-best-buy-ipad-3g-2683082/

It's like the rumor from five years ago that Apple was going to turn into iPod, Inc. and either
- Give up on OS X and port all of its apps to Windows like it did with iTunes
- License OS X to other companies and get out of the hardware business
- Split into two companies, a legacy one to milk the Mac and a shiny new media-focused one to build on the iPod

Having an established desktop platform is just too juicy a source of revenue and technology, even if phones and media players outsell PCs ten to one.

Unidirectional thinking by SuperKendall · 2010-06-23 02:05 · Score: 1

eading to a single DRM locked OS on your MacBook and your iPad

Or it COULD mean a more open environment for the iPad. But this is Slashdot, so of course please take the most negative direction possible and assume that is truth.

In reality, they are ALREADY one OS. The underlying layer is OS X, the systems mostly differ in the UI layer - which is how it should be, since touch-based UI is inherently different than windows based UI.

There is a TON of work put into the Mac UI libraries at this point. There is simply no way that work is going to be abandoned. You can already see the path forward today and it does not include such madness as having desktop systems ship with a touch-based UI.

Now I do think we'll see a Mac app store, but that will be optional for the user.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

I've been expecting this to happen for a while. by isolationism · 2010-06-23 02:13 · Score: 1

It only makes sense. They're both effectively the same OS, just different UI veneers. And Apple customers are eating up apps on the platform and most don't seem to be bothered by the lack of choice/competition thing; Steve would have been remiss not to at least try the waters with the iPad, and look how well it's selling. I'm one of those guys who would only even consider buying the thing only if it had actually shipped with OS X proper, but clearly I'm in the minority.

I own a couple older iPod Touches and a 2nd generation Mac Mini -- which is pretty much nothing but an HTPC that allows for some light surfing/VNC while my kid watches a cartoon or two for the hundredth time.

Disclosure: The Mac Mini replaced a really sweet 1GHz EPIA-based Freevo box that I had custom built both the hardware and software for; it was bliss. Totally diskless operation with netboot, very low power consumption, and ran everything from DirectFB so X wasn't even required. It was however quickly replaced as soon as I bought an HDTV as it could barely play h264 video at DVD resolution, and the motherboard didn't even have a DVI port. I might have done it again for a replacement, but I spent many long days setting the thing up -- The Mac Mini on the other hand came out of the box, got put on the stand, some cables plugged into it, and I was done.

Once upon a time I might have thought, "You know what, that's fine, let them do that, I'll just keep running my old OS and not upgrade" -- but I'm sure I'm not alone in realizing this isn't really an option at all anymore; no more bug fixes, security patches, and third-party software support disappears shortly thereafter (problematic for a media player). There is also the seemingly greater likelihood that the Mac Mini will die sooner than later as the design appears to favour quiet vs. cool operation, which probably isn't an unrealistic expectation based on their target audience.

Long story short, though -- if Apple wants to do this, let them. Given their recent business activities I've already decided to put a moratorium on buying any more Apple products, which is fine as I've always been a white-box guy anyway. I will admittedly miss running Plex as it is a beautiful media player, but I would rather have the freedom of choice than spend that much on hardware and have a vendor decide what's best for me to be allowed to run.

Re:I've been expecting this to happen for a while. by jbolden · 2010-06-23 03:48 · Score: 1

What makes the iPad so successful is the fact that it has iOS on it. The "lightweight laptop" that does a few things very well for the person who already owns a laptop when they needed it. Big difference if it were your only laptop.
Re:I've been expecting this to happen for a while. by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:48 · Score: 1

What makes the iPad so successful is the fact that it has iOS on it. The "lightweight laptop" that does a few things very well for the person who already owns a laptop when they needed it. Big difference if it were your only laptop.
I'm not so sure about the "big difference". The way my mom uses her desktop PC, she could do everything she normally does on an iPad, especially if provided with full-size hardware keyboard and external screen (i.e. a dock) for composing long emails and such. I'm sure she's not alone in that.
Re:I've been expecting this to happen for a while. by jbolden · 2010-06-23 08:56 · Score: 1

Well yeah in other words if you changed the form factor to a laptops and made the apps designed for a laptop.....
Re:I've been expecting this to happen for a while. by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 09:35 · Score: 1

Well, yes. My point was that iOS, for all its restrictions, is a perfectly usable OS not just for iPhone- and iPad-like devices, but also for full-fledged laptops and nettops, for a significant part of the population.
Re:I've been expecting this to happen for a while. by jbolden · 2010-06-23 10:21 · Score: 1

I don't disagree. I disagree that's there is any reason for it to move upstream now. But many disruptive technologies take time to take over successive markets.

Re:monopoly and censorship are just some of things by AmaranthineNight · 2010-06-23 02:21 · Score: 1

apple things they can force DEV's to pay $99 year just for free apps or $99 /year + 30% for payed apps?

No, a few really stupid developers think Apple can and wants to try. Apple has made it clear that they want different platforms for Mobiles, Tablets, and the Desktop by spending a ton of development effort to diversify them in the first place. Why on earth would they then merge them together, losing 3/4 of the functionality of a desktop and all of the media professionals who buy expensive, new, profitable Macs?

Re:Apple also needs to open osx to all pc's apple by NekSnappa · 2010-06-23 02:25 · Score: 1

I'm no spelling, or grammar Nazi.
But damn! You've got to be close enough to understand without having to read it more than twice.

--
I want to shoot the messenger!

If only iOS4 weren't a bloated pig by Theovon · 2010-06-23 02:29 · Score: 0, Offtopic

I'm not the only one who noticed this. There are hoards of blog and forum posts about this. iOS4 is actually SLOWER than the 3.x version, especially on the iPhone 3G. Good going, Apple.

Not like I havent been saying this for a while now by mjwx · 2010-06-23 02:43 · Score: 5, Interesting

Apple wants to kill the Mac OS desktop. Thus far I've been called a Troll, Naive and Insane. Now I am vindicated as developers have said the same thing.

Apple isn't going to kill the Imac and Macbook lines, they will simply replace the current NEXT based OS with the future versions of IOS and naturally more complex systems are more prone to unexpected issues. Moving the hardware to ARM is trivial as they've already got the HW expertise and OS to do it. The only thing they need to do is get SW makers to fall in line, MS will with their standard half-arsed attempt at Office:Mac and so will Adobe with CS (Adobe dont have the balls to tell Steve to stuff it). Realistically they just need to add more keyboard and mouse support to the Ipad.

Apple wants to do this for three reasons.

1. It just works(TM). Mac OSX can go wrong more then the Iphone. This is because, as fanboys point out OSX is a lot more complex then IOS. Apple does not want users to have to deal with their own problems so they seek to eliminate the chance of it happening. Apple's current strategy is to cut features out that don't work perfectly.
2. Homogeneity. Apple prides itself on the fact that everything works together, that choices are simple. Having two disparate OS lines is detrimental to the long term success of this goal.
3. Control. Fanboys may defend Apple's control for various reasons, mostly using cognitive dissonance (it's for your own good and other such excuses) but you cant deny that Apple wants control. They want to stop the hackintosh, they want to prevent more clones and they want to control what the end users experiences.

This wont happen overnight, not even the RDF turned to eleven could pull that one off. It will happen over time in baby steps and be hailed by the fanboys.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.

Performa 6300: *still* Apple's lowest point by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 02:46 · Score: 0

Macintosh Performa 6300

Oh my god. The road apple of road apples. Ten years ago, the 6300 was viewed as the nadir of Apple. Apple had been a pretty good hardware company before the 1990s, and they were a pretty good hardware company once again in the late 1990s, but the time in between was exemplified by the utter piece of crap that was the 6300. A PowerPC box that actually made (high-end) 68k stuff look competitive in terms of performance!

Things have changed since then. Apple's hardware is of generally good quality but the software has taken such an incredible nosedive, both in usability (iTunes) and general hostility (for the mobile devices) that some people say now is Apple's nadir. But I disagree; Apple's current products, as evil as they are and aside from the atrocity of iTunes, still "just works" well enough. They have no future but as throwaway gadgets they're pretty decent. Couldn't say the same about the 6300; it had no redeeming qualities at all. Anyone who says now is Apple's nadir: let me know when you can honestly say the iWhatever has no redeeming qualities, rather than merely having lots of unpleasant aspects.

Re:Performa 6300: *still* Apple's lowest point by Nalgas+D.+Lemur · 2010-06-23 05:55 · Score: 1

Clearly spoken by someone who never used the 5200, which made the 6300 look downright pimped out in comparison.
Re:Performa 6300: *still* Apple's lowest point by Scoth · 2010-06-23 08:54 · Score: 1

The 5200, 5300, 6200, and 6300 (except, for some reason, the 6360) were all basically the same computer with different cases and skins and configuration options. Very strange split architecture that required CPU time for silly things.
My high school had a roomful of Power Macintosh 5300/100LCs. It's no wonder they never bought another Mac again. Terrible, terrible designs.

Steve Jobs email saga by Dokterdok · 2010-06-23 02:57 · Score: 1

There's no indication of something like that happening anytime soon. Not sure? Then ask Steve Jobs:
He actually said there won't be any Mac App Store, and that the rumors about the Mac dying are "completely wrong". Furthermore, rumors about the iPhone 4 cutting into Mac OS X development are false.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by BrokenHalo · 2010-06-23 03:03 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apple wants to kill the Mac OS desktop.

It might, but I would be curious to know whether there was any evidence for this beyond the reported opinion of a handful of third-party app developers. These guys are targeting their products towards Apple's little handheld media boxes (and good luck to them) but their opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality.

Personally, I hope it doesn't. OS X is certainly not everything I would like it to be, but it is at least a unix-based platform that is useful for my purposes. I would be quite surprised if Apple were to actually dump OS X, given that maintenance and development of a "real" computer platform on established third-party chipsets must be a comparatively small drain on their resources by comparison with what they surely must devote to their phone and tablet devices.

I think from a user perspective that's good by jht · 2010-06-23 03:04 · Score: 1

Ultimately the codebases will pretty much merge - but there is a _lot_ of stuff in desktop MacOS that isn't in iOS, and vice-versa. There's also a need basis behind a lot of it. Desktop operating systems are suited to large systems with higher power consumption, multicore multi-GHz processors, gigabytes of RAM, and massive storage. iOS (and mobile systems in general) are suited to a much more constrained environment.

What pretty much happened in Apple-land is that Leopard forked to provide the basis of what is now iOS - as the platform matures further a lot of that will backport into the core OS. The iOS team picked what they needed and can now give some of it back. I don't think you'll ever get away from a freely downloadable and installable option in the desktop OS. A do think that eventually the App Store will be available for the desktop platform as a distribution option, and all the vendors who now use Escellerate and Kagi (and all the other online distributors) will all jump en masse to the App Store for Mac. Good for developers, good for users, lousy for distributors.

I also think the criteria for App Store for Mac will not be nearly as strict as it is for the iOS version. But it won't matter too much. Distribution choices for the desktop will be like this:

- Direct distribution: Available to anyone, handle sales and fulfillment yourself - whether electronic or physical.

- 3rd party: Still available, but increasingly irrelevant (most will opt for the App Store).

- App Store: The store handles installation and updates for you in exchange for a cut.

--
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."

Know which developers are thinking about this... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:05 · Score: 1

Pure idiots! The ones who know next to nothing about OS X. Apple cannot perform this without getting rid of OS X in it's current state. What Apple might do is build a virtual machine that will allow it to run iOS apps. It will be closed and restricted to the iPhone license but OS X will stay as it is. Will this take money away from OS X developers? I doubt it. The reason I doesn't own an iPad is... I need IDEs, text editors such as BBEdit and command line utilities like SVN and GIT.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jbolden · 2010-06-23 03:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't think you are a troll just a bit unrealistic. There is a huge difference between what users expect from Cell phone OSes and what they expect from Computer OSes. In particular Computer OSes need to support custom applications easily.

Apple would lose their place in the IT market, the scientific market, the music market, the video market with a limited lockdown system. They would lose their margins with a high level of control and supervision for a highly capable system. Yes they would love to have the control and the homogeneity. So would Microsoft, so would Linux. Its just that the order on computers is:

a) features -- can do what I want
b) reliability -- does what I want consistently
c) price --
d) convenience -- does what I want easily.

For cell phones the order seems to be
a) basic features
b) form factor
c) other features

And it means to Java? by hotfireball · 2010-06-23 03:10 · Score: 1

And that means that Java won't work on Macs (thus Apple in a total trouble, because lots of useful stuff just will gone). Or iOS users in a trouble, where Java will start working -- it will just kill these little devices because of shitty overuse.

Just a though.

I think it is far more likely ... by jackspenn · 2010-06-23 03:11 · Score: 1

That Apple gets out of the computer business completely and focuses on iDevices, than it is that iOS and OS X will merge.

That said I cannot wait for iTiger, they could run commercials "it's the i ... Tiger, its the thrill of the web, downloading apps, music and email content. It's magical devices ..."

I know, I know, I too find myself hilarious.

--
Respect the Constitution

Closed gardens by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 03:14 · Score: 0

Someone, we return to the early 1990s.... with the 'closed garden' business model.
lol

Windows Mobile and Windows 7 by drumcat · 2010-06-23 03:14 · Score: 1

WinMo and 7 are definitely merging. There's no reason they should be different.

Re:Windows Mobile and Windows 7 by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 09:08 · Score: 1

WinMo and 7 are definitely merging.
Reference?
Re:Windows Mobile and Windows 7 by drumcat · 2010-06-28 08:09 · Score: 1

Allegoric sarcasm, homeboy.

Flamebait in summary by bonch · 2010-06-23 03:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

leading to a single DRM-locked OS on your MacBook and your iPad.

There is zero evidence that any such convergence (beyond the fact they already share the same Darwin core and Foundation classes) would be "DRM-locked." You threw the phrase in there as flamebait to ignite discussion. Don't be an alarmist site.

Re:Flamebait in summary by Unequivocal · 2010-06-23 04:40 · Score: 1

Honest question here: would you consider iPad/iPod/iPhone platforms to be DRM-locked?
Re:Flamebait in summary by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 07:22 · Score: 0

leading to a single DRM-locked OS on your MacBook and your iPad.
There is zero evidence that any such convergence (beyond the fact they already share the same Darwin core and Foundation classes) would be "DRM-locked." You threw the phrase in there as flamebait to ignite discussion. Don't be an alarmist site.
I completely agree... If there is a need to discuss such ideas, avoiding National Enquirer/Fox "News" alarmism is advisable.
Good call on calling out the 'flamebait' (love that word)...
Re:Flamebait in summary by FxChiP · 2010-06-24 11:48 · Score: 1

iOS4 itself is DRM-locked via FairPlay on all of the content -- music, movies, apps and whatnot -- and via RSA signatures on all the firmware and OS bits, to prevent the running of arbitrary code and breaking the DRM locks on the former. Derivatives -- including a hypothetical merger of iOS 4 and Mac OS X -- would certainly share at least some of these restrictions, would they not?
Re:Flamebait in summary by bonch · 2010-06-25 07:26 · Score: 1

iOS4 itself is DRM-locked via FairPlay on all of the content
No, it's not.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by bonch · 2010-06-23 03:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apple wants to kill the Mac OS desktop. Thus far I've been called a Troll, Naive and Insane. Now I am vindicated as developers have said the same thing.

How does the speculation of a few developers vindicate you?

Steve Jobs himself has already addressed this topic and said traditional PCs won't go away. They'll be like trucks; the people who need them will simply be fewer than those who just drive regular cars.

Not just Mac OS... by Afell001 · 2010-06-23 03:33 · Score: 1

I see general use computers becoming a niche as mobile and specific-use computers become more and more powerful and capable. We won't see them go away altogether, but when a lay person (one who is not tech savvy) is faced with the option of a relatively expensive general use computer (running Windows, Mac OS, or any other Posix distro) that has a steep learning curve, and an inexpensive specific-use device that is geared to the services they want to use (email, web browsing, games, online chat, etc.), then that person will gravitate to the path of least effort and lowest expenditure as long as it satisfies their needs.

For the technical users (programmers, designers and such) general use computers will still be available, but I would expect to see a feature-freeze come into effect as more and more features are pushed into the specific use devices. That's not saying new features won't show up, just that features will be more driven by actual function rather than UI reformation.

Maybe we can refocus efforts on the parts of the operating system that matter to us technical users, such as improvement in file system structure and interoperability of APIs within any given IDE.

Maybe even a better framework to handle multithreaded coding that leverages whatever hardware a machine has available, whether it is multiple general use processors or graphics processors (GPGPU). That way, all the programmer has to worry about is the code he needs to execute, and let the framework worry about the resources that need to be used. Apple has already taken steps in this direction (look up Grand Central Dispatch) but you have to do it in Obj C (does anyone really like using the awkward square bracket syntax? I'm still not used to it).

Re:monopoly and censorship are just some of things by delinear · 2010-06-23 03:39 · Score: 1

But doing this to a laptop / desktop?? M$ was not able to pull this carp with IE

That was back when MS were busy playing cod, now they're singing a different tuna and Apple are taking their plaice. Okay, I'm all out.

DRM is the reason by hardburlyboogerman · 2010-06-23 03:41 · Score: 1

I don't and will not buy an Apple iAnything. It is also the reason that I left Windows for a Linux system.I see DRM (and :"Trusted Computing" [insert sarcastic laugh here]) as a attempt to control on how I use MY computer,and crap such as that doesn't work with this old mountain boy.
Apple,Microsoft and the MAFIAA (Major Media) can take their DRM and shove it where the sun won't shine.(Make a good guess WHERE-Sideways with a twisting motion)

If a product has DRM,I don't buy.Simple as that.

--
Geek Hillbilly

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jonbryce · 2010-06-23 03:43 · Score: 1

I think Microsoft shows that convenience is more important than reliability.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jbolden · 2010-06-23 03:50 · Score: 1

I assume you mean more like 10-15 years ago. If you ask the people who use Microsoft if it reliable enough they indicate it is. They don't like crashes but they just reboot, no biggie. The ones who are considered a crash intolerable used different equipment.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jonbryce · 2010-06-23 03:59 · Score: 1

Yes it is certainly pretty reliable now, but the experience of 10-15 years ago shows that Microsoft's strategy of convenience first, reliability later was right from a money making point of view.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 04:10 · Score: 0

Steve Jobs himself has already addressed this topic and said traditional PCs won't go away.

Apple do not make PCs

The New Godwin's Law = Just say Apple + DRM by stewbacca · 2010-06-23 04:10 · Score: 1

Short version of the summary:

Developers expect (insert cynical speculation about Apple and DRM) but I don't expect that to happen anytime soon.

What's the story here other than people love to hate Apple and assume every move they make (or don't make, in this case) has something to do with DRM-lock-in? You seriously lose any debate as soon as you introduce "DRM" or "vendor lockin" when it is not relevant to the discussion. It's like Godwin's Law, replacing "Hitler" with "Apple" and "Nazi" with "DRM".

(sidenote: did I just Godwin my post?)

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jbolden · 2010-06-23 04:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'd say it was features first for Microsoft.

What Microsoft did for the office environment was offer the ability for departments within a company to roll their own software out. They didn't have to go to the mainframe people, and so departments switched from:

a) dumb terminals on the mainframe
b) Office computers using terminal emulation

Of course for small business and home personal computers offered some ability to get computers at all. All computers were unreliable in the 1980s. In the early 90s OS/2, Xenix and Unixes existed but generally didn't offer the application diversity (features).

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Unequivocal · 2010-06-23 04:38 · Score: 1

Apple went down this road in the 80's and got demolished by the DOS/Windows hegemony. I wonder if the market forces are different enough now to yield a different outcome? Desktops are way more irrelevant in the market with so many other choices like phones, readers, pads now and those new segments growing very rapidly.. So maybe it'll work out ok for Jobs the second time around.

I personally think he's nuts to try to close out the Mac OSX platform but he's running things over there.

How does Steve Job's quote contradict parent? by manekineko2 · 2010-06-23 04:52 · Score: 1

Maybe there's more to it than you presented, but from what you've said, seems like a non sequitor.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by The+End+Of+Days · 2010-06-23 04:53 · Score: 2, Interesting

Your feelings of vindication are as valid as the vindication a christian feels when he points to the bible as "proof" of his beliefs.

Submitter didn't read the story by torako · 2010-06-23 04:54 · Score: 1

Has the submitter even read the original story at Ars? It is about a unification of the APIs where new features from iOS should appear in OS X. This is not at all about DRM or the App Store.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by DJRumpy · 2010-06-23 04:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

Odd. There isn't a single mention of DRM in the entire article. The summary is just an alarmist piece. It's only natural that features from one end up in the other, just as features from Windows end up in Mobile, and I would expect features from Mobile will end up in Windows if they are useful in a desktop environment.

iOS4 received feature parity with OS X (some 23 features from OS X ported to iOS in addition to IPV6 and DNS functionality). The article fails to mention any of this. It only talks about iOS4 influence on the desktop while ignoring the return path.

As a Mac user. I'm not concerned in the slightest.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by KarmaMB84 · 2010-06-23 04:57 · Score: 1

They makes Macs... which are PCs. I think only Apple marketing makes a distinction. Steve Jobs has in the past repeatedly referred to desktop computers including Macs as simply "PCs".

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by mcvos · 2010-06-23 05:12 · Score: 1

Apple wants to kill the Mac OS desktop. Thus far I've been called a Troll, Naive and Insane. Now I am vindicated as developers have said the same thing.

Depends on what kind of developers you talk to, I guess. A lot of developers love OS X because it's a full unix with all the features from a unix system, but with better software support and a better GUI than Linux tends to have.

OS X is the best of both worlds (the full power of a unix, and the slick integration of Apple). If Apple is going to cut down on one of those worlds, it's time to start looking elsewhere.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by e4g4 · 2010-06-23 05:16 · Score: 4, Informative

I'd recommend watching the interview with Jobs at D8 (by Mossberg and some other WSJ journalist), it's available (free) on iTunes. He made an excellent car analogy, equating the PC (as in personal computer, not PC/Mac) to trucks in the early days of the automobile market. Basically - the analogy was that back when automobiles were new, the vast majority of cars were trucks, designed for getting work done. As that technology trickled down into the popular market, the car became more user friendly (automatic transmissions, air conditioning, radio, etc.) and less like trucks. Jobs essentially equated MacOS and iOS with trucks and sedans. Ultimately, his point was that there are still trucks now (implying that Apple has no intention of killing their entry in the PC market). As I see it - Apple would love for MacOS marketshare to stay exactly where it is for the foreseeable future (5%) and replace the other 93ish% with iOS. Jobs is not a fool - he knows that we need trucks; I do not believe that Apple has any intention of killing MacOS.

--
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein

What's the point? by HalAtWork · 2010-06-23 05:25 · Score: 1

What's the point of this? Aren't they already the exact same thing?

--
Twinstiq, game news

Spoken like a true PC user... by postermmxvicom · 2010-06-23 05:31 · Score: 1

mice aren't multitouch

http://www.apple.com/magicmouse/

Just sayin...

--
One last thing: Sometimes I wonder; "Is that someone's signature? Or do they type that at the end of each post?"

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by node+3 · 2010-06-23 05:42 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apple wants to kill the Mac OS desktop. Thus far I've been called a Troll, Naive and Insane. Now I am vindicated as developers have said the same thing.

Apple doesn't want to kill the desktop, the desktop will be around for quite some time, and they want to be there until the end.

Apple isn't going to kill the Imac and Macbook lines, they will simply replace the current NEXT based OS with the future versions of IOS and naturally more complex systems are more prone to unexpected issues.

iOS is Nextstep, just with (mainly) UIKit replacing AppKit (there are more differences between Mac OS X and iOS, but this is main difference in terms of its relation to Nextstep). As for replacing Mac OS X with iOS, this doesn't make any sense. iOS is designed for small multitouch screens. This notion of iOS on the desktop is just as misguided as the idea of an iPad running Mac OS X. It can be done, but it would make the product worse.

Having two disparate OS lines is detrimental to the long term success of this goal [homogeneity].

Perhaps, but the gain in homogeneity would not offset the loss in quality of the Mac platform.

Control. Fanboys may defend Apple's control for various reasons, mostly using cognitive dissonance

FYI, when you get called a troll, it's for bullshit like this. Calling those who disagree with you "fanboys" makes you a troll, de facto. You may not realize it, leaving you to wonder "what the hell did I say that makes me a troll?" leading you to a conclusion that it must be just a bunch of "fanboys" who just don't want to hear the truth (hence your claim of cognitive dissonance), reinforcing your notion that we're just "fanboys", and therefore our arguments are dismissed out of hand.

Anyway, my point being, if you don't want to be seen as a troll, drop that word from your vocabulary completely, even when you think that there's a situation where it incontrovertibly applies.

They want to stop the hackintosh, they want to prevent more clones and they want to control what the end users experiences.

And this is why you are wrong, whether you get called troll or not. The above, which is pretty much the extent of their "control" is fairly limited, and very weak grounds upon which to base any sort of grand notion that Apple wants to increase control over their users.

The "control" over the hackintosh is obviously very limited, and not the sort of control which leads to any sort of slippery slope issues. They want you to buy a Mac if you want to run Mac OS X. The Mac and their OS are a whole. You may not like that that's how they see it, and that that's how they go about it, but some sort of overarching "control" it is not.

As for "controlling what the end user experiences". That's overstating things quite much. They don't want to control what the user experiences, with the fundamental exception that they want to exclude a set of very rational things. Primarily, buggy software, spyware, and ports which fail to make good use of the platform. They don't want control over my experience other than to help see to it that I don't have to deal with such crap. And when us "fanboys" say (as you said in your post) "it's for your own good and other such excuses", what we're saying is that "it makes the product better". That's why we willingly choose Apple products, so we don't have to deal with a bunch of crap. It's also a huge part of why Apple products do so well even when surrounded by competition whose primary advantage is less "control".

This wont happen overnight, not even the RDF turned to eleven could pull that one off. It will happen over time in baby steps and be hailed by the fanboys.

It (although not the "it" you've been going on about) will be hailed because it will make our lives better. The "it" won't be locking down the Mac, or replacing M

Company field in the ADC account form by tepples · 2010-06-23 05:54 · Score: 1

Developing for OS X and iOS does not require a company to be formed.

You have to sign up for an ADC account before you can sign up for an iPhone developer account, and the ADC account form doesn't allow leaving the Company field blank.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by PopeRatzo · 2010-06-23 06:25 · Score: 1

Apple would lose their place in the IT market, the scientific market, the music market, the video market with a limited lockdown system.

Apple has been slowly abandoning those markets. You would be shocked to learn how many people who once did music production, for example, on Macs are now working on PCs. I think we need to face that Apple wants to be a consumer electronics company much more than it wants to be a computer company. Mac Pros were always at the top of the high end for desktop computers, but with the i7/1366 platform being common in PCs, there isn't that clear advantage any more. There is still activity with iMacs, but it's mostly a matter of bigger screens. Where are the new Mac Minis? OSX is starting to seem a little long in the tooth, and with Windows 7, there's less of a clear advantage there. I'm not saying Win 7 is as good as OSX, but the difference has shrunk a great deal.

Look at how seldom they upgrade their computing platforms. They just don't seem to be paying much attention to those of us who would use a Mac Pro. All the energy seems to be going into the locked down consumer gear. That's bad news for any of us who have long used Macintosh computers for media.

Months ago, I posted that I thought we'd start to see Apple release iMacs with locked-down operating systems where app store was the only source for software. Of course, I was called a troll for that, but I still believe that's going to be the case.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by PopeRatzo · 2010-06-23 06:27 · Score: 4, Interesting

Steve Jobs himself has already addressed this topic and said traditional PCs won't go away.

Believing any CEO's pronouncement is like believing a whore who tells you "you're the best".

You have to watch what Apple does, not what Jobs says.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by PopeRatzo · 2010-06-23 06:29 · Score: 2, Funny

As a Mac user. I'm not concerned in the slightest.

Clearly.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jacksonj04 · 2010-06-23 06:42 · Score: 4, Informative

You mean the new Mac Minis they released last week?

--
How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?

I never understood this point of view. by falconwolf · 2010-06-23 07:32 · Score: 2, Informative

Why wouldn't you want the system wide open and available for your kids to tinker with?

Because I, in the third person, only have one computer and I don't want it hosed. I, the real me, use my Mac for different things and have set up more than one user account so that working in one I will not hose the whole system. Among the things I use it for is development, financial planning, photography, and programming. Only one account has administrator privileges, and I only log into that one to install software, to run updates, or for maintenance.

Falcon

--
Should there be a Law?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jbolden · 2010-06-23 07:33 · Score: 1

Well Apple along with every computer manufacturer is moving away from the desktop workstation market. Most power users find a laptop + big screen is enough. And the speed of hardware advances has slowed tremendously. But the drop off during the decade has been from 2 a year to 1 a year.

3/2009
1/2008
4/2007
8/2006
10/2005
4/2005
6/2004
11/2003
6/2003
1/2003
8/2002

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 08:09 · Score: 1

I don't think you are a troll just a bit unrealistic. There is a huge difference between what users expect from Cell phone OSes and what they expect from Computer OSes. In particular Computer OSes need to support custom applications easily.

The whole argument in favor of limitations on iPhone, and, more recently, iPad, centers around the claim that users do not want computers. They want appliances.

Indeed, an iPad isn't a cellphone, and, in terms of how it is used (rather than what it is), competes directly to netbooks. Yet it has locked-down iOS, not open OS X.

The obvious question: for a casual user who is content with an iPad to the point that it replaces his netbook/laptop for him completely, why wouldn't he also want to replace his nettop/desktop in a same way?

I don't think Apple is known for giving its users by falconwolf · 2010-06-23 08:10 · Score: 1

options.

I'm not suggesting that Apple can force existing Mac owners to adopt iOS, but they amount of money they can make from a locked down user is so much more then for a regular free user that I would expect that eventually, all Apple products will come with iOS.

I will not buy another Mac if it's OS is iOS. I switched from Windows to OS X and I'll just as easily switch to Ubuntu. Actually I plan on dual booting my Mac with Snow Leopard and Ubuntu.

The most likely way to implement this is just to slowly reduce the resources put into the Mac line, and to continue to expand the iOS line until it replaces most of the Mac line (except servers).

Why would Apple do this? It will not reduce the work needed if Apple continues making servers running OS X. As it is though I was looking forward to the iPad before it's release I don't want to get one specifically because it runs PhoneOS not the full OS X. I neither want a crippled OS nor a gatekeeper telling me what software I can install and use.

Falcon

--
Should there be a Law?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jbolden · 2010-06-23 08:25 · Score: 1

Because he can't. Most apps require more user input. Going from more to less interaction:

TV -> book -> video game -> ipad -> computer

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by bar-agent · 2010-06-23 08:30 · Score: 1

Believing any CEO's pronouncement is like believing a whore who tells you "you're the best".

Wait, wait...are you telling me she was lying? But she said she loved me!

--
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-23 08:46 · Score: 0, Redundant

Control. Fanboys may defend Apple's control for various reasons, mostly using cognitive dissonance

FYI, when you get called a troll, it's for bullshit like this.

You feel that? Thats called irony. When the biggest Mac troll on slashdot tries to call someone a troll for bullshit. Now the next time you want to call someone a troll you need to take a good, long look in the mirror first.

They want to stop the hackintosh, they want to prevent more clones and they want to control what the end users experiences.

As for "controlling what the end user experiences". That's overstating things quite much. They don't want to control what the user experiences, with the fundamental exception that they want to exclude a set of very rational things. Primarily, buggy software, spyware, and ports which fail to make good use of the platform. They don't want control over my experience other than to help see to it that I don't have to deal with such crap. And when us "fanboys" say (as you said in your post) "it's for your own good and other such excuses", what we're saying is that "it makes the product better". That's why we willingly choose Apple products, so we don't have to deal with a bunch of crap. It's also a huge part of why Apple products do so well even when surrounded by competition whose primary advantage is less "control".

As for Mac and control, it's always been about control. Control over hardware and software. This is why its products like the iPod/iTouch/iPhone are encrypted, for control. People found they could start to alter the software on these devices like either use different software to load music on to these devices (like Amarok could before they encrypted the hardware) or even install their own firmware on the devices these people paid for and are normally under the idea (like anything else they buy) that they can do with it as they can. Apple saw that people were doing what they wanted with something they bought (that just happened to have the Apple logo) and they shit a brick. Now all of these devices are encrypted on the hardware level. It wasn't 'for your protection' as it was only being used by a very small minority.

And as for your claim that by being locked down it 'makes a product better', how? iPhones still crash (done it myself as have my friends), it's lock down nature hasn't help it's security, and all of it's 'attempts to make it a better product' by judging if an app should be allow has resulted in either plain old censorship to all out privacy issues from something 'approved'. This hasn't been able to make 'a better product' even after 3 years, and the issues are just growing. Restrictions like this have been tried before by different peoples of power through out history and every time its shown to be a bad thing for the same reason: when someone has power they are more then interested in using/abusing it. And no, Steve Job's isn't going to be the first person in the entire history of humanity to not succumb to the temptation.

This wont happen overnight, not even the RDF turned to eleven could pull that one off. It will happen over time in baby steps and be hailed by the fanboys.

It (although not the "it" you've been going on about) will be hailed because it will make our lives better. The "it" won't be locking down the Mac, or replacing Mac OS X with iOS, but "it" will be things like abstracting the filesystem

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Highly probable by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 08:51 · Score: 0

If Steve adds macos applications to the iTunes store, most of the work is finished. In a next iteration, all he needs to do, is make a few permission changes to the /Library and /Applications directories.

And yes, this is very probable. The MacOS platform has lost Apple's intrest for a long time, and maybe they don't even care. But he might do it anyway for the sake of being even more Evil(tm).

No longer an Apple fanboy, here - I just hope his cancer comes back!

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 09:10 · Score: 1

Because he can't. Most apps require more user input.

What's the problem with input? Are you hinting at the inconvenience of typing text on an iPad? This is trivially taken care of by providing an external keyboard with a dock to conveniently position the screen. Throw in an external display connector, and you're all set.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by node+3 · 2010-06-23 10:33 · Score: 1, Troll

You feel that? Thats called irony. When the biggest Mac troll on slashdot tries to call someone a troll for bullshit. Now the next time you want to call someone a troll you need to take a good, long look in the mirror first.

Just out of curiosity, do you honestly expect me to read the rest of your post, after starting out like this?

Calling people who disagree with you "fanboys" (or "freetards" or using words like "Windoze" and "Micro$oft", you get the idea) is trollish bullshit. Simply having an opinion that is not anti-Apple is not bullshit, nor is it trollish.

Anyway, I hope you didn't put too much effort into the rest of your post, since you've given me no reason to continue reading it. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Frequency response isn't the whole story by garote · 2010-06-23 11:09 · Score: 1

Your 20khz math would be fine if we all had just one ear, but humans hear in stereo. Reproduction of stereo sound for humans is not a simple matter of "max audible frequency = upper limit for sampling rate". Humans are able to distinguish much more subtle differences in timing among sounds - and groups of sounds - heard by both ears.

Listen to a properly produced stereo track at 96Khz versus one at 44khz, and if you pay attention to the stereo image, your ability to track individual sounds in 3D space from a mix, and you will quickly perceive an obvious difference. This is what vinyl enthusiasts call "presence" - shortly before they are mocked and ridiculed by kids who have only listened to vinyl cut from bandwidth-starved digital sources in the modern post-production workflow.

This phenomenon is the main reason why you can distinguish someone knocking on a door quite clearly from the loud 44khz music in your open-ear headphones. Those studio guys aren't idiots. Check out some of the recent publications on the evolutionary biology of hearing.

Re:Frequency response isn't the whole story by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-26 06:04 · Score: 0

Your argument doesn't make any sense. You have to record at a higher frequency because we have two ears? You don't double the frequency for stereo sound, you record a separate channel at the same frequency, so you have one for each ear. That would be twice the data, but not twice the frequency. Your argument is like saying one car travelling at 80, will provide an adequate representation of two cars travelling at 40, it just doesn't make sense.
There may be cases where a sampling rate of 96kHz is needed, and other people have addressed these using less nonsensical arguments, but you didn't address the point made by the poster you replied to that 192kHz is massive overkill.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Zancarius · 2010-06-23 11:12 · Score: 1

Apple would lose their place in the IT market, the scientific market, the music market, the video market with a limited lockdown system. They would lose their margins with a high level of control and supervision for a highly capable system. Yes they would love to have the control and the homogeneity. So would Microsoft, so would Linux. Its just that the order on computers is:

Easy: They'd simply make the IOS/OSX combiOS something that is generally sold on cheaper Macs (I can see the Mac Mini being turned into an iAppliance, for instance). Then, if the consumer wanted to upgrade it to a full fledged OSX install, they'd have to pay a steeper fee. Artificial market segmentation isn't anything new, and I can see traditional markets being forced into purchasing more expensive devices (not that it would really be any different from what they typically do).

So no, I think the OP is right. Apple won't lose their place, they'll just do what every other company (MS included) has been doing for years. In other words:

Cheap Macs = iAppliance
Expensive Macs = full fledged computing device with a "real" OS.

And really, what do most people use their computers for? E-mail and the web. That's it. No, I'm not talking about us; I'm talking about people like your grandmother, your neighbor across the street who isn't much of a techy, and so forth.

--
He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by 3dr · 2010-06-23 11:22 · Score: 1

I disagree. I don't think Apple is interested in walking away from a desktop/server OS. Their pro hardware lines, various software packages, servers and burgeoning IT support, and reputation among The Creatives will ensure Mac OS remains. One simply cannot Create on IOS devices, compared to a desktop. A full computer has such different usage than purely mobile/consumptive devices.

I read the article, and it's more about how some features in IOS appear to be influencing OS X APIs, and how a very small sampling of developers think OS X is going away. There isn't substantial support of either.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by the_B0fh · 2010-06-23 11:29 · Score: 1

WTF is wrong with you people?! Apple's iOS and OSX *CAME FROM THE SAME FUCKING SOURCE*

Additionally, Apple has been Open Sourcing various components, and using Open Source components as those become available. Things like dtrace, etc. Darwin is open source. The kernel itself is open source. Grand Central is open source. Safari/WebKit came from KDE and they made so many improvements to it that KDE *TOOK APPLE'S VERSION IN AND REPLACED THEIR OWN WITH WEBKIT* All the smartphones except for Winblows use a version of webkit.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 11:31 · Score: 1

So wait, is or isn't Apple entirely Steve Jobs?

When it suits you, Apple does what it likes, when it suits you another way for trolling, Steve Jobs is the final say, what he says is law...

Which is it this week?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 11:35 · Score: 2, Informative

Too long didn't read, after your first paragraph pretty much defined what it was you were going to say.

Touched a nerve did he? Too close to the truth?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-23 12:02 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Didn't expect you to read it, since it wasn't blind pro-apple praise to be honest

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-23 12:09 · Score: 0

By the looks of it, I got too close to the truth for you so you decided not to keep reading.

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by PopeRatzo · 2010-06-23 12:12 · Score: 1

When it suits you, Apple does what it likes, when it suits you another way for trolling, Steve Jobs is the final say, what he says is law...
Which is it this week?

I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't believe Steve Jobs is anything but the CEO of a company whose shareholders have come to expect a certain level of profit. He's only going to do what will best provide that profit.

If he ever was a "true believer" in the future of desktop computing to foster innovation and imaginative solutions, he has certainly come to understand that his role as CEO of Apple requires a different approach.

For those of us who have come to appreciate the ability to use a personal computer for things that go beyond the manufacturer's expectations, for those of us who sought and continue to seek new ways of doing things that are outside the intention of the manufacturers and vendors, the best we can hope for is that we can continue to buy components with which to build machines and install the operating systems and applications of our own choice, not the choice of the vendor.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by node+3 · 2010-06-23 12:17 · Score: 1

Didn't expect you to read it, since it wasn't blind pro-apple praise to be honest

I doubt that. You wrote it for me to read. Your one-line quip response here, though, is just trolling, pure and simple. Be honest and admit it.

I don't care if you have a differing opinion, I don't even care if you hate Apple with a passion, I'll read your replies if you aren't just being an asshole. Since you seem so familiar with my posts, you must be aware of that.

But no, the thing that makes me a troll in your eyes is that I say things positive about Apple, so you react like this is supposed to be a flame war. I really, honestly don't care if you agree with me or not, if you're here for an honest conversation, but life's too damned short to spend it throwing insults, not honest opinions, back and forth.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-23 12:31 · Score: 0, Troll

You were so quick to try to label the first person a troll, yet panic when I called you one. Pot meet kettle.

And yes, I've read your posts, and I know you read mine. Your post showed me that. I asked for you to give a legit citation, something you can't do because you know you've made up your posts, all of your posts. I went through you posts. You spout out whatever seems to come to your mind, fully expecting everyone to accept what you say is god-honest truth. Even when its been shown you were wrong. And even when you've been shown that your wrong, you spout more nonsense still unable to give a single legit citation because your hoping to cover lies with more lies. Myself and others here have tried to have mature conversions with you but you always go back to the same old problems expecting everyone to take your word as gold because you said it. All I've asked you for is some legit citations, not much. And still, you refuse to.

Your claiming that I have a differing opinion. Showing facts that counter your say-so isn't a differing opinion. Its calling your bluff. And again, I'm calling your bluff. Prove me wrong.

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jo_ham · 2010-06-23 12:59 · Score: 1

I'm not the OP.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-23 13:22 · Score: 1

Then please don't bother responding in defense of the OP.

If you had read my post, you'd have noticed it wasn't I was 'afraid' of the truth. Far from it in fact. I called him on his comments, had the facts to back up my statements, and wanted him to try to be able to at least try to defend himself. And he didn't, as is his normal reaction.

If you wish to make a response to defend him, then maybe you could show me some facts to prove him right even? Maybe you could show a citation that could back up his claims and not just random say-so? I've called his bluffs, laid out the facts and I don't feel its that much to ask for some facts out of him to back up what he's saying.

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Nice quoting by mister_playboy · 2010-06-23 14:24 · Score: 1

Your quote is misleading... here's a better one from your second link:

System X is a supercomputer assembled by Virginia Tech faculty members, staff, and students in the summer of 2003, comprising 1,100 Apple PowerMac G5 computers. System X is currently running at 12.25 Teraflops, (20.24 peak), and was last ranked #47 (November, 2006) in the TOP500 list of the world's most powerful supercomputers. At that time, it was still the most powerful system categorized by TOP500 as "self made" at any university.

--
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by node+3 · 2010-06-23 17:10 · Score: 1

You were so quick to try to label the first person a troll, yet panic when I called you one. Pot meet kettle.

I didn't call him a troll, re-read my post. In all my time here on slashdot, I've only ever called someone a troll a handful of times.

And yes, I've read your posts, and I know you read mine. Your post showed me that.

To be honest, I recognize your name, but I don't particularly recognize you specifically (and there are folks on both sides who I recognize, plenty more that I don't).

I asked for you to give a legit citation, something you can't do because you know you've made up your posts, all of your posts.

This is just a load of shit. I didn't respond because I didn't read your post, and I don't intend to go back and do so. The thing is, even though this is the internet and all, you still have to treat people with respect if you want to receive respect in return. You'll be hard pressed to cite an example of me totally shitting all over someone who's being respectful.

Not a single thing I've posted is "made up". Some of it is opinion, of course. But any facts are things I know to be true. I might be wrong, but I don't do what you're suggesting.

Your claiming that I have a differing opinion. Showing facts that counter your say-so isn't a differing opinion. Its calling your bluff. And again, I'm calling your bluff. Prove me wrong.

I tell you what. Give me a specific thing you want me to either back up or refute or whatever. Do it without being an ass, and I'll respond (the only exceptions, aside from being an ass, is if the post is from long ago, or there are tons of replies and going through them is a hassle, it would be nice if slashdot had some way of marking replies as viewed or not to be easily sorted).

But, anyway, if you want to have a civil discussion, feel free to completely ignore all the stuff about how I'm not a troll or am a troll, or how you're being an ass or not an ass, etc. Silence will not count against you. Just throw some questions or whatever you think is an honest critique, and see how it goes.

And I debated whether to add this last part here or not, but I will because I think it may help out. Sometimes, hell, a *lot* of times, I'll erase part of a post where I insult someone. Not necessarily because I don't think they deserve it, or that they aren't guilty of being a complete idiot or whatever, but because it just does no good. You clearly think I'm a troll, or being an ass or an idiot or whatever. But really, do you think insulting me is going to get me to respond in a good way? How would it make you respond? That's why I didn't read the rest of that post of yours above.

Anyway, I realize I'm the guy you're pissed off at, so any advice will sound like I'm being condescending or whatever. Reply in the fashion you wish, but before hitting "Submit", take a second to think about what you are looking to get out of your contributions here on slashdot.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-23 18:11 · Score: 1

I asked for you to give a legit citation, something you can't do because you know you've made up your posts, all of your posts.

This is just a load of shit.

Truth is never a load of shit, only someone who has something to hide would declare truth to be shit.

I didn't respond because I didn't read your post, and I don't intend to go back and do so. The thing is, even though this is the internet and all, you still have to treat people with respect if you want to receive respect in return.

I've treated you with respect many times. I've given you the benefit of the doubt many of times. For these acts of kindness I've had you insult me, lie to me and declare my answers meant nothing. Please try listening to yourself. I've been nice, many times. I'm only going to be nice so many times though. I'm not trying to be an asshole, but as the saying goes 'treat others as you wish to be treated'

You'll be hard pressed to cite an example of me totally shitting all over someone who's being respectful.

Myself would be my first example where when I caught your mistaken information in the past and pointed it out to you, you declared that pointing out your being wrong only made me seem like an idiot and a child to you somehow. You never were able to point out why in the times we've done this.

Not a single thing I've posted is "made up". Some of it is opinion, of course. But any facts are things I know to be true. I might be wrong, but I don't do what you're suggesting.

Oh? Your facts are true? Even though I've had the facts with sources to show you that you were wrong? You continue you go on, refusing to show facts, expecting others to disprove you as showing proof/facts about your comments is somehow beyond your needs.

Your claiming that I have a differing opinion. Showing facts that counter your say-so isn't a differing opinion. Its calling your bluff. And again, I'm calling your bluff. Prove me wrong.

I tell you what. Give me a specific thing you want me to either back up or refute or whatever. Do it without being an ass, and I'll respond (the only exceptions, aside from being an ass, is if the post is from long ago, or there are tons of replies and going through them is a hassle, it would be nice if slashdot had some way of marking replies as viewed or not to be easily sorted).

But, anyway, if you want to have a civil discussion, feel free to completely ignore all the stuff about how I'm not a troll or am a troll, or how you're being an ass or not an ass, etc. Silence will not count against you. Just throw some questions or whatever you think is an honest critique, and see how it goes.

And I debated whether to add this last part here or not, but I will because I think it may help out. Sometimes, hell, a *lot* of times, I'll erase part of a post where I insult someone. Not necessarily because I don't think they deserve it, or that they aren't guilty of being a complete idiot or whatever, but because it just does no good. You clearly think I'm a troll, or being an ass or an idiot or whatever. But really, do you think insulting me is going to get me to respond in a good way? How would it make you respond?

The first few times, I bit my tongue and ignored the comments of insult you gave me while still stating facts to disprove your comments that you were never able to back up. I really don't like to have to insult people but as I've mentioned, I can only be insulted so many times before I start getting annoyed.

As for deleting comments, I do that when I try to counter what someone says. Thats why I look up sources to show proof, because I've noticed sometimes I'm wrong and I'm not going to mention whatever I feel like because thats what I want to feel. Facts are real, opinion and memory are not always correct. Everyone makes mistakes and sometimes b

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by EvanED · 2010-06-23 18:13 · Score: 1

What's the problem with input? Are you hinting at the inconvenience of typing text on an iPad? This is trivially taken care of by providing an external keyboard with a dock to conveniently position the screen. Throw in an external display connector, and you're all set.

But how portable is such a setup really? As compared to, say, a Netbook? Could you use it in your lap?

I disagree that they are in the same space... it's close, but not quite there. The Netbook is a clear winner if you're going to be doing much typing; the iPad is a clear winner if you're going to be doing more reading.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jcr · 2010-06-23 18:29 · Score: 1

Now I am vindicated as developers have said the same thing.

So, a couple other people's speculation "vindicates" your own speculation?

The Mac is here to stay. Various technologies that Apple develops will show up on the Mac or the iOS first and be migrated to the other, as we've already seen with Core Data ( went from the Mac to the iPhone), or Core Animation (went from the iPhone to the Mac).

-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2010-06-23 18:41 · Score: 1

You mean abandoning by slowly improving their pro software range?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 18:48 · Score: 0

> This notion of iOS on the desktop is just
> as misguided as the idea of an iPad running Mac OS X

Uh, yeah... actually, iPad running Mac OS X (with some additional features related to keyboard/touch pad) would be a product suitable for an intelligent audience, while the iPad as initially dumbed down dates itself as inevitably the lowest level of functionality one could possibly imagine in such a device. Landfill, for all of Apple's green hype. Landfill, only, for sure, it will be there with the Kindles and 8-track tapes, only idiots bought this, for only 6 months.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-06-23 18:56 · Score: 1

I disagree that they are in the same space... it's close, but not quite there. The Netbook is a clear winner if you're going to be doing much typing; the iPad is a clear winner if you're going to be doing more reading.

Agreed. But this gets us back to my original comment, which was about how iOS functionality (including its artificial restrictions) is quite sufficient for a typical casual user on a laptop or a desktop, and may even prove to be subjectively superior. iPad form factor is not really a part of it.

WWDC by Serious+Callers+Only · 2010-06-23 18:59 · Score: 1

Something which points to this, and which has not received as much attention as it should, is that the entire WWDC conference this year was given over to iOS.That is unprecedented, and gives an indication of where Apple's focus lies at the moment and how much they care about Mac devs.

Certainly iOS, AppKit in particular reads like a cleanup and rewrite of all the APIs from cocoa, something you wouldn't bother doing unless you were confident it would be used to replace Cocoa/AppKit.

Since the major difference between iOS and Mac OS X is cocoa (the underpinnings are the same, many core frameworks are the same), this would effectively mean replacing OS X with iOS. I expect to see a transition happen over the next few years. Note that UIKit doesn't at present support mouse events - will be interesting to see if they go all touchscreen or not with this transition. This will anger a lot of desktop devs who have sunk a lot of time into learning their APIs (some recently switched from carbon or Windows), but Apple have shown repeatedly that they don't give much thought to third party devs.

Imagine being Adobe though - you've just completed the transition to end all transitions (Carbon to Cocoa), after much pain getting your code-base up to date, and Apple tell you they have another bridge to sell you, even better than the last one.

This might be partly why Apple are so insistent on keeping people corralled into their dev tools and Obj-C - so that they can switch deployment targets, supported APIs and even architectures easily without worrying about leaving anyone behind or supporting glue other languages.

The signs are already there in Apple's neglect of the desktop, and it is likely to become more pronounced over the next few years. Turns out that invite with two bridges diverging was prophetic, you just have to be sure you're on the same bridge as Steve Jobs, or you may find the one you're on ends in mid-air when you least expect it.

Do it! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-23 19:14 · Score: 0

Please, Apple, bust Mac OS X! It's time to upgrade again! I can't stand the wait and suspense!

Re:monopoly and censorship are just some of things by krischik · 2010-06-23 19:26 · Score: 1

force DEV's to pay $99 year just for free apps

This is one thing I never understood: If I have to pay $99 a year - why would I give my app away fro free. Wy would I not try to recoup the $99.?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by node+3 · 2010-06-23 19:47 · Score: 1

Kitkoan: I'm going to reply with a second, TL;DR. Feel free to ignore either this one or the other one.

Everyone else: If anyone else is still reading this, please skip this post and go to the second TL;DR one. I mean, if you want, read on, but it's going to be boring as hell.

So, here's the thing. This isn't going to work if you keep attacking me personally, so I'm skipping down to where you actually go after factual points (I did read it this time, but I'm not going to address it except to say you make a lot of claims against me without any citations, just, "you keep insulting me and I held my tongue" etc.).

Anyway, if you have any specific grievances, feel free to cite them. Otherwise, addressing nebulous accusations seems futile.

And I'll try to restate what I was trying to say last post: if you are interested in honest discussion, let's just drop all the "you're a dick", "no, you're a dick" back and forth.

For starters, you mentioned 'As for "controlling what the end user experiences". That's overstating things quite much.... with the fundamental exception that they want to exclude a set of very rational things. Primarily, buggy software, spyware, and ports which fail to make good use of the platform(which unless I'm mistaken your meaning the App store and the inability to install/modify the OS the your choosing)... it makes the product better' how so? How is the locked down nature of iPod/iPhone/iPad not 'controlling the end user experiences? How does this make a 'product better'?

I can't go through a barrage of questions (logistically speaking). Three questions means three quotes and three answers, it gets tedious quickly.

Anyway, I'll do a list here:

1. (makes it better, how?) It makes it better by removing a lot of responsibility on the part of the user.
2. (how is the app store lock not "controlling the user") It doesn't control the user. It controls one aspect of the device. I suspect we are never going to agree on this, and that's fine. But my point is that "control" isn't binary. If any minuscule amount of control is the same as total control, then yes, Apple controls the user. But if there's a difference, then what I'm saying is that the amount of control is insufficient to trigger a judgement of "Apple is controlling you". The reason I say we will probably not agree here is because you appear to be the type of person who finds pretty much any control to be offensive. While you don't have to agree with me, you should at least agree that my judgement is honest.
3. (how does this make it better? (ok, looks like just two questions) I'll expand on my first answer. It makes the product better for most people. If you are technically competent (most people aren't), enjoy tinkering (most people don't) and like the idea of having a phone that allows tinkering and pushing the boundaries of what is possible, then the iPhone is not for you. For that type of person (I'm assuming you are that type), it doesn't make the iPhone better. But for people for which those things do not apply? The iPhone is better for them.

So when I say it makes the iPhone better, I don't mean better for everyone. Also, it's important to understand that "better" is opinion. When you claim I'm not honest or am making things up, or whatever, you can't use opinion as though it were fact. What is important here is whether my opinion is honest (it is) and whether it's based on some form of rational thought process (it is). Even if you disagree with my opinion, you cannot dismiss it as lies or fanboyism or something.

As I mentioned (with links re-inserted) 'As for Mac and control, it's always been about control. Control over hardware and software. This is why its products like the iPod/iTouch/iPhone are encrypted, for control. People found they could start to alter the software on these devices like either use different software to load music on to these devices (like Amarok could before they

TL;DR version by node+3 · 2010-06-23 19:55 · Score: 1

So, we're both annoyed with each other. No point in dwelling on that, but if I've offended you, cite some specific posts and if you want an apology or acknowledgement, etc., well, we'll see what the case is. I'd rather just drop it altogether and get to the actual topic at hand.

As for the actual topic, please ask specific questions. Not walls-of-text paragraphs with question after question and link after link. There's no way to reply to something like that without either ignoring huge parts of it, or creating a monster-size reply in turn. It's alright (and perfectly reasonable) to go on an explanation for a paragraph or two, but for the parts you specifically want me to reply to, a one liner, or a small list, is the way to go.

After all, I have to read your post in order to reply to it.

So, if you have some specific things you want me to address, ask them directly and reasonably succinctly, otherwise this is just a mess.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Tim+C · 2010-06-23 22:15 · Score: 1

Yes they do, PC is short for "Personal Computer" - or are you disputing that Macs are personal computers?

--
It's official. Most of you are morons.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by cerberusss · 2010-06-24 00:06 · Score: 1

You mean the new Mac Minis they released last week?

Have you seen the price of the new Mac Minis? I am surprised they dare call it Mac Mini anymore. A raise from $500 to $700 is a 40% price increase.

--
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jo_ham · 2010-06-24 01:23 · Score: 1

Why bother, you'll just call me a clueless fanboy and dismiss my citations out of hand. Your opening paragraph says pretty much everything anyone needs to read.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · 2010-06-24 01:46 · Score: 1

I agree the elimination of Mac OS X is far fetched, but do not trust it just because Jobs said so. He's said a lot of things that Apple has reversed course on throughout his time of CEO. Furthermore there are other things that Apple has done, that I would categorise as foolish. The good news is that upgrades are never mandatory, and you can install alternative Operating systems on the hardware. If either of those two things change, run for the hills.

--
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.

The requirement of Objective-C++ by tepples · 2010-06-24 02:26 · Score: 1

If you have a good idea and you can program decently enough that your app won't crash in basically a single-tasking environment, buy a Mac, pay an extra $99 and get rich. Um, where's the downside?

The downside is that you have to program in Objective-C++, which means you can't bring your existing Python, Java, or C# codebase with you. Nor can you make a Windows Phone 7 app and an iPhone app that share the same back-end business logic, even if they do have front-ends individually customized for the strengths of each platform, because Windows Phone 7 requires verifiably memory-safe CIL and iPhone requires Objective-C++, which cannot compile to verifiably memory-safe CIL.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-24 08:52 · Score: 1

Doubtful, since thats all I asked for. All I asked for is a citation, even a single one. Thats all I asked for to accept what he said as fact. A good citation shows honesty and truth and will make me listen, this is how others have shown where I was wrong and I've accepted I was wrong, I've even mentioned it in return I was wrong. But just saying whatever and having nothing to back it up, even after being called on it and having a solid citation to show he was wrong, is worthless and not an answer.

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-24 09:03 · Score: 1

While most of the post I can accept as it is at least well thought it, it's when you claim things like "iPhone still outsells Android, all Android products, by a huge margin" that make me question your answer. As is mentioned today, from an article as far back as May, Android is outselling iPhones. It doesn't take a huge report to point it out that it's a mistake notion. But a simple Google search can at least make sure to yourself that what you said might be mistaken. (The links second choice would be a good, as the others are just guesswork.)

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by jo_ham · 2010-06-24 09:36 · Score: 1

Right, and an ad hominem attack in your opening paragraph is *really* conducive to good discourse. Why waste the time looking up cites when your opponent is only interested in mud slinging?

Autotune by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-24 11:40 · Score: 0

The 'T-Pain Sound' which you find in most of the pop stars' recordings these days is basically the audio equivalent of the blocky artifacts in an overprocessed JPEG. Autotune does pitch shifting to compensate for singers who can't hold a note. And if the sample rate is too low, guess what! Aliasing.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Kitkoan · 2010-06-24 12:15 · Score: 1

I don't know why I kept wasting the time to look up cites in the past when his first reaction was mudslinging and misinformation, guest I felt that it might be worth trying. Ehh... live and learn and treat others like they treated me. Might remember that for your next post, just read the first few words and assume the worst for you too... since obviously thinking that maybe there is more here then a first impression implies is possible...

--
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by bandmassa · 2010-06-24 12:32 · Score: 1

Frankly, if my Mac ran iOS4 AND the current crop of productivity apps I have on it, I'd rejoice. Like Windows, Mac OS has become an overly complex house of cards. More stable than Windows, mostly, better integrated with hardware, I guess, but the original ease of use vanished with the release of Mac OS X. Don't get me wrong, I love my Mac, there are no media tools of the kind I use which come close to Garage Band's or Final Cut's ease of use. Just the same, it takes me less time to make a basic multitrack, overdub recording on my iPhone using Multitrack (I have all the necessary adapters to do this :-) than it does to get to the same basic, raw 16 track stage with Garage Band, and don't even bother having a race with Logic. iOS is what 99% of the world needs from an OS, anything else is probably a Microsoft-World-View of what we "need." (And 99% of the world don't need what developers need, either, BTW.)

--
"I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by node+3 · 2010-06-24 15:58 · Score: 1

Android outsold the iPhone[*] in the US for one quarter. Worldwide, the iPhone dominates Android, and even in the US, it's uncertain whether Android will see the same sales rate, but it very well could. I do have a suspicion, however, that iPhone will have a very good current quarter.

It's just one market for one quarter. It's definitely notable, but iPhone is still out ahead.

[*] It's also worth noting that this only counts iPhone, not all iOS devices, but it doesn't have any direct bearing on what I wrote or what you were responding to.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by Anonymous Coward · 2010-06-26 10:58 · Score: 0

the ones that use the same cpu and just added hdmi out and a smaller case? Still costs $800, still slower than a $300 dell from 3-4 years ago.

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by nurb432 · 2010-06-27 11:13 · Score: 1

If they do make this move, it will kill the desktop where people are used to more control. In the phone market, i can see why its this way, and people are used to it. ( at least the ones that think rationally.. ). But extend this to the desktop/portable you can kiss the market good bye.

And as an apple fan, id be jumping ship too.

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----

Re:Not like I havent been saying this for a while by nurb432 · 2010-06-27 11:16 · Score: 1

But they may not be apple branded trucks.

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----

Slashdot Mirror

Developers Expect iOS and MacOS To Merge

436 comments