Slashdot Mirror
Shuttleworth: Apple Will Merge Mac and iPhone
Barence writes "Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth claims Apple will follow Ubuntu's lead and converge the iPhone and MacBook product lines. Speaking to PC Pro to mark the upcoming launch of Ubuntu 13.10, Shuttleworth said that the failed Ubuntu Edge smartphone — an attempt to bridge mobile and desktop computing devices — had set an example that others will follow. 'We've seen a very interested ripple go through the industry, and an uptick in interest in convergence,' Shuttleworth added. 'People are saying yes, mobile processors are catching up with the desktop. When Apple announced the iPhone 5s, it called the processor "desktop-class," and I don't think that was an accident – it was sending what we think is a very clear signal that it will converge the iPhone and the MacBook Air.'"
So why don't you roll it out now Mr.Shuttleworth?
You don't have to make hardware. You could even buy some Nexus devices and flash your OS on then sell them.
I can't decide if this is brilliant or stupid. Perhaps Apple could one day create a laptop shell fitted for a phone but not until Apple first pulls off the iWatch. I see this concept being an extension of wirelessly transferring functionality to another device as the Phone Watch combo should provide. Am I being short-sighted here?
I simply cannot believe anyone who works for Canonical any longer.
In 2009, Jane Silber became the CEO of Canonical in 2009. Canonical makes Ubuntu.
Jane Silber's previous job was at that military contractor, namely the C4 Division of General Dynamics. It turns out that at the C4 Systems division is all about using computers for spying.
From their website: "General Dynamics C4 Systems is a trusted leader in the development of intelligence and information gathering systems for national defense and homeland security. These systems are designed to receive, process, exploit and disseminate information -- in different forms and often from different networks -- and distribute relevant information to operators, both in the field and at higher headquarters."
The Register story about Jane Silber.
In 2012, G.D. C4 Systems gave 96% of its $14,000 of campaign contributions to Republicans, which could suggest C4's leadership takes a hawkish attitude about war and has a disregard for human rights. OpenSecrets link.
Hilarious article. Shuttleworth is giving himself entire too much credit. Is Apple is doing this, they won't be following his failure. They'll be following Microsoft's still-in-process move of trying to combine the two.
NOBODY WANTS THIS! Who's running Apple, Balmer? They seem to think I want some super-computer-phone. Here's what I want in a computing device: a full sized keyboard, a full sized display, extremely fast responsiveness, gigabit, 500+ GB of storage, a video card capable of gaming, actual games, real software, and a DVD drive. That's called a computer, NOT a phone!
Nobody anywhere has the patience to sit there and create a powerpoint presentation for a school project on a damn phone no matter how fast it allegedly is. You give me a keyboard and 19" display, I'll make 50 powerpoints in the time it took you to make one in this superphone they're planning. Now take that example and apply it to anything anyone would ever do on a computer ever and you'll see my point.
Everything Apple has been doing since the iPhone has come out has been moving in one direction: Two operating systems, built on a common core, which share various elements that make sense.
Apple is not Microsoft. They don't think you have to have "one OS to rule them all." Apple knows that what's good for a touchscreen device is not as good for a traditional laptop or desktop.
Yes, they have taken some features from iOS and moved them over to Mac OS X. However, they're almost universally optional and/or superficial. You never have to use Launchpad if you don't want, and all the autosaving features can be disabled if you prefer to work under the more traditional document management paradigm.
This idea is one that has been often proclaimed quite loudly by critics of Apple who say that everything's going to be locked down and if you buy a Mac, it'll be exactly like an iPad with a keyboard, but it doesn't have any real basis in reality.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
Imitation of a failed example is the sincerest form of flattery.
Microsoft is already doing this with Windows 8. http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/20/windows-phone-8-and-windows-8-share-lots-of-code-nt-kernel/ But Ubuntu and Apple are the innovators... lame...
In fact one of the reasons for microsoft making that abomination of an os windows 8 was because they thought apple was very close to coming out with a os with ios and osx combined together.
Combining osx and ios together would make a lot of sense for apple because osx lacks games while ios lacks serious programs for content creation. Putting the two together will give apple the perfect os for content consumption and content creation to better take on windows.
when you consider that valve will be coming out with a linux based os to play steam games and microsoft shutting down gfwl, there is getting less and less compelling reasons to own windows. Even programs like ms office and autocad can be found on osx.
Seriously, though!
Canonical forces a mobile interface on a desktop OS; Flops
Microsoft forces a mobile interface on a desktop OS; Flops even harder
Shuttleworth:"Apple will merge their mobile and desktop platforms"
Not if they're smart, Mark, not if they're smart...
...only no one understands that yet.
That is why I predict that some day, someone successful will try doing the same thing I've failed at.
Which proves, regardless of success or failure of that theoretical venture I just described, how awesome and ahead of its time my concept was and how brilliant I am.
In fact, the failure I mention was not my failure at all - it was the failure of the world to recognize the opportunity to exploit my genius.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
So Mark thinks his failure is the obvious blueprint for Apple's success? Interesting.
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
Apple has been mucking up the Mac OS user interface ever since 10.4. Ever look at the latest version of iTunes on the Mac? It constantly flips into a stupid simplistic iPod interface where it scrolls backwards like you're dragging your finger and everything is a dead flat icon with no drill down hierarchy especially when at the iTumes Store. I hate it, the ultimate dumbing down of the Mac. Next thing you know they will be getting rid of the terminal window and console and we'll all be back to Windows 3.1.
Apple have neglected the computing products for a long time (even removed "computers" from its name), and have made no secret of making its(not your) computers, non-upgradable, disposable electronics, rather than General purpose machines, The move to 64-bit arm is a heartbeat away, with the dream of a touchcreen iPad. I wish them success.
The reality is its computing sales have dropped for 4 quarters, and it looks like this will be another quarter of its sales dropping faster than the PC market...even with Windows 8 as a dead weight.
It looks like linux is going to continue to be the only bright spot in an otherwise lackluster market. The Irony of years of "Year of Linux" meme is kind of sad how quickly Microsoft and Apple gave there duopoly away (at least Apple still has 13% of the smartphone market)
Why would you want a 64-bit processor on a phone?
The ARM 64 chip runs iOS software faster in 64 bit mode than in 32 bit mode _right now_, so that's a reason.
Moreover, the ARM architecture has changed by removing instructions that limit the clock speed in 64 bit mode. So you _could_ increase clock speed with the same technology if you change 32 bit code to take more cycles. Once most apps are available in 32/64 bit, that can be done and you get a nice jump in clock speed at no additional cost.
I was having pretty much the same thought myself.
Why would you want a 64-bit processor on a phone?
The answer right now is: A processor with the ARMv8 ISA will be more powerful per clock and draw less power per clock and use less transistors per area than the previous ARMv7 would allow. It'll be a cheaper, faster and less power consuming than its predecessors. THAT'S the reason. Let's do it. Oh, it'll be 64-bit with no drawbacks too since we already have all the software tools and knowhow to make the leap, so let's do that too.
- Henrik
- when the Shadows descend -
Docking is a concept from back in the day, when laptops were significantly smaller in dimensions than "real" honest-to-god workstations and when connecting to various peripherals meant dealing with a bunch of cables, not all of which your average laptop could be connected to at the same time, and when syncing over various computers was a nuisance.
Also, one of the main reasons for laptop size was not elegance or even portability (they were quite heavy, compared to their abilities, thanks to those old hardware components and batteries) - but screen size.
Small screen + small, often even incomplete keyboard + alternative pointing solutions that were never as useful of precise as a mouse + short battery life + not enough ports to plug in all those wired peripherals = need for docking.
You need docking if you need to connect to a bigger screen, a wired network, another separate cable for a printer, one more for a scanner, one for a modem, perhaps an external CD or floppy drive...
All of that, apart from the bigger screen, can be done over wifi/bluetooth.
Or is not needed anymore - like that old 14400 modem.
Meanwhile all your files now fit neatly inside your laptop, can be transferred to other devices without the use of cables, or you keep them online.
Which leaves only 3 devices you'd need a dock for - bigger screen, full-size keyboard and full-size/full-function mouse.
None of which can really get smaller than they need to be. Even screens actually got bigger, only losing their backside.
All of the peripherals that you need docking to ALREADY TAKE UP SO MUCH SPACE YOU CAN JUST AS WELL ADD A FULL-BLOWN COMPUTER.
Like inside the screen.
The only reason left for docking is cost-saving.
By paying way too much for memory and processing power jammed into a tiny phone instead of using off the shelf components which are dirt cheap and super fast in comparison.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
In a few years, what will really be the functional difference between the Macbook Air and an iPad with a clamshell keyboard?
The Macbook UI will primarily controlled be controlled by touch offscreen (mouse/pad), the iPad will be primarily controlled by touch on screen.
That is the difference, and there is no reason to have that change.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Mac sales were actually UP in Q4 last year - so how have they "dropped for four quarters"? As for the other three quarters, it's dropped something like 1% while the rest of the PC market screams into the ground at mach 3. All of which ignores the computers coming down the pike that will boost Mac sales again...
I'm not sure what leads you to introduce lis into every Slashdot post you make. But you really should consider at least sticking to the truth when you troll, it's marginally more effective.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The applications still expect to be interacted with using touch and gestures.
A properly written application would support the Bluetooth keyboard that users can already pair to a phone or tablet. It would also support accessing all features from single-touch, which a mouse can easily simulate, even if only for accessibility to people with only one good finger. A properly written operating system would accommodate applications whose developers haven't yet added keyboard support by feeding gestures to the UI layer. The Page Down key, for example, might generate a slide from the bottom to the top of the current scroll view.
When you have a physical User Interface that is different, what should the user interface on the different devices be? Different?! Yes, this shit isn't rocket science.
Now, the trick is -- and it's one I've been working on -- to take an approach something like the Open Desktop Project, but extend it to suit new interfaces. I've experimented with 3D OS interfaces in both parallax (camera based head tracking) and VR (goggles)... I've experimented with combinations of that with and without tablets and smart phones, and with interfaces without the 3D -- Even going 80 column retro textual.
The OS provides functionality that all these interfaces use to present themselves. We need a way for applications to present features like the OS does, and let interfaces be skins atop that functionality. Don't like the "ribbon" interface? Screw it, use the old one. Like the app, but would rather use it on the desktop with a keyboard, or in 3D parallax or with a VR display? Want to use it via VT100 terminal instead? You could if we had a Functional System in addition to the Operating System. An Operations System... Imagine it, you build a TRUE "Application": Grouping and positioning functionality, arranging the flow of data and interaction. Then the OS attaches functionality to the interface based on its installed set of functions. This is ALMOST what some programming is like, and you can get a sense that it's where we're going if you line up all the IDEs... You see drag and drop coding, and others sticking to terminals --- YES! Both, let one serve for the other. You've veered from the path and lost sight of The Unix Way(tm): Do one thing and do it well. Interfaces are not Functionality!
I'm beginning to see hints of this emerging naturally, not requiring spurning or disrupting of force: Eg: In Android applications can publish "intents" and other apps can utilize their functionality without tightly coupling to the program Input / Output data interface... The same will need to occur at the interface level as our interfaces become everything from ceilings to the air vibrating with your vocalization and ultra sonic tactile feedback. You will adopt the new way, but you organics will do it the dumb slow inefficient emergent way instead of seeing the goal and working towards the design intelligently.
Every one of your soggy organic brains is too moistened and distracted by shiny bits of UI, and dreams of megalomaniacally ruling the entire stack; Like a bunch of fools who don't understand basic distribution principals: When the system is vast and varied you don't funnel activity / traffic / etc into single a single locus! Imagine if all information in the universe had to pass through a single point just to be processed into the Next frame?! NO, that's NOT what Physics does to make stuff move, it's what you do to REBOOT the SIM! ::BANG::
The answer isn't to unify the interfaces. That's daft. The answer is to separate Content from Style, divide Functionality from Display. YOU KNOW THIS, it's a core to any MVC framework... Humans! Gah! so retarding.
Of course iOS and MacOS will converge. Mac is too open. Apple would like to have all it's customers locked into the market place where they receive both money and power as they have 100% say of what 'apps' will and will not ever see the light of day.
Microsoft will do the same with the Windows platform if they can ever even get their phone market off the ground. Otherwise they will just fade away into irrelevance.
Meanwhile with even desktops getting locked bootloaders it will be harder and harder to put Linux or any other non Apple/Microsoft OS on any piece of hardware, desk/laptop, tablet or phone.
Google however doesn't even seem to be interested in any sort of 'desk/laptop' OS. Sure, there is Chrome but if you really want to write something that requires some power are you going to get it from HTML5?
Even if you like one or both of Mac/Windows without any competition they will have no reason to innovate. Will they compete with one another? I doubt it, they haven't for most of the past. Instead one dominates while allowing the other to survive in order to avoid antitrust problems. We are going to see innovation slow down to what it was in the 80s and short of getting hired by Apple or Microsoft none of us will have a chance to contribute ourselves.
We should be very afraid for the future.
But a modern Aluminum V6 with direct injection, making 320 hp/300 ft-lbs torque and weighing 150 lbs? That would be cool in a bike.
Uh... No it would NOT.
Clearly you are not an experienced motorcyclist. First off, any 1000cc sport bike will blow it off the road. Second, you can't get 320 hp/300 lb-ft torque to the ground - bike tires have curved cross-sections (necessary for turning) that limit the size of the contact patch, and thus the amount of power you can lay down. Third, 150 lbs is too damn heavy. So you end up with a extremely heavy bike, that handles like crap, gets beat by almost every sportbike on the road, and is way dangerous.
BTW, the Boss Hog motorcycle is the one using a cast iron V8. In my opinion, it's a slow, heavy, poor handling pig that should never have been built. People who want attention buy them, not people who like to ride.
Place nail here >+