PDA

View Full Version : Is Apple running out of ideas?




Retina MacBook
Jul 21, 2012, 08:43 PM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history. Then Snow Leopard barely had anything new, just refinements. Lion had a UI tweak and Mountain Lion has a bunch of Apps.

Let's face it - Mountain Lion isn't shockingly amazing. No one would camp outside the Apple Store just to grab a USB of ML.

But Mountain Lion is a good upgrade, just not much over Lion.

Is Apple running out of ideas?



MacDawg
Jul 21, 2012, 08:46 PM
I seriously doubt their well has run dry on ideas

Technology always evolves and goes in cycles
Sometimes in giant leaps
Sometimes incrementally

I am sure they have some things in R&D

Vorlox
Jul 21, 2012, 08:51 PM
Tiger=Probably the prettiest and fastest Version of OS X

Snow Leopard=Probably the best overall!

Mountain Lion(As of yet)=Good but unfortunately has no real new things except a lack of support for a LOT of software.

Who knows what apple will have thought of by OS XI 11.0 Giraffe...

ixodes
Jul 21, 2012, 08:59 PM
I believe Apple is staffed with very creative people.

Now that the man that took credit for everything has left, I've heard that Apple employee moral has truly improved. Not that it was particularly bad before, let's just say it was a bit suppressed.

The only concern I have, is based solely on recent product releases and the apparent (if true) lack of a freshly revamped iPhone. I'm not sure just how the narrow, longer display will be received. I'm sure it will sell very well, after all it's the Apple Hype Machine that lures people in.

That said, the question that lingers in my mind is just how much _better_ would a fresh, new, slightly wider and proportional iPhone have done in the market place? :)

daneoni
Jul 21, 2012, 09:02 PM
*sigh* You guys and the unrealistic and unreasonable expectations you heap on this company.

I hope you realise that it is still a company run by Humans not Unicorns, Magical Elves or Fairies with Pixie Dust.

You guys sound like addicts waiting for the next 'fix' from your dealer.

iVeBeenDrinkin'
Jul 21, 2012, 09:02 PM
What do you want your os to do? Cook for you? OSX is by far the most superior OS available.

rorschach
Jul 21, 2012, 09:02 PM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history. Then Snow Leopard barely had anything new, just refinements. Lion had a UI tweak and Mountain Lion has a bunch of Apps.

Let's face it - Mountain Lion isn't shockingly amazing. No one would camp outside the Apple Store just to grab a USB of ML.

But Mountain Lion is a good upgrade, just not much over Lion.

Is Apple running out of ideas?

I'll repost something I wrote a few months ago about this:

How much more big innovations are going to happen on desktop OSes? The desktop has simply matured to the point where there's just not much more you can do.

It's all about mobile now. Actually, for Apple it's more than that. It's about keeping everything in sync. This is exactly what was meant when Steve talked about the Mac being demoted to "just another device." It won't matter what device you're on, whether it's your Mac, your iPhone, your iPad. All your data will be there.

That's the future.

Quite frankly, there's not much that I'm personally missing from operating systems these days, feature-wise.

Both Windows and OS X have matured to the point where each release is not going to be a massive update with dozens of big new features. And Mountain Lion's price reflects this: it's $19. Apple is switching to the iOS model for OS X updates: yearly, incremental, and cheap.

million7
Jul 21, 2012, 10:22 PM
How bout this for a new idea/big leap, what if when apple gets to OS 11.x they announce they'll be discontinuing software development for their mac line and will be focusing all their efforts on iOS. :cool:

Jonx
Jul 21, 2012, 10:35 PM
I don't know, perhaps back then there was no iOS and iOS devices so Macs and OSX got all the attention, nowadays it's split between the two. Hopefully OSX's future is bright and wont turn into or abandoned in favour of iOS.

MisterMe
Jul 21, 2012, 10:59 PM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history. ...This is an awfully big assertion for someone to make without hint of the criteria he is basing his assertion on. Leopard was Apple's first UNIX 03-certified operating system. This is a huge deal in a lot of respects. I mean that is a good way. However, Leopard was also the first version of MacOS X that did not support Classic. For someone whose first experience with MacOS X was OS X 10.7.3, that means nothing. For someone who has files dating back to cave paintings, it can be an issue.

To the ordinary user who only cares about the work that his/her computer allows him/her to do, I contend that Leopard is an evolutionary step. Lion, which changed the MacOS X UI, was a bigger step. Show me the errors in my analysis.

mrsir2009
Jul 21, 2012, 11:04 PM
How bout this for a new idea/big leap, what if when apple gets to OS 11.x they announce they'll be discontinuing software development for their mac line and will be focusing all their efforts on iOS. :cool:

How bout this for a new idea/big leap, what if Tim Cook shoots himself in the foot? :cool:

Retina MacBook
Jul 21, 2012, 11:20 PM
This is an awfully big assertion for someone to make without hint of the criteria he is basing his assertion on. Leopard was Apple's first UNIX 03-certified operating system. This is a huge deal in a lot of respects. I mean that is a good way. However, Leopard was also the first version of MacOS X that did not support Classic. For someone whose first experience with MacOS X was OS X 10.7.3, that means nothing. For someone who has files dating back to cave paintings, it can be an issue.

To the ordinary user who only cares about the work that his/her computer allows him/her to do, I contend that Leopard is an evolutionary step. Lion, which changed the MacOS X UI, was a bigger step. Show me the errors in my analysis.

Classic was useless, anyway. Barely anyone had a file that is from the time of the dinosaurs. And it really was time to go. And that's why Apple also abandoned PPC on Snow Leopard, and Rosetta on Lion. Forget them. It's not like you're working with them til today.

The UI is just the buttons and the scroll bar. Not much, compared to tiger vs. leopard. Now, that's huge.

nuckinfutz
Jul 21, 2012, 11:29 PM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history. Then Snow Leopard barely had anything new, just refinements. Lion had a UI tweak and Mountain Lion has a bunch of Apps.

Let's face it - Mountain Lion isn't shockingly amazing. No one would camp outside the Apple Store just to grab a USB of ML.

But Mountain Lion is a good upgrade, just not much over Lion.

Is Apple running out of ideas?

What does their patent portfolio say to you?

Photics
Jul 22, 2012, 07:10 AM
Let's face it - Mountain Lion isn't shockingly amazing. No one would camp outside the Apple Store just to grab a USB of ML.

I generally don't camp outside for any products, but I'm really excited about Mountain Lion. It's cheap and it adds great features.

I think the addition of Game Center is huge, as the Mac is not really known as a gaming platform. I'm looking forward to iMessage, as I'll be able to send free messages to iOS devices and Macs. That's great... because AIM usage seems to have waned.

I'm looking forward to iCloud features, like reminders and notes. I'm also looking forward to testing out the new dictation feature.

Plus, I was cheap. I didn't upgrade my Mac Mini to Lion. I'm basically saving $29.99 (plus tax) by skipping it.

Snow Leopard=Probably the best overall!

Mountain Lion(As of yet)=Good but unfortunately has no real new things except a lack of support for a LOT of software.

I really like Snow Leopard. I don't like the loss of Rosetta. Although, since I really wasn't using it, I'm getting ready to upgrade to Mountain Lion.

million7
Jul 22, 2012, 07:55 AM
How bout this for a new idea/big leap, what if Tim Cook shoots himself in the foot? :cool:

Mindblown! :eek:

Krazy Bill
Jul 22, 2012, 09:40 AM
Is Apple running out of ideas?As implied in another post... it's all about iOS. OSX has about one more version, then it's all going to be merged.

MacDawg
Jul 22, 2012, 10:03 AM
As implied in another post... it's all about iOS. OSX has about one more version, then it's all going to be merged.

I don't see them ever being completely merged
Too many hurdles until we have enough advancements to do the type things we see in the movies with virtual screens and holograms

TheGdog
Jul 22, 2012, 10:34 AM
As implied in another post... it's all about iOS. OSX has about one more version, then it's all going to be merged.

I highly doubt it will be merged. That would be a software nightmare to pull off.
OSX has reached a point where it very mature and the only thing really left is cloud integration. iOS is getting most of the attention because it has only begun in terms of ability and function. Apple has promised yearly updates to OSX. Apple is not getting rid of OSX, but its to a point where it does not need as much attention.

cocky jeremy
Jul 22, 2012, 11:25 AM
Tiger=Probably the prettiest and fastest Version of OS X

Snow Leopard=Probably the best overall!

Mountain Lion(As of yet)=Good but unfortunately has no real new things except a lack of support for a LOT of software.

Who knows what apple will have thought of by OS XI 11.0 Giraffe...

Tiger is in NO way prettier than Leopard, SL, Lion, ML.

nuckinfutz
Jul 22, 2012, 12:15 PM
As implied in another post... it's all about iOS. OSX has about one more version, then it's all going to be merged.

No it will not

MisterMe
Jul 22, 2012, 01:08 PM
Classic was useless, anyway. How would you know? I'd bet dollars to donuts that you don't have a clue.

Barely anyone had a file that is from the time of the dinosaurs. ...Do you actually believe that people threw away their old mission-critical files?

But I digress... You still have not supported your contention that Leopard was the biggest leap in MacOS X. It is worth noting that no one has yet supported your contention.

PlaceofDis
Jul 22, 2012, 01:11 PM
out of ideas? certainly not. i think as time goes on we'll see less 'features' as consumers but developers will be the ones to get the features though APIs and the like which lets them create better, more integrated applications. and i think thats were the real growth has been and will continue with a few tweaks here and there for the everyday consumer.

pdjudd
Jul 22, 2012, 01:20 PM
As implied in another post... it's all about iOS. OSX has about one more version, then it's all going to be merged.

Cite please. Iíll give you a hint that version numbers arenít necessarily decimals.

50548
Jul 22, 2012, 01:51 PM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history. Then Snow Leopard barely had anything new, just refinements. Lion had a UI tweak and Mountain Lion has a bunch of Apps.

Let's face it - Mountain Lion isn't shockingly amazing. No one would camp outside the Apple Store just to grab a USB of ML.

But Mountain Lion is a good upgrade, just not much over Lion.

Is Apple running out of ideas?

The answer is an easy YES. Ever since SL, Mac OS X is nothing more than a bunch of patches - almost ZERO exciting and/or innovative under-the-hood or visible features.

No new/revamped Finder, no new file system, no mindblowing interface changes, no major codec support measures etc.

And with SJ down, the hopes of Apple refocusing on OS X with a team of TRUE geniuses are virtually nonexistent. In the meantime, ordinary customers may jump up and down about the latest integration of "reminders" into OS X...while longtime users cringe with disappointment.

pmau
Jul 22, 2012, 02:00 PM
Totally agree.

Since Apple has spent so much time on developing iOS and the infrastructure for the App Stores, they have totally left out fundamental new ideas in the area of base technologies.

Filesystem (clustered with "cloud" support)

Drivers (Mac once was capable of driving external hardware, nowadays noone cares anymore if it's not USB carp)

Graphics Techoloogy (No real advances in OpenGL, Quartz is years old, no real resolution independence)

What I call "mobile identity", don't migrate files, migrate abstract profiles to different devices.

Apple has told us so often that fileszstems are outdated, but the only thing they come up with is blobs in an sqlite database hidden on every volume.

Networked Spotlight, I mean the real thing, Internet enabled.

IPv6 private networks whereever you are.
Back To My Mac was a great idea, but they dropped it because of interface gimmicks.

I could go on for hours. There's no innovation at all regarding the core system.

Only shinnier hardware specs and people telling us we don't need to cahnge anything because next year we buy the latest crap anyways.

I own a MacPro and will keep it until hell freezes over.

Amen, whoever started that topic, yeah absolutly right.
Apple is loosing it.

(I will NEVER buy that Retina MBP.... NEVER... And I have a job and could afford it)

daveishere
Jul 22, 2012, 02:10 PM
I don't think they are running out of ideas, I think the feature diets in recent versions of OS X are down to the products marketing rather than anything else.

To sell a 'major' OS X update pretty much every year for the $20 or so Apple decides to sell them at, they can't possibly cram the software with features as the economics just don't work out.

With Apple's general shift to iOS over the past few years, OS X has had to suffer. So what they're doing is putting less features (or porting iOS features) into interations of OS X but charing a lot less for the product.

nuckinfutz
Jul 22, 2012, 02:15 PM
Totally agree.

Since Apple has spent so much time on developing iOS and the infrastructure for the App Stores, they have totally left out fundamental new ideas in the area of base technologies.

Filesystem (clustered with "cloud" support)

Drivers (Mac once was capable of driving external hardware, nowadays noone cares anymore if it's not USB carp)

Graphics Techoloogy (No real advances in OpenGL, Quartz is years old, no real resolution independence)

What I call "mobile identity", don't migrate files, migrate abstract profiles to different devices.

Apple has told us so often that fileszstems are outdated, but the only thing they come up with is blobs in an sqlite database hidden on every volume.

Networked Spotlight, I mean the real thing, Internet enabled.

IPv6 private networks whereever you are.
Back To My Mac was a great idea, but they dropped it because of interface gimmicks.

I could go on for hours. There's no innovation at all regarding the core system.

Only shinnier hardware specs and people telling us we don't need to cahnge anything because next year we buy the latest crap anyways.

I own a MacPro and will keep it until hell freezes over.

Amen, whoever started that topic, yeah absolutly right.
Apple is loosing it.

(I will NEVER buy that Retina MBP.... NEVER... And I have a job and could afford it)

This is nonsensical rambling.

/dev/toaster
Jul 22, 2012, 02:20 PM
Its not about running out of ideas, its about quicker more incremental updates. You don't want to have an OS that is making drastic changes every version. Yearly smaller releases are a damn good thing.

If you want chaos in your OS upgrades, switch to Windows.

rorschach
Jul 22, 2012, 02:46 PM
This is nonsensical rambling.

Still trying to decipher it.

MacDawg
Jul 22, 2012, 02:49 PM
Still trying to decipher it.

Translation = "I know better than Apple how to run Apple's business and they aren't doing it the way I think they should"

50548
Jul 22, 2012, 02:58 PM
Translation = "I know better than Apple how to run Apple's business and they aren't doing it the way I think they should"

WRONG. The translation is: "I am pissed at cash-rich Apple because they are currently unable or unwilling to dedicate a few additional resources for PROPER development of Mac OS X; instead, what they call innovation means integration of frivolous iOS features."

rorschach
Jul 22, 2012, 02:59 PM
Translation = "I know better than Apple how to run Apple's business and they aren't doing it the way I think they should"

I think that's about it.

Well, not that we can't all have ideas or suggestions. But Apple seems to be doing pretty well with the way they've been doing things. :rolleyes:

MacDawg
Jul 22, 2012, 02:59 PM
WRONG. The translation is: "I am pissed at cash-rich Apple because they are currently unable or unwilling to dedicate a few additional resources for PROPER development of Mac OS X; instead, what they call innovation means integration of frivolous iOS features."

Translation = same as above

robgendreau
Jul 22, 2012, 03:01 PM
Translation = "I know better than Apple how to run Apple's business and they aren't doing it the way I think they should"

Nope; he makes some sense. I'm sure lots of tech companies thought they had the best idea that would last forever...until they didn't. Apple itself broke the mold when it designed a new and superior interface for mobile devices.

Computer hardware has changed as well, particularly in the area of networking. Someone is going to come up with a new interface, and pmau has pointed to technologies that could push a new change in the interface.

Apple got where it is on the back of mobile devices, not Macs. Yeah, I love their machines, but the Finder etc is like what, 20 years old? How long are we gonna keep using the "desktop" as a metaphor? Crap, I know people that never even use folders and "desktops" at work anymore...isn't it time we moved on?

nuckinfutz
Jul 22, 2012, 03:10 PM
Ideas are plentiful. However the real question is "how many ideas do we have in the pipeline that are easy to explain to consumers?"

Revamped finder. Not gonna happen folks.

What we're seeing now is the gradual replacement of old technologies. Moving into a 64-bit future with Cocoa.

I think most complaining do not realize the amount of work it has taken to move from a two headed hydra that was Carbon and Cocoa to what we have today which is primarily Cocoa but there is still much Carbon stuff.

Apple did it without your computer blowing up or the majority of your apps failing.

They've revamped the video foundation OS X. Lion is the first OS X version to support AV Foundation replacing Quicktime as the source for modern codecs.

They've replaced Mach for interprocess communications with a modern equivalent.

They are 90% done with replacing the GCC compiler which is older than many on these boards.

Apple employs some of the brightest people in the world. It's a bit of a stretch to say this collection of all stars has somehow run out of ideas. Even the Retina MBP shows that Apple has a lot of clever employees that know how to work around roadblocks.

The real battle going forward is going to be YOUR ability to understand the smaller ripples in the water because those will get larger the close they come to shore.

rorschach
Jul 22, 2012, 03:16 PM
Ideas are plentiful. However the real question is "how many ideas do we have in the pipeline that are easy to explain to consumers?"

Revamped finder. Not gonna happen folks.

What we're seeing now is the gradual replacement of old technologies. Moving into a 64-bit future with Cocoa.

I think most complaining do not realize the amount of work it has taken to move from a two headed hydra that was Carbon and Cocoa to what we have today which is primarily Cocoa but there is still much Carbon stuff.

Apple did it without your computer blowing up or the majority of your apps failing.

They've revamped the video foundation OS X. Lion is the first OS X version to support AV Foundation replacing Quicktime as the source for modern codecs.

They've replaced Mach for interprocess communications with a modern equivalent.

They are 90% done with replacing the GCC compiler which is older than many on these boards.

Apple employs some of the brightest people in the world. It's a bit of a stretch to say this collection of all stars has somehow run out of ideas. Even the Retina MBP shows that Apple has a lot of clever employees that know how to work around roadblocks.

The real battle going forward is going to be YOUR ability to understand the smaller ripples in the water because those will get larger the close they come to shore.

I swear, some of the people complaining about Mountain Lion and its "lack of features" would be praising it if had a new theme slapped on.

50548
Jul 22, 2012, 04:15 PM
I swear, some of the people complaining about Mountain Lion and its "lack of features" would be praising it if had a new theme slapped on.

It does, the theme is called "iOS crap". :rolleyes:

pmau
Jul 22, 2012, 05:01 PM
Thanks to all the people who did not turn down my ramblings as crap.

If you would at least consider history, namely the switch to Intel and the introduction of Tiger and Leopard that included all these great underlying technologies.

Think about the introduction of Objective-C, the 64-bit transition and all of the frameworks that enabled great applications.

You might have to admit that Snow Leopard has been the last real OS update on the Desktop.

Remember the possible inclusion of ZFS.

Recall that Back To My Mac opened the possibility to have a plug-and-play IPv6 enabled private network that would connect all your devices.

It was an iPv6 tunnel that would put all your devices in one virtual network, wherever you would be. It was slow and unreliable but the idea was brilliant.

If you think about that a little further you might see what todays iCloud might have become.

They removed keychain syncing, re-introduced documents in the cloud although they already had iDisk. Just to limit file sharing between applications to the same bundle identifier.

If you now think of an abstract and versioned storage that would enable you to really share all your data even on iOS, you probably understand part of my rambling.

Look at FileVault and Logical Volumes, they stopped working on that.
It has the potential to distribute storage across multiple media, encrypt it and make it fault tolerant by dynamically adding and removing volumes.

You can check this by looking at the diskutil commands.

But Apple sacrificed most of their technological advances they had it this time just to further limit what people could do.

There has been a lot of potential, but for the last two OSX releases Apple stopped at the "good enough" side of things.

It's mostly gimmicks and the support for new shiny hardware.

At least that's my opinion.
And now I'll shut up.

----------


What we're seeing now is the gradual replacement of old technologies. Moving into a 64-bit future with Cocoa.

I think most complaining do not realize the amount of work it has taken to move from a two headed hydra that was Carbon and Cocoa to what we have today which is primarily Cocoa but there is still much Carbon stuff.

Apple did it without your computer blowing up or the majority of your apps failing.

They've revamped the video foundation OS X. Lion is the first OS X version to support AV Foundation replacing Quicktime as the source for modern codecs.

They've replaced Mach for interprocess communications with a modern equivalent.

They are 90% done with replacing the GCC compiler which is older than many on these boards.

Apple employs some of the brightest people in the world. It's a bit of a stretch to say this collection of all stars has somehow run out of ideas. Even the Retina MBP shows that Apple has a lot of clever employees that know how to work around roadblocks.

The real battle going forward is going to be YOUR ability to understand the smaller ripples in the water because those will get larger the close they come to shore.

Thank you, by the time I've seen your post, I already wrote my last stupid response.

You seem to be one of only a few who understand what I'm trying to express here.

Thanks.

EDIT: QuickTime X was introduced in Snow-Leopard
XPC is not a replacement for mach but for sandboxing and privilege separation.
GCD was also introduced in SL
Therefore my opinion about SL being the last major update.

NT1440
Jul 22, 2012, 05:04 PM
www.patentlyapple.com

Just look at the patents, you guys have no idea the crazy things coming down the road when you combine a bunch of these.

Out of ideas? Pfft. The whole entire industry is just waiting for manufacturing processes to catch up.

Fifteen20s
Jul 22, 2012, 05:12 PM
The value of the upgrade is directly related to how much YOU need the changes. If your not *needing* anything provided by ML stay where your at, be happy and dont buy it.


If ML syncs iWork between my iPad and iMac then that alone will make ML the best upgrade EVER (to me) because that is one function I really need.

Krazy Bill
Jul 22, 2012, 05:50 PM
Cite please.Dunno. A post up the line somewhere.


Iíll give you a hint that version numbers arenít necessarily decimals.You lost me son...

LizKat
Jul 22, 2012, 05:51 PM
Totally agree.

Since Apple has spent so much time on developing iOS and the infrastructure for the App Stores, they have totally left out fundamental new ideas in the area of base technologies. ~snip~

The people at Apple can't be rolling out some new but halfbaked fundamental technology (for people immediately to ROAST them for releasing it at all, yes?) during every gadget cycle.

That doesn't mean they're not working hard to innovate on basics, to experiment, to improve on what's out there. We might not see results of their efforts on improving fundamentals for three to five years, in the marketplace. We might never see some of them.

R&D on fundamentals is like that. One must take what shows promise for the future, leave what cannot be wrapped up in the apparent window of oppportunity, and move on.

One can't stop time and polish every design to prototype, nor profit very long from rushing unworthy products to market.

I would say that goes double or triple for fundamentals like battery technology, compilers, file system or OS architecture. It's one thing to bring the wrong shiny toy to market next October. It's a much bigger deal to put recycled cardboard i-beams under your next OS and then hear your marketing team promise that it will even work underwater.

The planet slows down long enough to admire this or that thing for awhile. That's the window. It takes prodigious amounts of talent, effort, discipline to roll out in timely fashion --- in that window-- a market-worthy new method of porting data, connecting devices, transferring energy from a source to a power-hungry device, etc. That's because one must also keep an eye on what end users are doing and looking for. That drives the bus, not only for the gadgets they crave but for the underpinnings that make those gadgets possible. It's some achievement to bring out new fundamentals that can serve the ever moving target of development designed for end users.

Thanks to people working away behind the scenes while most of us were still creatively cursing the voodoo of SCSI termination, we have meanwhile ended up with Firewire and USB and Thunderbolt. Who knows what technologies were explored and abandoned in the meantime? Some of those guys were trying to bring a better SCSI. Some of them keyed on fundamental limitations and said "To heck with that, let's try this." That's part of the process. It's thankless, often enough, and it doesn't get keynote recognition, but it is what gives us the foundations of our next great stuff.

So really, I don't see how we can assess what Apple's working on in the way of fundamentals based on what we see roll out for iOS or mobile devices or even updates on the larger gear.

Also, the level of juicy speculation around MacRumors on where technological underpinnings are going will never be as high as that for the next gadget. Most of us are not going to wade very far into the geek bayous to find out what wild thing Apple's next compiler is finally going to feature.

Finally, as is often said, the people who know aren't spending a lot of time talking. They're in a design review session trying to remember that the job is to rip the wheels off the design before it makes prototype stage, not attack each other personally. Or they're building the prototype. Or they're debugging something for the 87th time this weekend. It's happening. Whatever Apple is doing, it's not resting on the laurels of past OS, past filesystem, past anything. It's designing, building, extending, questioning, going again, shifting gears, being its own toughest critic. That's a big part of what makes what they bring to market worth considering.

SiPat
Jul 22, 2012, 06:03 PM
Apple doesn't work in a haphazard way. When Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 he brought some brilliant people with him from NeXT, the company & software Apple bought and which is the foundation for OSX. I wouldn't be surprised if SJ & Co didn't have ideas of how to replace OS9 on the Mac whilst still at NeXT.

Once SJ was appointed Interim CEO of Apple, he probably unlocked his secret vault and dusted off the road-map for the development of OSX and possibly even outlines and brainstorming notes for iOS (timeframe for the completed prototype is somewhere between 2002 & 2004 so it must have been in development even as Newton was being killed-off). Both OSes have one thing in common: they were trickle-fed to the consumer over a period of time as and when new features were thrashed to death and met with SJ's and Apple's strict guidelines. Apple could have waited (always on the verge of extinction) for a number of years and given us a more complete OSX with all the bells & whistles in 2005 or 2006 or 2007, but then Apple wouldn't be where it is today: the most valuable technology company in the world.

OSX is maturing, or has now matured -- it is like the wise old man who has gained wide knowledge & experience and you can't teach him very much more. It is the most elegant, most simple and most stable OS I have used -- I can't see anyone coming out with something so revolutionary that it will dump Apple & OSX in the gutter, unless it comes from within Apple itself. Also, I can't see OSX becoming a clone of iOS -- developing an OS which caters efficiently and equally for mouse-clicks and touch screen will be very difficult -- that's why we have the Magic TrackPad -- it allows you to do everything on the Mac that you can do in iOS.

The real revolution will come when the new magical TV (the little box or full-blown TV, whichever Apple chooses) is unveiled -- just imagine: Apps on your TV, social networking, surfing, email etc., etc. all available on your plasma/LCD screen, all controlled from your iDevice.

entatlrg
Jul 22, 2012, 06:08 PM
Is Apple running out of ideas?

Yes, they are.

In others news, the Patent Offices are closing because everything that could be invented has been invented.

ajvizzgamer101
Jul 22, 2012, 06:12 PM
How does it feel to be that kind of a person that wonders if a company's future doomed? I've never experienced it myself, even though companies aren't innovating I am still able to see areas that are ready for the next wave of revolutions.

NT1440
Jul 22, 2012, 06:20 PM
<snip>

This man gets the R&D spirit, a tip of my hat to you guv'na :)

rorschach
Jul 22, 2012, 07:10 PM
It does, the theme is called "iOS crap". :rolleyes:

Notification Center
Messages
iCloud integration
Dictation
AirPlay Mirroring
Multitouch
Push Notifications
Resume
Real full screen

I'm very happy to have that "iOS crap" in OS X.

Jovian9
Jul 22, 2012, 08:07 PM
I have used every version of OSX except the beta and have both purchased a new computer with each version pre-installed as well as upgrading computers I already had to each upgrade. I've used them all extensively.

I'd have to say that Tiger "felt" like the biggest leap forward on all versions of OSX when I got it. It just seemed huge and amazing Snow Leopard has felt like the "fastest" or most "stable" version to me.

With that being said; I feel that OSX is a very mature operating system that doesn't have room for as many big jumps as it had before. Having your data all the time with you (phones, tablets, notebooks) is the fad in computers and technology right now. I think Apple is going in the right direction trying to get all of these things seamlessly integrated with as little user involvement as possible.

These are yearly updates for $20-$30. So I don't expect $150 worth of features and 2 years in between OS's any longer.

JohnDoe98
Jul 22, 2012, 09:00 PM
Back To My Mac was a great idea, but they dropped it because of interface gimmicks.


What on earth are you talking about? Back to my mac works just fine.

MTD's Mac
Jul 22, 2012, 09:51 PM
How would you know? I'd bet dollars to donuts that you don't have a clue.

Do you actually believe that people threw away their old mission-critical files?

But I digress... You still have not supported your contention that Leopard was the biggest leap in MacOS X. It is worth noting that no one has yet supported your contention.

In his defense, this isn't the sort of statement that requires defense. It's not really a contention, just an opinion, and one that's very relevant.

I skipped Leopard, so going from Tiger to SL was the biggest leap for me. For many users, Leopard introduced new features that they made daily use of, hence a major leap. I expect ML will bring a few small things that will change my daily use of my Mac, so I have more reason to be excited about this week's launch than a lot of people who don't expect to make much use of the new features. That's just how it is when users have so many different uses for their Macs.

You (MisterMe) need to realize that the vast majority of OS X users don't care at all about the changes you "cited" in your response. Ditching Classic? Maybe it was important to you, but more people will find the naming change from "iCal" to "Calendar" a more significant change.

iThinkergoiMac
Jul 23, 2012, 04:56 AM
Classic was useless, anyway. Barely anyone had a file that is from the time of the dinosaurs. And it really was time to go. And that's why Apple also abandoned PPC on Snow Leopard, and Rosetta on Lion. Forget them. It's not like you're working with them til today.

Maybe to you Classic was useless, but tell that to a business with tons and tons of files that could only be opened by a Classic app when Leopard came out. Same for Rosetta. Same for PPC. Just because you consider something to be useless doesn't mean it is...

SlCKB0Y
Jul 23, 2012, 06:02 AM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history.

Tiger - Leopard was also the longest gap in OS X releases at 2.5 years.

Retina MacBook
Jul 23, 2012, 06:12 AM
Tiger - Leopard was also the longest gap in OS X releases at 2.5 years.

It's completely fine for me, even to wait 4 years for the next, major release as long as it's shockingly amazing. Or just as amazing as Tiger - Leopard. The UI changes were Amazing!

ThatGreekMacGuy
Jul 23, 2012, 08:26 AM
No, technology is imroving in pretty high rates. Apple will always have something new to release. For example, have you ever seen a computer with a 2560x1440p resolution like iMac's? Even 3D TV's still use 1080p. Imagine that the new Retina MacBook Pro has a resolution of 2880x1800p. Can you imagine that. There's no other company that offers such an elegance. And no; I am not a fanboy.The freshness of a Mac feels great. In a few months we'll all see the revolutionary iPhone 5 (or whatever it's going to be called). Even Mountain Lion is quite amazing. It takes full advantage of the iCloud service, so that all of your Apple devices are always synced. Don't forget the built-in social network services like Twitter and Facebook.

Retina MacBook
Jul 23, 2012, 08:35 AM
No, technology is imroving in pretty high rates. Apple will always have something new to release. For example, have you ever seen a computer with a 2560x1440p resolution like iMac's? Even 3D TV's still use 1080p. Imagine that the new Retina MacBook Pro has a resolution of 2880x1800p. Can you imagine that. There's no other company that offers such an elegance. And no; I am not a fanboy.The freshness of a Mac feels great. In a few months we'll all see the revolutionary iPhone 5 (or whatever it's going to be called). Even Mountain Lion is quite amazing. It takes full advantage of the iCloud service, so that all of your Apple devices are always synced. Don't forget the built-in social network services like Twitter and Facebook.

The resolution of the display, in case you didn't notice, isn't about software, it's about hardware. You can put Mac OS X on a TV and that wouldn't make it 2660x1440. But, If you put a different OS on an iMac, provided that the drivers are installed, it will run 2660x1440.

Abazigal
Jul 23, 2012, 09:24 AM
Leopard was the biggest leap in OS X's history. Then Snow Leopard barely had anything new, just refinements. Lion had a UI tweak and Mountain Lion has a bunch of Apps.

Let's face it - Mountain Lion isn't shockingly amazing. No one would camp outside the Apple Store just to grab a USB of ML.

But Mountain Lion is a good upgrade, just not much over Lion.

Is Apple running out of ideas?

Who camps outside Apple for software updates when they can be readily downloaded from the app store?

I don't see what's wrong with refinements. If the OS itself is pretty solid as is, there is little point in trying to reinvent the wheel. So it is just introducing additional features to fine-tune those existing features.

I am pretty interested in some of the touted features. Icloud seems like it could make for a worthy dropbox alternative (because I can sync documents directly). Imessage, well, fun to contact someone's iphone/ipad while working. All these small little stuff that improve my workflow without any real learning curve or changing the way I use OSX. What's not to like? :)

nuckinfutz
Jul 23, 2012, 10:21 AM
The resolution of the display, in case you didn't notice, isn't about software, it's about hardware. You can put Mac OS X on a TV and that wouldn't make it 2660x1440. But, If you put a different OS on an iMac, provided that the drivers are installed, it will run 2660x1440.

That wasn't his point. He opened his statement with "technology is always improving" which is counter to your question "is Apple running out of ideas?"

randomnut
Jul 23, 2012, 10:33 AM
If 'running out of ideas' means a yearly update with fewer features to enable this then i'm Ok with it.

If it also means not coming out with something as ill-thought out as Windows 8 is then i'm OK with that as well.

I was always previously a windows sympathiser I guess you could call it, ie until Win 7 I always saw a place for it. I've tried windows 8 and *HATE* it - so I think that Apple are getting something right with their release scheme that none of their releases are as terrible as that.

Nozuka
Jul 23, 2012, 10:49 AM
I don't think iOS has anything to do with the amount or lack of new features OSX is getting... (especially since iOS isnt getting much "big" features this time either, except maybe the new map thingy. )

And i'm pretty sure those are 2 seperate departements that dont have to share alot of ressources.

"Big" things just take longer to develop than 1 year. I'm sure Apple is already working on some major changes for OS XI (or whatever it will be called). Hopefully ready in 1-2 years.

aaronvan
Jul 23, 2012, 04:12 PM
$603.83/share

The Street thinks Apple is doing just fine.

Stevamundo
Jul 23, 2012, 06:22 PM
At least Mountain Lion doesn't have all of the goofy colorful tiles only a kindergartener would enjoy. :D

However I agree, Leopard was a big step forward for the OSX. After Leopard, Apple's upgrading the OSX is marginal at best. However Apple just wants to integrate their IOS and the OSX now. I think that's why we're not seeing a really big innovative upgrade. Apple just wants everything to work well together on all of their products.

jbolden1517
Jul 23, 2012, 10:19 PM
First off of the 3 major kernels XNU (OSX), NT kernel and Linux; XNU is far and away the least sophisticated. Apple has always been behind on kernel related issues from 1997 till now, though in 1997 they were closer to Linux. There is nothing new about that.


Since Apple has spent so much time on developing iOS and the infrastructure for the App Stores, they have totally left out fundamental new ideas in the area of base technologies.

Filesystem (clustered with "cloud" support)

Here is an example where Apple tried, but tried and failed. They were aiming for ZFS which while not exactly innovative would have been a major step up. There is some 3rd party work that looks promising: Greenbytes / Zevo (http://www.getgreenbytes.com/blog/bid/80758/GreenBytes-Welcomes-ZEVO-and-Don-Brady)


Drivers (Mac once was capable of driving external hardware, nowadays noone cares anymore if it's not USB carp)

I'm not even sure what you mean here. Things are much better in the drivers department than they were a decade ago, when I was using wrapped Linux drivers.

Graphics Techoloogy (No real advances in OpenGL, Quartz is years old, no real resolution independence)

I'd say the capacity to use an integrated and a discrete graphic subsystem and switch seamlessly based on power is a rather major advance. And that was only possible because of the Open CL in 10.6 WebKit2 layout engine (10.7) was a key advance for graphics in practice.


IPv6 private networks whereever you are.

What does that even mean? Apple has had full support for v6 for years. IPv6 subnets are supposed to be global. There is no reason for a small private network to use v6. The reason to use v6 on a private network is that every device has an externally addressable IP.

SlCKB0Y
Jul 25, 2012, 12:36 AM
First off of the 3 major kernels XNU (OSX), NT kernel and Linux; XNU is far and away the least sophisticated.

I'd be pretty interested for you to expand on this.

jbolden1517
Jul 25, 2012, 08:19 AM
I'd be pretty interested for you to expand on this.

Sure. Take an example of filesystem support. On XNU you have a very basic 1970s style filesystem underneath the covers. That's why you start having allocation problems as you get bigger than 1TB, which people are hitting. You also have inconsistency issues about case sensitive throughout the OS. It lacks advanced features for large drives so that block level corruption in HFS+ creates file corruption, which with larger files is a problem.

And mind you, you don't even get a high speed filesystem, (like a modern XFS) would provide.

Linux has support for well over 100 filesystems and there is 3rd party support on Windows for every filesystem I've ever run across. So not only is the filesystem choices meager on XNU, the default kinda sucks.

____

In terms of protocols there is a move towards move advanced protocols like SCTP to replace TCP and UDP (why SCTP (http://www.isoc.org/briefings/017/)). Again most kernels support this already.

As an aside, the Windows Networking stack with multiple points for runtime configuration and virtualization is just amazing. The result are Windows applications that are able to reconfigure the networking stack in minor ways without having performance implications or serious compatibility problems.

____

I personally think the /proc filesystem and the ability to view in a reasonable and accessible way kernel status information is incredibly powerful. There is no easy way to figure out what's going wrong with XNU kernel if it is having problems: (description of proc (http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/3/html/Reference_Guide/s1-proc-topfiles.html)). Admittedly Windows has nothing like this either.

____

Now most of the advanced features of the Linux and NT kernel mainly apply to servers and not desktops. But here XNU started life as a server kernel. So it doesn't have embedded features (especially useful for phone) like you would find in a real time kernel. For what's its worth, I think given that Apple doesn't make server products (in any meaningful sense) anymore, they should switch to a real-time kernel. Desktop users would much rather trade off slightly lower total work for a system that is 100% of the time responsive to new input. The system, while being slightly slower, would feel so much faster. I don't know whether RIM will survive long enough to show off the advantages of a real time kernel but I hope so. I think the idea of having a server kernel ported to the desktop and then reported to phones is a terrible idea. I understand why Apple did it, and the advantages of being able to port over the entire Cocoa framework made it possible to get off the ground quickly.

Retina MacBook
Jul 26, 2012, 08:40 AM
Sure. Take an example of filesystem support. On XNU you have a very basic 1970s style filesystem underneath the covers. That's why you start having allocation problems as you get bigger than 1TB, which people are hitting. You also have inconsistency issues about case sensitive throughout the OS. It lacks advanced features for large drives so that block level corruption in HFS+ creates file corruption, which with larger files is a problem.

And mind you, you don't even get a high speed filesystem, (like a modern XFS) would provide.

Linux has support for well over 100 filesystems and there is 3rd party support on Windows for every filesystem I've ever run across. So not only is the filesystem choices meager on XNU, the default kinda sucks.

____

In terms of protocols there is a move towards move advanced protocols like SCTP to replace TCP and UDP (why SCTP (http://www.isoc.org/briefings/017/)). Again most kernels support this already.

As an aside, the Windows Networking stack with multiple points for runtime configuration and virtualization is just amazing. The result are Windows applications that are able to reconfigure the networking stack in minor ways without having performance implications or serious compatibility problems.

____

I personally think the /proc filesystem and the ability to view in a reasonable and accessible way kernel status information is incredibly powerful. There is no easy way to figure out what's going wrong with XNU kernel if it is having problems: (description of proc (http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/3/html/Reference_Guide/s1-proc-topfiles.html)). Admittedly Windows has nothing like this either.

____

Now most of the advanced features of the Linux and NT kernel mainly apply to servers and not desktops. But here XNU started life as a server kernel. So it doesn't have embedded features (especially useful for phone) like you would find in a real time kernel. For what's its worth, I think given that Apple doesn't make server products (in any meaningful sense) anymore, they should switch to a real-time kernel. Desktop users would much rather trade off slightly lower total work for a system that is 100% of the time responsive to new input. The system, while being slightly slower, would feel so much faster. I don't know whether RIM will survive long enough to show off the advantages of a real time kernel but I hope so. I think the idea of having a server kernel ported to the desktop and then reported to phones is a terrible idea. I understand why Apple did it, and the advantages of being able to port over the entire Cocoa framework made it possible to get off the ground quickly.

A lot of geniuses here, I barely had any idea about what you just said.

SlCKB0Y
Jul 26, 2012, 10:07 PM
Sure. Take an example of filesystem support. On XNU you have a very basic 1970s style filesystem underneath the covers.

I would argue that the EXT line of filesystems is in a very similar situation and given that it is the default on almost all of the widely used distributions, this should apply to Linux.


That's why you start having allocation problems as you get bigger than 1TB, which people are hitting.

Are you referring to volumes or files?

and there is 3rd party support on Windows for every filesystem I've ever run across.

Granted, I spent only a minute or two thinking about this but a noticeable omission is ZFS. I'm pretty sure I could come up with more if needed.

I also think it is not correct in a discussion of Kernel features to include those provided by third parties. These filesystems drivers you mention are not part of the NT Kernel.


In terms of protocols there is a move towards move advanced protocols like SCTP to replace TCP and UDP

I think it would be extremely naive to think that SCTP will ever replace TCP/UDP in even the distant future ono anything except private networks perhaps. It's been RFC for more than a decade and what's the rate of implementation in the real world? Seems kind of academic at this point.


I personally think the /proc filesystem and the ability to view in a reasonable and accessible way kernel status information is incredibly powerful.


I completely agree with this.

like you would find in a real time kernel

Correct me if i'm wrong but NT is not realtime either?

OS X has had support for preemption and schedulers for a long time. This article is from 2001:
http://static.usenix.org/events/bsdcon/full_papers/gerbarg/gerbarg_html/

Linux did not achieve a lot of these kinds of features until PREEMPT was added years after in the 2.4.x line of kernels.

PREEMPT_RT is still not in the mainline kernel source and needs to be patched in:
https://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RT_PREEMPT_HOWTO


For what's its worth, I think given that Apple doesn't make server products (in any meaningful sense) anymore, they should switch to a real-time kernel.


Whilst I agree that Apple no longer makes server products (at least none serious enough to warrant major kernel level support), I disagree that XNU is a pure server kernel. It is not even close.


Desktop users would much rather trade off slightly lower total work for a system that is 100% of the time responsive to new input. The system, while being slightly slower, would feel so much faster.


Again, I disagree with your assessment of the current state of support for desktop features in XNU (see above article), but I think you're missing a bigger point. Prior to PREEMPT and the desktop style schedulers by Con Kolivas (-ck kernel patches), Linux on the desktop felt slow. OS X in it's current state does not and for this reason I feel that you are calling for a fix to a problem which does not exist.


I think the idea of having a server kernel ported to the desktop and then reported to phones is a terrible idea.

To me this sounds almost identical to the transition Linux made from its server roots, to the desktop and then to Android.

jbolden1517
Jul 27, 2012, 06:31 AM
I would argue that the EXT line of filesystems is in a very similar situation and given that it is the default on almost all of the widely used distributions, this should apply to Linux.

Linux distribution are mostly on ext4 at this point. That's the 5th major filesystem revision in 20 years, with almost constant improvements ever week. I don't think the situation is similar with Linux at all. Just a quick look at ext4 features (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4#Features) I think makes the differences rather clear.

Granted, I spent only a minute or two thinking about this but a noticeable omission is ZFS. I'm pretty sure I could come up with more if needed.

Well first off the only really good ZFS is running under Solaris on Sun/Oracle hardware. Also ZFS is a Unix filesystem so Windows would also be treating this as non native. In which case, iSCSI offers ZFS for Windows. There is a google project right now to implement ZFS for Windows.

I also think it is not correct in a discussion of Kernel features to include those provided by third parties. These filesystems drivers you mention are not part of the NT Kernel.

Microsoft has always had a 3rd party development model. I don't want to bias the conversation about advantages by getting into the the "who pays" model.

I think it would be extremely naive to think that SCTP will ever replace TCP/UDP in even the distant future ono anything except private networks perhaps. It's been RFC for more than a decade and what's the rate of implementation in the real world? Seems kind of academic at this point.

In 2010 I was shocked how little worked had happened for IPv6. Today there are major IPv6 implementation efforts with every carrier. By 2015 I expect to see a complete flip.

Correct me if i'm wrong but NT is not realtime either?

No it isn't. But NT has to support a line of server products.

Again, I disagree with your assessment of the current state of support for desktop features in XNU (see above article), but I think you're missing a bigger point. Prior to PREEMPT and the desktop style schedulers by Con Kolivas (-ck kernel patches), Linux on the desktop felt slow. OS X in it's current state does not and for this reason I feel that you are calling for a fix to a problem which does not exist.

I agree 100% that Linux is worse in this regard than XNU, which has been pointing towards desktops since the NeXT days. NT was built from the ground up with nice adjustments for the desktop. Linux as you mention is just getting those.

That being said though. I get, especially prior to my recent hardware upgrade, unacceptable stalls all the time with XNU. This isn't something that doesn't exist its part of my daily working experience.

To me this sounds almost identical to the transition Linux made from its server roots, to the desktop and then to Android.

I agree. iOS and Android are in the same boat here.