PDA

View Full Version : Embedded Mac OS X for Apple Consumer Electronics?




MacRumors
Dec 19, 2006, 01:00 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2313) that Apple is working an an operating system based on the core technologies in Mac OS X as the basis for upcoming devices.

According to the report, Apple intends to integrate the software into the upcoming Apple Phone which is expected in the 1st half of 2007. Meanwhile, more devices are expected and "more comprehensive plans call for it to form the bedrock of a jaw-dropping device not due to hit the market until the following year".

This embedded form of Mac OS X is expected to offer tight integration with Apple's desktop offerings.

Looprumors first offered (http://www.looprumors.com/LoopBlackPopup.php?mac-mobile,4046720790) early claims of a "light" version of Mac OS X as the basis for the rumored Apple Phone. According to their earlier report, the light version of Mac OS X would incorporate light versions of their iLife software (iCal, iTunes, iPhoto) for integration with the standard version of Mac OS X.



steve_hill4
Dec 19, 2006, 01:01 PM
Oooh, smartphones and PDAs anyone??

MWSF is too far away for my liking.

miketcool
Dec 19, 2006, 01:05 PM
Mac OS X is going to be scalable, only makes sense.

EagerDragon
Dec 19, 2006, 01:09 PM
Integration is the key, being able to transfer information in both directions seamlessly and using a common interface would be king.

Too bad it is not here today.

xJulianx
Dec 19, 2006, 01:10 PM
Now THIS is exciting news.

iJawn108
Dec 19, 2006, 01:11 PM
This is a rumer I like to hear most.

Leopard Phone please.

BoyBach
Dec 19, 2006, 01:12 PM
What do you think this 2008 "jaw-dropping" product could be?

spine
Dec 19, 2006, 01:13 PM
So we have a full year to rumor about a new apple device?
I hope its a ultra mobile touchscreen palm-top. The ultimate all-in-one.
Countdown to keynote 08!

gloss
Dec 19, 2006, 01:13 PM
What do you think this 2008 "jaw-dropping" product could be?

Dare I say it?






...G5 Powerbook.

mister880
Dec 19, 2006, 01:14 PM
I am just about ready to give up on any phone / pda from Apple! Right now I am using a Treo 650 and it's good... But not great!

If Apple is working on such a device if they don't announce MWSF I am giving up on RUMOR SITES!

Com'n apple even you are taking this too far!

EagerDragon
Dec 19, 2006, 01:17 PM
Meanwhile, more devices are expected and "more comprehensive plans call for it to form the bedrock of a jaw-dropping device not due to hit the market until the following year".


This jaw-dropping quote seems to be the key here, unfortunatly it sounds that we will not see it until 2008 "the following year".

Bring it on.

m-dogg
Dec 19, 2006, 01:18 PM
Dare I say it?...


No. Don't say it.

EagerDragon
Dec 19, 2006, 01:20 PM
What do you think this 2008 "jaw-dropping" product could be?

The usual
a) Powerbook G5,
b) iTablet,
c) Video iPod
d) iPod Phone
e) Mac Gamer Pro

Yea a) is lame

product26
Dec 19, 2006, 01:24 PM
i sure hope so... mobile OS companies need some real competition to push the market in to making real, usable, integrated solutions.

ChrisA
Dec 19, 2006, 01:26 PM
Should be possible. Linux has been ported to the iPod. http://www.ipodlinux.org/Main_Page

If you look at the computers that were used to develop BSD Unix the iPod and a cell phone don't look so low powered. This is kind of like taking BSD back to it's roots. Mac OS X is after all just BSD with a pretty face.

Back in the day, we measured RAM in kilobytes, not MB or GB and BSD ran on those machines. I remember seeing an IBM 360 computer at UCLA that was the first machine I saw that had a full megabyte of RAM The memory unit was a cube about 8 feet on a side. I remember there were 8 racks that were cabled together to make the full 1MB and UCLAbought 9 racks so they could have a spare. The RAM was made of real "core" , about 10 million little cores each hand wired. UNIX ran on machine much, much less expensive than this, machines with just kilobytes of core. This was in the mid 1970's back when UNIX and the Internet (or "darpanet") was still new. All of this ran on a few "K" or core back then, why not do it again?

supafly1703
Dec 19, 2006, 01:28 PM
finally...true intergration with my mac...

danielbriggs
Dec 19, 2006, 01:30 PM
Just a thought:

Could this be what iTV will run???
:D

gloss
Dec 19, 2006, 01:30 PM
No. Don't say it.

Sorry. My first offense. ;)

ariel
Dec 19, 2006, 01:34 PM
What do you think this 2008 "jaw-dropping" product could be?

Ah, the newton is finally back!

LostPacket
Dec 19, 2006, 01:36 PM
I doubt they'll announce a phone at MWSF if they're still working on the OS. I sincerely hope this rumour is out of date and it's just taken this long to come to light.

This new device could also be jaw-droppingly mundane, like the "Hi-Fi 2: Now with more bulk".

hvfsl
Dec 19, 2006, 01:36 PM
I am guessing the 'Jaw dropping device' is the Apple tablet we keep on hearing about.

Using a tec similar to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89sz8ExZndc

allpar
Dec 19, 2006, 01:39 PM
Newton MessagePad 160 is coming!

mkrishnan
Dec 19, 2006, 01:40 PM
Just a thought:

Could this be what iTV will run???
:D

I'd assume that's one very prominent planned application, yeah. :)

steve_hill4
Dec 19, 2006, 01:41 PM
Ah, the newton is finally back!

Return of another familiar classic. I for one would love to see the Newton name return, but it would feel too much like Apple clinging to the past, and a past product that was a relative failure compared to what it could have been. Not to mention Jobs pretty much killed the Newton upon arrival back at Cupertino.

Newton-like, but not Newton.

I think by now the phone is a near certainty, but what else could this be utilised for? Remember that Windows CE was used on the Sega Dreamcast.....

AidenShaw
Dec 19, 2006, 01:42 PM
finally...true intergration with my mac...

...and your Mac's spell-checker.

DavidCar
Dec 19, 2006, 01:49 PM
Just a thought:

Could this be what iTV will run???
:D
So would iTV have a Core 2 Duo running an embedded OSX?

mkrishnan
Dec 19, 2006, 01:54 PM
So would iTV have a Core 2 Duo running an embedded OSX?

Ermm... embedded OSes are for small simple devices, generally, with specialized processors rather than general purpose processors like the ones used in notebooks and computers. Probably the very highest end of an embedded OS application would be something like a tablet. I don't think any of them are going to be using Core 2 Duos. What would an iTV need with a C2D anyways?

Georgie
Dec 19, 2006, 01:58 PM
I am beginning to think that Apple is taking their secrecy too far.

I think it's to their detriment, but there are counter-arguments. On the one hand secrecy lends itself to sites like this, and probably enhances the excitement people feel about Apple products. No other companies have "fanboys" quite like Apple does.

Like an SAT question, I'd equate: Rumors are to Apple as Piracy is to Adobe. Both companies publicly decry it, but actually they both benefit from it, at least to some degree. (I'm convinced that Adobe doesn't try too hard to stop piracy because all the kiddies who steal it, like myself back in the day, learned how to use it instead of, say, Corel or GIMP, and now those kids are professionals and will only buy Adobe because it's the best and it's what they know. In fact, sounds a little like Apple's heyday in the education market.)

However, while secrecy may be good for something like iTV or some speaker system, I don't think it's good for their iPhone product. Especially not now that everyone is talking about. Some people like myself are in the market now for a new phone. I'm waiting for the iPhone. If it's not at least announced at MacWorld I will actually be upset.

Some will say I shouldn't be so invested in a silly device, but there'd be no problem if Apple were just a little more transparent. Apple will neither confirm nor deny this product. I love my MBP (I'm a switcher) and I badly want a good phone that syncs well with my Apple applications. That's why I'm willing to wait. However right now I'm on edge because maybe Apple's developing a phone, maybe they're not, maybe they were but aren't going to release it, maybe I should go ahead and buy another phone because mine is falling apart, maybe they are going to release a phone tomorrow, maybe in a month, maybe in six months, maybe it's going to be the perfect phone that meets my every expectation, maybe they'll release one and it won't be so great and I'll end up buying another phone anyway: point is, Apple's secrecy makes it difficult for myself and other consumers to plan expensive purchases. I'll happily and patiently wait if Apple confirms the phone. I'll peacefully go buy a different phone if Apple states they're not going to release this thing. But they won't say either way, so I'm frustrated.

My fundamental point is that Apple can be too secretive. Most of the time they're secrecy is harmless (though financial analysts may beg to differ), at times it's even beneficial, but for the iPhone their secrecy is becoming an albatross. It's in everyone's best interest for Apple to give some indication about the project. I hope they do so at MacWorld. If they don't I guess the thing to do is move on and forget about Apple.

On an aside, this gives me some idea why IT managers seem to dislike working with Apple--they can't plan product purchases and deployments efficiently because Apple is so damn secretive. As Apple's market share grows, this will become a larger and greater problem.

G

DavidCar
Dec 19, 2006, 02:04 PM
... What would an iTV need with a C2D anyways?I would expect an iTV would need significant processing power to process HDTV.

backspinner
Dec 19, 2006, 02:12 PM
However right now I'm on edge

if it comes too late for you a sale is lost, but apple thinks in millions and I think they won't mind if you buy something else now. next month there will be other people that need new phones, and next mont +1 other other people etcetera...

deebers
Dec 19, 2006, 02:19 PM
I think it can only be a good thing. To get the general public familiar with the Mac OSX look… Most Windows users don't know where to start when using a Mac, so knowledge of a broken down version of Mac OSX would definitely be an advantage. It could also lead to more sales of their computers.

Apple know what they're doing.

dernhelm
Dec 19, 2006, 02:19 PM
Wow. They must be trying this idea out because it worked sooooo well for WinCE (not called wince for nothing ;) )

Georgie
Dec 19, 2006, 02:21 PM
if it comes too late for you a sale is lost, but apple thinks in millions and I think they won't mind if you buy something else now. next month there will be other people that need new phones, and next mont +1 other other people etcetera...

Yes, but the longer they wait, the more sales lost. I'm only extrapolating from my own feelings right now, but I expect there is a growing bolus of people right now waiting to buy an iPhone. If Apple doesn't announce something about it soon--and I think MacWorld is a critical date most people are waiting for--Apple is going to lose all those customers. And since those customers tend to be more fanatical, sitting on rumor chat boards anxiously awaiting word of this device for example, it would be a real loss to lose customers. The fanatical customers are the ones that get their significant others, parents, and siblings to switch to a Mac. This is a critical segment of their consumer base, during a critical period of growth.

ziwi
Dec 19, 2006, 02:24 PM
need to actually see these devices...soon - too much around this concept and rumormill - show us the technology/gadgets.

dernhelm
Dec 19, 2006, 02:31 PM
I think it can only be a good thing. To get the general public familiar with the Mac OSX look… Most Windows users don't know where to start when using a Mac, so knowledge of a broken down version of Mac OSX would definitely be an advantage. It could also lead to more sales of their computers.

Apple know what they're doing.

Apple's success with the iPod had largely to do with the fact that it has a custom OS for a particular device. Cramming OS/X into some device to turn it into some general-purpose solution to a problem that doesn't exist only means you turn out junk. Every "smart phone", PDA, etc that has tried to run some version of windows on it feels clunky and never does what you want it to do.

To paraphrase Alan Cooper: What do you get when you cross a computer with a phone? Answer: A computer! And from a human interface perspective, it will suck.

I don't want a phone that can double as a computer. I have a portable computer, I don't need that. Putting some stripped down version of OS/X on a phone won't just make the phone more functional, it will also invariably make it more difficult to use. Apple has succeeded in making great devices because their strategy was to "delight the user". Microsoft's smart phones are consistently irritating to use, because Microsoft's strategy was "windows everywhere, the user be damned."

Here's hoping Apple doesn't go down the wrong road in the future.

motti
Dec 19, 2006, 02:33 PM
Finally a light OS X in my car! In-car entertainment, climate control, ipod integration.. everything controlled by OS X..wow! :D

Antares
Dec 19, 2006, 02:37 PM
....and "more comprehensive plans call for it to form the bedrock of a jaw-dropping device not due to hit the market until the following year".

Hmm...shall we speculate on what this "jaw-droping" device could be? I see that people here have already come up with some possibilities. But what could truly be considered "jaw-dropping?" Certainly not a phone or iTv or a MacTablet....it's a bold statement and this product must be truly something amazing, if not groundbreaking. Has anyone heard of any possible rumors yet?

danielbriggs
Dec 19, 2006, 02:51 PM
Hmm...shall we speculate on what this "jaw-droping" device could be? I see that people here have already come up with some possibilities. But what could truly be considered "jaw-dropping?" Certainly not a phone or iTv or a MacTablet....it's a bold statement and this product must be truly something amazing, if not groundbreaking. Has anyone heard of any possible rumors yet?

I've heard they are going to sell hi tech apples. They change colour throughout the day, from red to green and back again, count for 1 of your five a day, have a 48 hour battery life and a "byte" of RAM.

I actually got to test one out, have to say, that the software was a bit buggy!


* Jokes aside, I really don't know - Just ignore me, i'm in one of those moods! :D

kddpop
Dec 19, 2006, 02:56 PM
i don't think we should read too much into "jaw-dropping."

in the first place, this is a rumor. this isnt jobs saying it.

and secondly, even if it was jobs, we would be wise to remember the ipod hi-fi and even more to the point, the ipod socks. what steve thinks as jaw-dropping might not be what we, on this forum, would drop our jaws for.

i am excited to know that they are thinking of making small devices as easy and intuitive as their desktops. that is, if this rumor pans out.

~kyle

AppliedVisual
Dec 19, 2006, 03:02 PM
So would iTV have a Core 2 Duo running an embedded OSX?

Hmmm.... If it has a Core 2 CPU in there, it will most likely run a version of OSX that has been stripped of all the extras it doesn't need. But if Apple goes for a smaller CPU with various programmable media chips or processors, it could likely run an embedded OS. I guess we'll see what happens in a couple weeks. MWSF should be great this year... Too bad I can't go.

Dunepilot
Dec 19, 2006, 03:18 PM
This is the most exciting rumour we've seen for a while. I personally have always hoped we'd see an OS X Mobile. If you think of the additional sales Apple must have garnered from the iPod halo effect, a portable version of OS X done properly could work wonders for market share.

We know that Jobs hates dud, clunky software, and that the UI will be done properly. We also know from the iPod success that they now also know how to market consumer electronics.

This would be a wonderful thing if it came to fruition.

kneeslasher
Dec 19, 2006, 03:25 PM
Yes, but the longer they wait, the more sales lost. I'm only extrapolating from my own feelings right now, but I expect there is a growing bolus of people right now waiting to buy an iPhone. If Apple doesn't announce something about it soon--and I think MacWorld is a critical date most people are waiting for--Apple is going to lose all those customers. And since those customers tend to be more fanatical, sitting on rumor chat boards anxiously awaiting word of this device for example, it would be a real loss to lose customers. The fanatical customers are the ones that get their significant others, parents, and siblings to switch to a Mac. This is a critical segment of their consumer base, during a critical period of growth.

If I could speak for myself only:

I think they're losing (certain) potential customers already. Not to mention the damage to the share price with the speculation causing volatility.

Because Apple often takes too long to release the perfect product/service, other are sometimes able to pip them to the post. This is starting to happen in all non-iPod related areas by Google.

.mac is a perfect example. Whilst Apple is pissing around offering a sub-standard service at an inflated price, Google has stepped in (for me) and I don't think I'll ever use .mac and some other Apple products ever again:

- I absolutely hate web-only non-IMAP email solutions. Yet GMail has me hooked. Switched from: Apple Mail, .mac, Apple's address book.
- Google toolbar / browser sync are "it just works" syncing solutions to favourites. Switched from: .mac bookmarks syncing.
- Google's online web applications are more than fancy enough for quick documents where LaTeX would be overkill. Switched from: Pages, .mac.
- Google page creator can be used by any idiot. Switched from: .mac.
- Google Calendar. Switched from: Apple's calendar and .mac.
- Google Talk. Switched from: iChat.
- Picasa (and Picasa Web Albums). Switched from: .mac, iPhoto.

To top it all off, all of these services are starting to talk to each other and work seamlessly. GMail now has integration with Google Calendar and Google Talk. Apart from my phone being a crap MP3 player and not working with my iTunes library, Apple has, sadly, more or less been eliminated from everyday life.

The final icing on the cake is the phone product: I've been waiting for years for an Apple phone so I could finally use Apple's calendar, address book, Mail, etc.. Rumours are now circulating that Google is going to produce either its own phone or customised software for existing (WM5) phones. Well since all the above Google services are already in place, have become indespensible to me and probably won't be supported by an Apple phone, I'd now prefer a Google phone to an Apple phone.

The only plus for an Apple phone left for me would be:

- Ease of use as an MP3 player since it would have undoubted iPod lineage.
- Syncing with iTunes.

Whilst for a Google phone:

- Google Talk.
- Google Calendar.
- Googl Maps.
- GMail.
- Google address book.
- Picasa.

Etc., etc. as Google continue to roll out indispensable services which are "always on" by being hosted on Google's infinite bandwidth servers. And therefore continuously available to a Google phone. Whilst all of Apple's solutions are offline except for what can be tied into .mac.

These days, I try and win over people to Google rather than Apple. It's the route I'm headed down myself. Google are doing in the virtual/connected sphere what Apple has traditionally been famous for in hardware and off-line software: producing "it just works" products.

Mal
Dec 19, 2006, 03:28 PM
Most of the time they're secrecy is harmless (though financial analysts may beg to differ), at times it's even beneficial, but for the iPhone their secrecy is becoming an albatross.

Way I remember it, albatross was a ship's good luck till some idiot went and killed it.

Yes, I've read a poem, try not to faint.

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Anyways, the thing you need to remember is that Apple doesn't owe you any information on something they may or may not be releasing. They may not even have any plans to release a phone (though that seems less likely now), in which case it's in their best interest to simply ignore the rumors. Let interest in the company build without promising something they're not doing. None of these rumors are their fault, and there's no reason for them to worry about them.

jW

Georgie
Dec 19, 2006, 03:46 PM
if it comes too late for you a sale is lost, but apple thinks in millions and I think they won't mind if you buy something else now. next month there will be other people that need new phones, and next mont +1 other other people etcetera...

Way I remember it, albatross was a ship's good luck till some idiot went and killed it.

Yes, I've read a poem, try not to faint.

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Anyways, the thing you need to remember is that Apple doesn't owe you any information on something they may or may not be releasing. They may not even have any plans to release a phone (though that seems less likely now), in which case it's in their best interest to simply ignore the rumors. Let interest in the company build without promising something they're not doing. None of these rumors are their fault, and there's no reason for them to worry about them.

jW

Not owing anything to the customer can't be good for a company's bottom line. Not to say the customer is /always/ right, and I guess they don't owe me anything (though I do own stock, so I could argue otherwise), but they and I want them to be a successful company. Though Apple obviously chooses to not respond to rumors doesn't de facto mean that sticking one's head up one's ass is the best thing to do. If they're not going to release a phone, it *is* in their best interest to say so. What do they gain from letting such rumors continue? It is causing stock volatility--that's not a good thing.

Definition:
albatross ( D. exulans),. • a source of frustration or guilt; an encumbrance (in allusion to Coleridge's The Rime of the Ancient Mariner) : an albatross of a marriage.

emotion
Dec 19, 2006, 03:55 PM
To paraphrase Alan Cooper: What do you get when you cross a computer with a phone? Answer: A computer! And from a human interface perspective, it will suck.

I don't want a phone that can double as a computer. I have a portable computer, I don't need that. Putting some stripped down version of OS/X on a phone won't just make the phone more functional, it will also invariably make it more difficult to use


I mostly agree with you though it has to be said the Frontrow interface seems to be simple enough for expansion into a phone UI.

Some animated UI like that might need the nvidia chipset that appears to delayed until mid next year.

Donz0r
Dec 19, 2006, 04:11 PM
Apple's success with the iPod had largely to do with the fact that it has a custom OS for a particular device. Cramming OS/X into some device to turn it into some general-purpose solution to a problem that doesn't exist only means you turn out junk. Every "smart phone", PDA, etc that has tried to run some version of windows on it feels clunky and never does what you want it to do.

To paraphrase Alan Cooper: What do you get when you cross a computer with a phone? Answer: A computer! And from a human interface perspective, it will suck.

I don't want a phone that can double as a computer. I have a portable computer, I don't need that. Putting some stripped down version of OS/X on a phone won't just make the phone more functional, it will also invariably make it more difficult to use. Apple has succeeded in making great devices because their strategy was to "delight the user". Microsoft's smart phones are consistently irritating to use, because Microsoft's strategy was "windows everywhere, the user be damned."

Here's hoping Apple doesn't go down the wrong road in the future.

Apple is not Microsoft. They won't try to cram a pc operating system into a handheld device. It won't be difficult to use or cumbersome.... we're talking about Apple right? Why do you keep comparing how Microsoft has approached smartphones to how apple will?

gugy
Dec 19, 2006, 04:24 PM
Apple is not Microsoft. They won't try to cram a pc operating system into a handheld device. It won't be difficult to use or cumbersome.... we're talking about Apple right? Why do you keep comparing how Microsoft has approached smartphones to how apple will?

very true, That's why I only use Apple.
Simplicity is Apple's core philosophy. If they ever create a OS X lite version will be just a simple thing to use.
So I say, bring it on.

vishare
Dec 19, 2006, 04:31 PM
Wirelessly posted (HTC-8100/1.2 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows CE; PPC; 240x320))

Its the iBeeper and iPager line.

Duh!

relimw
Dec 19, 2006, 04:34 PM
Back in the day, we measured RAM in kilobytes, not MB or GB and BSD ran on those machines. I remember seeing an IBM 360 computer at UCLA that was

Wow, you're old ;)

My earliest experiece was a rackmounted 8008 system. I think I even still have it around the shop somewhere...

jmbear
Dec 19, 2006, 05:10 PM
Imagine...

MikeDTyke
Dec 19, 2006, 05:13 PM
Apple's success with the iPod had largely to do with the fact that it has a custom OS for a particular device. Cramming OS/X into some device to turn it into some general-purpose solution to a problem that doesn't exist only means you turn out junk. Every "smart phone", PDA, etc that has tried to run some version of windows on it feels clunky and never does what you want it to do.

To paraphrase Alan Cooper: What do you get when you cross a computer with a phone? Answer: A computer! And from a human interface perspective, it will suck.

I don't want a phone that can double as a computer. I have a portable computer, I don't need that. Putting some stripped down version of OS/X on a phone won't just make the phone more functional, it will also invariably make it more difficult to use. Apple has succeeded in making great devices because their strategy was to "delight the user". Microsoft's smart phones are consistently irritating to use, because Microsoft's strategy was "windows everywhere, the user be damned."

Here's hoping Apple doesn't go down the wrong road in the future.

I feel the iPhone (whatever its called) will have a derivation of the ipod or frontrow ui's. In fact this what i think Apple have been experimenting with frontrow. The concept of multiple UI's on top of a standard core of code. It will in no way resemble the complexity of windows CE.

Llewellyn
Dec 19, 2006, 05:19 PM
"Keep in mind that an embedded operating system is designed to be very compact and efficient, forsaking many functionalities that non-embedded computer operating systems provide and which may not be used by the specialized applications they run.

Examples include embedded Linux, eCos, embOS (Segger), Net BSD, Open BSD, Windows CE and SymbianOS.

An embedded system is a special-purpose system in which the computer is completely encapsulated by the device it controls. Unlike a general-purpose computer, such as a personal computer, an embedded system performs one or a few pre-defined tasks, usually with very specific requirements. Since the system is dedicated to specific tasks, design engineers can optimize it, reducing the size and cost of the product. Embedded systems are often mass-produced, so the cost savings may be multiplied by millions of items.

Handheld computers or PDAs are generally considered embedded devices because of the nature of their hardware design, even though they are more expandable in software terms. This line of definition continues to blur as devices expand.

Physically, embedded systems range from portable devices such as MP3 players, to large stationary installations like traffic lights or factory controllers."

The preceding was from Wikipedia

So this is a tool not an end product. Apple would use this to build great devices. I could run the iTV or the iPhone. It could be used in a PDA or tablet. It could power the next router or a game console. But more importantly it will allow Apple to develop great products quickly with more time spent on features and usability rather than the core components.

Marx55
Dec 19, 2006, 05:43 PM
Here it is with built-in Mac OS X:

http://www.t3.co.uk/news/247/communi...january_iphone

http://www.t3.co.uk/nested_content/g...&result_page=1
http://www.t3.co.uk/nested_content/g...&result_page=2
http://www.t3.co.uk/nested_content/g...&result_page=3

JARS
Dec 19, 2006, 05:53 PM
I would still like to see integration with Office so that you can edit and store word, excel, and power point docs. Or at least text files, pages docs, and keynote presentations, as well as any excel like software which comes with the latest IWork suite.

jsalzer
Dec 19, 2006, 06:01 PM
Return of another familiar classic. I for one would love to see the Newton name return, but it would feel too much like Apple clinging to the past, and a past product that was a relative failure compared to what it could have been. Not to mention Jobs pretty much killed the Newton upon arrival back at Cupertino.

Newton-like, but not Newton.

Gravity - From Apple Computer. Watch it become the center of your digital life.

Gravity - From Apple Computer. The unshakable law of nature.

:)

That would be a nice tribute to the Newton cult with a fairly slick name. Though it really doesn't flow in a sentence. "Let me grab my gravity." Then again, I thought iPod was a pretty dorky name at first, too.

Lepton
Dec 19, 2006, 06:20 PM
I believe the Apple handheld device will be this - phone, iPod, media player, 16:9 touch screen across the front, Apple Remote Desktop, more:

Apple's Handheld Device (http://tinyurl.com/y8rdcr)

Whistleway
Dec 19, 2006, 06:59 PM
If I could speak for myself only:

I think they're losing (certain) potential customers already. Not to mention the damage to the share price with the speculation causing volatility.

Because Apple often takes too long to release the perfect product/service, other are sometimes able to pip them to the post. This is starting to happen in all non-iPod related areas by Google.

.mac is a perfect example. Whilst Apple is pissing around offering a sub-standard service at an inflated price, Google has stepped in (for me) and I don't think I'll ever use .mac and some other Apple products ever again:

- I absolutely hate web-only non-IMAP email solutions. Yet GMail has me hooked. Switched from: Apple Mail, .mac, Apple's address book.
- Google toolbar / browser sync are "it just works" syncing solutions to favourites. Switched from: .mac bookmarks syncing.
- Google's online web applications are more than fancy enough for quick documents where LaTeX would be overkill. Switched from: Pages, .mac.
- Google page creator can be used by any idiot. Switched from: .mac.
- Google Calendar. Switched from: Apple's calendar and .mac.
- Google Talk. Switched from: iChat.
- Picasa (and Picasa Web Albums). Switched from: .mac, iPhoto.

To top it all off, all of these services are starting to talk to each other and work seamlessly. GMail now has integration with Google Calendar and Google Talk. Apart from my phone being a crap MP3 player and not working with my iTunes library, Apple has, sadly, more or less been eliminated from everyday life.

The final icing on the cake is the phone product: I've been waiting for years for an Apple phone so I could finally use Apple's calendar, address book, Mail, etc.. Rumours are now circulating that Google is going to produce either its own phone or customised software for existing (WM5) phones. Well since all the above Google services are already in place, have become indespensible to me and probably won't be supported by an Apple phone, I'd now prefer a Google phone to an Apple phone.

The only plus for an Apple phone left for me would be:

- Ease of use as an MP3 player since it would have undoubted iPod lineage.
- Syncing with iTunes.

Whilst for a Google phone:

- Google Talk.
- Google Calendar.
- Googl Maps.
- GMail.
- Google address book.
- Picasa.

Etc., etc. as Google continue to roll out indispensable services which are "always on" by being hosted on Google's infinite bandwidth servers. And therefore continuously available to a Google phone. Whilst all of Apple's solutions are offline except for what can be tied into .mac.

These days, I try and win over people to Google rather than Apple. It's the route I'm headed down myself. Google are doing in the virtual/connected sphere what Apple has traditionally been famous for in hardware and off-line software: producing "it just works" products.

Really brilliant post. I could talk at length about the implications of things you posted, but i defer.

Infact, I use a similar array of Google products and I am very excited to hear Google's talk with Orange on a pre-loaded Google phone. Almost everything that I do online is on Google's network. And if I square away on a good mobile, I am all set :)

OdduWon
Dec 19, 2006, 08:55 PM
perhaps in OS x/2 there will be plug-ins for dashcode. ooohhh or phone widgets, sold thru iTMS of course ;) . we don't need it to do everything, just to be a great organizer with a polished apple feel :D iNote would be great along with a voice recorder for memo taking. and a camera if and only if it is useful as a reference device, not just for photo-booth, or what our stupid friend is doing. 2.0 or nothing. many times i have wanted to take pictures of things so i don't forget to look it up at home, but my phone takes such crappy pics i don't even try anymore. It would be wonderful if apple based their "image capture device" around their screen capture tech. I like to make quick notes and capture them via shift+apple+4 and have a reminder icon on my desktop. also not to add to the already long list of wants for the apple phone, but a motion capture, or some kind of way to record text on the go would be cool. like video or O.C.R. scanning, for news articles or magazines or textbooks. I guess a good camera would do this though. hope the first round goes well for the Mac pod (if it has os x/2 it may be called mac_____) :D three weeks till we get our teaser :eek:

mrthieme
Dec 20, 2006, 05:31 AM
My impression from the last keynote, and I hope this is correct, was that the new target for Apple is the living room. I would think that ipods have won over new Mac users and that more non-computer devices would do the same. I am hoping for a more full featured itv myself, but even better would be a 37 or 42 inch stripped down imac. 1080p resolution, wireless connection to the primary Mac in the house, dvd drive, and a more robust remote.

In the world of windows we already see smart tvs coming out, with access to music, movie and photo libraries on the main computer. Media servers based on Windows media center are everywhere. For a company that advertises itself as a leader in the realm of fun stuff, Apple will soon be falling behind providing an integrated solution in the front room, IMO.

puuukeey
Dec 20, 2006, 07:25 AM
Iam so down

dingpat
Dec 20, 2006, 11:52 AM
I think everybody is hyping things up too much. Plus, what about us? The Mac addicts that love Apple for what it is? a company that provides an operating system superior to windows?

I believe that Apple is going down the road to destruction, and by destruction I mean financial enlightenment. But is this a good thing? In the past couple of years, Apple has become more and more a provide of cool, hip gadgets like that iPod, and more recently, the macbook. I think if Apple keeps expanding and catering to literally everybody in the world, they will lose what is essentially "Apple". It will become just like microsoft is right now, a huge corporation that is disconnected from the very people who love its products. So maybe we should focus on keeping Apple a close-knit family, instead of it growing into a mob of individuals.

OdduWon
Dec 20, 2006, 01:52 PM
THIS is what i was talking about (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.eyeassociates.com/quicklook%2520%2520iwill%2520positive%2520image.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.eyeassociates.com/pocketviewer.htm&h=2700&w=3600&sz=435&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=68MajG8K911qGM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dquicklook%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN) this would help with notes and documenting receipts on the go.

ClimbingTheLog
Dec 20, 2006, 02:50 PM
Newton MessagePad 160 is coming!

That's 3000 to you, bub.

The 2100 already shipped.

For what it's worth, MacOSRumors is calling it Mac OS D (Device) and is saying it evolved from the iPod OS, converging to Mac OS X in a later generation.

mkrishnan
Dec 20, 2006, 04:00 PM
THIS is what i was talking about (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.eyeassociates.com/quicklook%2520%2520iwill%2520positive%2520image.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.eyeassociates.com/pocketviewer.htm&h=2700&w=3600&sz=435&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=68MajG8K911qGM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dquicklook%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN) this would help with notes and documenting receipts on the go.

You kind of lost me... you were saying something about using screen captures as a memo / reminder system and then this link... you want Apple to create a portable scanning device that records print information for later integration on the computer?

OdduWon
Dec 20, 2006, 05:45 PM
You kind of lost me... you were saying something about using screen captures as a memo / reminder system and then this link... you want Apple to create a portable scanning device that records print information for later integration on the computer?

Have you ever read something, or seen a recipe while shopping and needed to write it down for later? well if you had the ability to capture the image or text in a "pass over view" you could have a faster way to make notes for recording information. Maybe this could work for business cards too. Basically a digital solution to the note pad. the "scanner" just happens to be a magnifier in the article, what i am talking about is a way to capture "useful" images as memos. A video scroll of a flyer would be good too for gathering all the information without having to take six different pics. I think this was the initial idea behind cellphone cameras but their low res and lack of image applications limited this to a silly gimmick that is only useful if you have friends that do stupid things on an hourly basis. :rolleyes:

ClimbingTheLog
Dec 21, 2006, 07:47 AM
So would iTV have a Core 2 Duo running an embedded OSX?

Possibly - it'll be something based on the Intel Viiv platform.

http://www.intel.com/design/celect/index.htm?iid=prod_nav+ce&

Marx55
Jan 18, 2007, 05:00 AM
Loks promising. Hopelly to get the ultimate wireless computerless presentation device.

WE NEED TONS FOR OUR UNIVERSITY!!!

1. Make Keynote or PowerPoint presentations on Mac or PC-Windows.

2. Save them to the wireless handheld device which has built-in Mac OS X.

3. Carry only the handheld device to the meeting room and use it as a remote control for your presentation. No wires. No computers involved.

Imagine the huge halo effect on corporate, education and domestic markets.

RacerX
Jan 18, 2007, 05:44 AM
Apple's success with the iPod had largely to do with the fact that it has a custom OS for a particular device. Cramming OS/X into some device to turn it into some general-purpose solution to a problem that doesn't exist only means you turn out junk.What makes you think that OS X needs to be crammed into such a device?

This operating system was originally developed to run on hardware with a Motorola 68030 processor at 25 MHz, 8 MB of memory and about 100 MB of storage space. In every conceivable way the iPhone dwarfs those specifications.

From what I've heard, Apple paired the OS back down to the size of Mac OS X v10.0. And by not trying to give it a computer like GUI, much of the overhead that we require of desktops is removed.

Basically what we are being given is the core OS, Cocoa foundations and something akin to dashboard for a GUI. Even after many applications become available for the iPhone, don't be expecting this to be the same experience you have with your Mac.

:rolleyes:

Actually it would be a lot more like if you couldn't exit dashboard mode in 10.4. :D

backdraft
Jan 18, 2007, 10:52 AM
Sorry. My first offense. ;)

Actually a G6 based on POWER6 would be welcomed over the Intel parts.