PDA

View Full Version : iPhone's OS X Less than 500MB, Flash vs Hard Drive




MacRumors
Jan 14, 2007, 05:05 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Macworld.co.uk provides (http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipod-itunes/news/index.cfm?newsid=16927) some quotes from Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of worldwide iPod marketing.

Joswiak provides some additional details about the version of OS X that runs on the Apple iPhone. He confirms that the operating system sits in the flash memory of the iPhone and takes up "considerably less" than half a gigabyte of storage.

OS updates will be provided regularly, much like iPod updates are provided.

Meanwhile, Joswiak also states that Flash memory was chosen for the iPhone over a hard drive due to the advantages of size and durability.

In another report Joswiak reports that Apple will be providing accessory makers more details about designing for the iPhone later this month:

"We will be giving our developers technical information by the end of next month that will outline those extra requirements. We’ll work with our developers to make sure that the products are properly shielded."

He also confirms that the only other applications to be expected for the iPhone will be coming from Apple for the time being. Macworld.co.uk speculates that the next iWork update may integrate with the iPhone. Indeed, the buzz on the Macworld floor indicates that many believe that the iWork and iLife updates have been delayed due to tight integration with Leopard. iPhone integration could also certainly be possible, but no concrete evidence yet to support this.



psychofreak
Jan 14, 2007, 05:08 AM
The thing I want to know: Will there be a hard drive based iPod, like the iPhone without the phone bit...

IEatApples
Jan 14, 2007, 05:11 AM
The thing I want to know: Will there be a hard drive based iPod, like the iPhone without the phone bit...That's what I want to know as well. :)

aLoC
Jan 14, 2007, 05:12 AM
They must have left quite a bit out... the System folder on my iMac is nearly 2GB, the Library folder is another 600MB.

Marvy
Jan 14, 2007, 05:21 AM
They must have left quite a bit out... the System folder on my iMac is nearly 2GB, the Library folder is another 600MB.

Yeah, now I'm starting to wonder what is taking up so much data in my System folder :)! Are the GUI elements on my Mac taking up that much?

Then again, they could probably get rid of a bunch of things that aren't necessary on the iPhone, like printer drivers, unused frameworks, and on the Darwin layer: All the command utilities that aren't used at user level anyway.

MacDonaldsd
Jan 14, 2007, 05:26 AM
Would be nice for some tight integration with iWork and iLife.

I wonder what bits of OS X have been left out

Apple!Fre@k
Jan 14, 2007, 05:41 AM
The iPhone is an incredible product but I have a hard time plunking down $600 for just 8GB worth of storage. That gets me about 3 full length movies and 100 songs. Until the storage is upped to at least 16GB Flash or 30GB HDD I think I'm going to hold out.

BlueRevolution
Jan 14, 2007, 05:41 AM
I'm still not convinced that the iPhone is running anything but an OS X lookalike. I doubt it's so much a question of what's left out as what's included. And when you start to build up what you need rather than strip down what you don't, I have no trouble believing they could get it down to well under 500 MB.

emotion
Jan 14, 2007, 06:17 AM
16GB and 8GB versions on launch?

Also, cue torrent of iphone haters complaining too hard about how they're not gonna buy one and that Apple has another cube on it's hands :D

mark88
Jan 14, 2007, 06:20 AM
I'm getting a bit worried about Leopard. The features we saw at WWDC were pretty minor, only time machine and spaces could you say were 'real new features'.

Considering Vista is launched this month you'd have thought Apple would be showing the world just how cool Leopard is going to be. But they just aren't.

vitaboy
Jan 14, 2007, 06:25 AM
I'm still not convinced that the iPhone is running anything but an OS X lookalike. I doubt it's so much a question of what's left out as what's included. And when you start to build up what you need rather than strip down what you don't, I have no trouble believing they could get it down to well under 500 MB.

We've now had several Apple execs, including Jobs himself state that the iPhone is running OS X. So why do you keep on doubting it is anything but a highly optimized version of OS X? Just because we've gotten used to software bloat?

Here's an anecdote from Andy Hertzfeld about the power of optimization:

http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Puzzle.txt&topic=Software%20Design&sortOrder=Sort%20by%20Date&detail=medium

Andy was one of the original Mac programmers and while the story is from a while back, the point remains valid. A talented programmer can take a program and with genius and creativity, significantly reduce the size of the program. In the story above, Andy took the original Puzzle desk accessory that was 6 KB in size and managed, in just a few hours of weekend work, reduce it to just 600 bytes.

Of course, he used assembly language to reduce the program to just 10% of its original size, but without resorting to assembly language, I would say it would be fairly easy for programmers to reduce the size of something by 2-4 times, especially if they leave unneeded libraries out.

Less than 500 MB for OS X is totally believable, especially since Apple tends to have more than its fair share of genius-level software engineers.

emptyCup
Jan 14, 2007, 06:25 AM
I'm still not convinced that the iPhone is running anything but an OS X lookalike.

What does this actually mean? That you can't run anything that runs on a Mini on the phone? That it is a purpose built device that only does exactly what you see?

Actually it is not a lookalike. It doesn't look anything like OS X. Since nobody here actually knows anything about the iPhone, I am willing to accept that it is a stripped down version of OS X.

And since none of us actually knows anything about the phone it might be more useful, and entertaining, to start making a list of things in the full version of the OS that the iPhone doesn't need.

1. The whole printing subsystem including drivers.
2. The Windowing system.
3. Drag and Drop.
4. A large part of the code that handles networking.

Feel free to continue...

Shagrat
Jan 14, 2007, 06:33 AM
I'm getting a bit worried about Leopard. The features we saw at WWDC were pretty minor, only time machine and spaces could you say were 'real new features'.

Considering Vista is launched this month you'd have thought Apple would be showing the world just how cool Leopard is going to be. But they just aren't.
Just wait. It's obvious that Apple wanted to show off what they believe, if not all users of this forum(!), is a fantastic new device. I think that it is, and will get one the moment it is released here in the UK.

Jeez, because they devoted most of the keynote to the iPhone, you all think that OSX etc. is on the back burner?

Oh ye of little faith, as they say!

Steve threw away a mention of new stuff re Macs at the start, and I see no real reason to doubt that that will happen in due course. There will be plenty of new announcements soon, and if you think that Apple are putting OSX on hold, then you are simply mistaken.

If you don't like that, then go and get Vista, and a Blackberry, and I'm sure you will be happy.

emotion
Jan 14, 2007, 06:34 AM
Considering Vista is launched this month you'd have thought Apple would be showing the world just how cool Leopard is going to be. But they just aren't.

They don't need to. The world's media is on Apple anyway. No hype needed.

brandon6684
Jan 14, 2007, 06:39 AM
The thing I want to know: Will there be a hard drive based iPod, like the iPhone without the phone bit...

Exactly. I want a widescreen/touchscreem iPod with WiFi and web browsing, just replace the phone and SMS parts with iChat, and I would definitly buy one, but as a phone, I just don't see myself buying one.

ereddekopp
Jan 14, 2007, 06:41 AM
I'm getting a bit worried about Leopard. The features we saw at WWDC were pretty minor, only time machine and spaces could you say were 'real new features'.

Considering Vista is launched this month you'd have thought Apple would be showing the world just how cool Leopard is going to be. But they just aren't.

I think that is the very reason they are not showing the world how cool Leopard is gonna be. They gave us a little taste at WWDC, barely enough to wet the appetite. Rushing Leopard out, just to compete with Vista is stupid...its a Microsoft move. It is just like Apple bringing nothing out, as far as a new iPod to compete with Zune.

Why bother?

People are getting wise now to Microsoft. They are seeing that the "innovative new features" that are being generated out of Redmond, are nothing more than rip-offs of others.

What is innovative about the Zune?
Or Vista?

Is there one concept or idea in either product that is new, different or added to the world of technology...that was not lifted from another company?

Here is why Apple doesn't need to rush their products out.

Microsoft is just now catching up to the iPod and Mac OS X. The problem is, Apple has been deep, already, in developing their next wave. The iPhone is definitely a foreshadowing of things to come for iPod. I think you could easily bet on the fact we will see a full on touch screen, widescreen iPod video this year. And Leopard has yet to show its spots. I do think there is much happening with Leopard they are not telling any of us about. Even developers.

Companies like Microsoft have left them no choice.

I think their statement at the beginning of this year was a bold statement and a real call that they are planning some sweeping things...iPhone was just the beginning.

allenhuffman
Jan 14, 2007, 06:50 AM
Although not common in the desktop market, there are many areas where OSes (embedded, real-time, etc.) carry on the same name but are quite different under the hood.

In 1980, the company I work for introduced an operating system called OS-9 for the Motoroal 6809. Written in 8/16-bit assembly, the kernel was a few K, if that. In 1983, the operating system was ported/rewritten for 68000 assembly. Much like native PPC Mac apps, and native Intel Mac apps, there was zero compatiblity between 6809 and 68000 architectures, but portable source code (BASIC, C, etc.) could be directly recompiled with few, if any, changes. Both versions, compatible only at the high-level language source level, were known as "OS-9." Today's 68000-based kernel is about 28K, and other variations (ported in C to newer 32 and 64 bit processors) are many times larger.

So, all "OS X" means is an API and feature set. You can drop features and have "OS X Lite" or whatever (which is undoubtedly what this is) and you can leave out 90% of the high end features and the core is still "OS X."

This is very common in all non-PC/Mac operating system markets (you know, the place where the majority of OSes are used in all those billions of cell phones, traffic light controllers, and french fry cooking robots).

(Hmmm, I guess it's alot like Linux. You can't buy a $99 router that runs Linux and expect to have it running OpenOffice; the heart may be Linux, but without all the support components for a "full" Linux, it won't do much.)

iJed
Jan 14, 2007, 06:54 AM
I'm still not convinced that the iPhone is running anything but an OS X lookalike. I doubt it's so much a question of what's left out as what's included. And when you start to build up what you need rather than strip down what you don't, I have no trouble believing they could get it down to well under 500 MB.

From this job advert (http://jobs.apple.com/index.ajs?BID=1&method=mExternal.showJob&RID=4063&CurrentPage=1) I think its highly likely that it runs OS X. Why else would they be looking for "MacOS X / IOKit driver development experience" and "Mach IPC and/or Mach Server design experience" for an iPhone wireless engineer.

mark88
Jan 14, 2007, 07:09 AM
They don't need to. The world's media is on Apple anyway. No hype needed.

Perhaps that's why they choose to showcase the iPhone instead of Leopard. Knowing that it would create more medie attention

clevin
Jan 14, 2007, 08:00 AM
We've now had several Apple execs, including Jobs himself state that the iPhone is running OS X. So why do you keep on doubting it is anything but a highly optimized version of OS X? Just because we've gotten used to software bloat?

Here's an anecdote from Andy Hertzfeld about the power of optimization:

http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Puzzle.txt&topic=Software%20Design&sortOrder=Sort%20by%20Date&detail=medium

Andy was one of the original Mac programmers and while the story is from a while back, the point remains valid. A talented programmer can take a program and with genius and creativity, significantly reduce the size of the program. In the story above, Andy took the original Puzzle desk accessory that was 6 KB in size and managed, in just a few hours of weekend work, reduce it to just 600 bytes.

Of course, he used assembly language to reduce the program to just 10% of its original size, but without resorting to assembly language, I would say it would be fairly easy for programmers to reduce the size of something by 2-4 times, especially if they leave unneeded libraries out.

Less than 500 MB for OS X is totally believable, especially since Apple tends to have more than its fair share of genius-level software engineers.

its always not smart to totally take business company's PR statements literally.

Optimization can be done, but how much optimization you can do without loosing functionality, its all balance.

Actually I do agree a 500 MB system can do alot of things, (remember Win98? it only took 200MB), but it will not be as flexible as Mac OSX.

I guess the problem is ppl expecting the iPhone OS to do as much as MacOSX (or at least 70% of what Mac OSX can do), which is quite unreasonable, but again, apple created this expectation by using the name of "OSX", who to blame? if finally buyer find this to be disappointing and iPhone fail in market because of this, its only Jobs' PR campaign's fault.

OdduWon
Jan 14, 2007, 08:12 AM
Although not common in the desktop market, there are many areas where OSes (embedded, real-time, etc.) carry on the same name but are quite different under the hood....So, all "OS X" means is an API and feature set. You can drop features and have "OS X Lite" or whatever (which is undoubtedly what this is) and you can leave out 90% of the high end features and the core is still "OS X."

So any mac can run mac OS(X) where X is the name of a huge cat :D

thejadedmonkey
Jan 14, 2007, 08:51 AM
Actually I do agree a 500 MB system can do alot of things, (remember Win98? it only took 200MB), but it will not be as flexible as Mac OSX.

Forget Windows 98, Windows 95 was around 1/4 the size of 98, and look at everything it could do! Heck, Windows XP can be reduced to 500mb's if you remove all the extra drivers and unnecessary bloat, and if you had access to the source code you could probably chop that number in 1/2 again if you removed parts you don't need that are computer-only... so yeah, 500mb's for OS X is pleanty.

gnasher729
Jan 14, 2007, 08:59 AM
I'm still not convinced that the iPhone is running anything but an OS X lookalike. I doubt it's so much a question of what's left out as what's included. And when you start to build up what you need rather than strip down what you don't, I have no trouble believing they could get it down to well under 500 MB.

Just as an example: Take the file system. MacOS X supports HFS+, HFS, FAT32, Unix file systems, user-loadable file systems. Network file systems. Disk images. Multiple harddisks. Multiple volumes on one harddisk. Raid. Harddisks that can be ejected, that are connected through Firewire or USB. Harddisks of arbitrary size. CDs, DVDs, recordable CDs and DVDs in a dozen formats. Powerdown, Powerup. Sleepmode. Writeable CDs and DVDs. And so on, and so on, and so on.

On the iPhone, you have exactly one harddisk. Exactly one file system. Exactly one hardware interface. It is always there, not removable. So here is what you do as a programmer: You make a list of all features that you might want - like HFS, HFS+, Unix file system, multiple file systems, more than one harddisk, and so on and so on. Then for every bit of code, you decide which feature or combination of features require that bit of code, and mark it. Then you build an OS supporting exactly what you want and nothing else, and tons of code drop out. Easy to get rid lots of code that way.

Also, the ARM processor is famous for having very compact code, and there is an even more compact variant (THUMB) which will save even more.

Cepe Indicum
Jan 14, 2007, 09:10 AM
Just wait. It's obvious that Apple wanted to show off what they believe, if not all users of this forum(!), is a fantastic new device. I think that it is, and will get one the moment it is released here in the UK.

Jeez, because they devoted most of the keynote to the iPhone, you all think that OSX etc. is on the back burner?

Oh ye of little faith, as they say!

Steve threw away a mention of new stuff re Macs at the start, and I see no real reason to doubt that that will happen in due course. There will be plenty of new announcements soon, and if you think that Apple are putting OSX on hold, then you are simply mistaken.

If you don't like that, then go and get Vista, and a Blackberry, and I'm sure you will be happy.

Couldn't agree more with your comments. I'll be getting an iPhone when they're out in the UK too (praying that they are not exclusive to '3'!!), and I can't wait to see Leopard arrive, which it will, in due course.

I can't believe that so many Mac devotees on this forum seem to be shunning Apple on this one... :rolleyes:

I'm sorry, but if Apple only released the products / software that the 'hardcore' Mac fans wanted, then they simply wouldn't be able to attract NEW customers / switchers to Macs, and then they wouldn't be able to keep innovating as they are.

I can understand the frustration, really - especially over some of the iPhone features, and the price tag - but seriously, the 'teaser' on their website before MacWorld was not just about the iPhone... there is SO much more to come from Apple this year... :)

MisterMe
Jan 14, 2007, 09:19 AM
... to start making a list of things in the full version of the OS that the iPhone doesn't need.

1. The whole printing subsystem including drivers.
2. The Windowing system.
3. Drag and Drop.
4. A large part of the code that handles networking.

Feel free to continue...5. Classic
6. Chess
7. iLife
8. Support for all but one language
9. BSD subsystem
10. Office 2004 trial

Next...

Warbrain
Jan 14, 2007, 09:36 AM
11. iWork
12. Finder
13. User and user folders

...

BigPrince
Jan 14, 2007, 09:38 AM
They had a year to get ready for iLife 07. Dissappointed they couldn't get it out the door.

Cepe Indicum
Jan 14, 2007, 09:40 AM
5. Classic
6. Chess
7. iLife
8. Support for all but one language
9. BSD subsystem
10. Office 2004 trial

Next...

Isn't iPhoto part of iLife? But, I get your point.

14. Automator
15. Stickies (though this would be handy, unless the new Notes is built into the Mail app)

And I pass...

AidenShaw
Jan 14, 2007, 09:44 AM
By comparison, Smartphone/PDAs like the Q or Qtopia have 128 MB flash - and that contains the OS, the apps, and the data.

peharri
Jan 14, 2007, 09:55 AM
Ok, I'm convinced.

If he'd said "50M", I'd have thought "Ok, they've made an OS X clone", I mean, that's about as large as it would have needed to be.

500M however does sound like a stripped down OS X.

Remember, yes, your System folder may be 2G, however:

- That includes a suite of device drivers that are no longer relevent
- That includes frameworks that are no longer relevent
- That includes larger multimedia objects that can be stripped down
- That's for umpteen languages rather than one.
- That even includes C++/Objective C headers!

OS X used to, back when it was NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP, fit on a single CD, uncompressed (and that was including an encyclopedia), and run in 16Mb of RAM. What's happened since? Carbon, Quartz, Java, and Quicktime. How much of that is needed? What about the Unix back-end?

Taking a look at my System folder (admittedly Panther):

Total size is 1.38G
- The big ones are
CoreServices (143M) - that's things like Finder.app, LoginWindow, etc. Big ones in here are are entirely unnecessary include ClassicStartup (36M), Setup Assistant (40M), and Netwrok Setup Assistant (8.5M), and overall I'd say around 75% of the apps can be removed from here.
Fonts (127M)
Frameworks (600M) - including nearly 100M for Java, and 45M for Python. And this is assuming they haven't been radical and, say, removed Carbon.
Perl (28M) (Huh?)
Preference Panes (40M)
PrivateFrameworks (133M) - plenty of stuff you can see is no longer relevent, SetUpAssistant, various Java things, development tools cores, DVDs...
Screen Savers (26M)
Speech (38M) - I hope they keep this one in some form though, obviously...

Some of these, such as Perl, can go completely. Others can be stripped down to the bare minimum. The relatively bloated Finder can be replaced by the simpler UI of the device. Most of the resources used by all of the apps can be stripped down (no need for Dock.app happy 128x128 pixel icons any more.)

I don't see why it would be hard for Apple to strip 1.4G to .5G for a much simpler device with much lighter requirements and a closed design. I believe the iPhone probably does run Mac OS X. It's stripped down, but it's probably XNU, and it's almost certainly the major Leopard frameworks running on top, with a few compilation options to remove support for unneeded features.

clevin
Jan 14, 2007, 09:59 AM
By comparison, Smartphone/PDAs like the Q or Qtopia have 128 MB flash - and that contains the OS, the apps, and the data.

lol, smart phones don't claim they have OSX, apply are using the "OSX" vaguely in order to connect iPhone to the the "most advance" OS in the world-Mac OSX, its business tricks, implying, but not directly.

so when ppl are happy with 5MB palm OS 5.4, they might not happy with 500MB OSX Lite simply because their expectation is too high.

twoodcc
Jan 14, 2007, 10:18 AM
16GB and 8GB versions on launch?


that's what i'm hoping for :)

i hope the delay of iwork and ilife is due to leopard.......and they're all coming out soon :D

Snowy_River
Jan 14, 2007, 10:21 AM
I'm getting a bit worried about Leopard. The features we saw at WWDC were pretty minor, only time machine and spaces could you say were 'real new features'.

Considering Vista is launched this month you'd have thought Apple would be showing the world just how cool Leopard is going to be. But they just aren't.

Hmm...

Maybe that's the ticket. Maybe they'll have a special event right around the official release of Vista (which hasn't launched yet, but will in a couple of weeks) to show off Leopard and give a formal release date. That would get some of the media attention off of Vista and on to Leopard, just when people might be in a mode of thinking about upgrading their computers...

greenfluke
Jan 14, 2007, 10:28 AM
I guess if there is no support for 3rd party applications then it is easy to trim the fat from the OS :). I have heard that the version of Safari included with the iPhone is more limited than the regular version. If all of the applications included are as limited, I wonder how good the iWork stuff could possibly be without a chunk of the functionality. I don't think it could be much better than the Docs-to-go that comes with the palm IMHO.

Snowy_River
Jan 14, 2007, 10:29 AM
Exactly. I want a widescreen/touchscreem iPod with WiFi and web browsing, just replace the phone and SMS parts with iChat, and I would definitly buy one, but as a phone, I just don't see myself buying one.

You can definitely count me in this category as well. I have particular tastes when it comes to phones, and a block unit like this wouldn't do much for me. I'd rather have something like this as my iPod/PDA/portable email reader than as my phone.

Of course, that's all being said without having actually held one. I look forward to having that opportunity, though.

AidenShaw
Jan 14, 2007, 10:30 AM
lol, smart phones don't claim they have OSX, apply are using the "OSX" vaguely in order to connect iPhone to the the "most advance" OS in the world-Mac OSX, its business tricks, implying, but not directly.
At least Microsoft has the honesty to call the light version of Windows by the name "Windows Mobile", and not stretch the truth to the breaking point by saying it's the "full OS".

I'll bet when all's said and done, people will realize that the Apple Phone runs a subset of OSX, similar to the Windows subset called Windows Mobile (Windows CE).

Which isn't a bad thing (except for the dishonesty^H^H^H^H^H^H^H marketing part) - once you start stripping down the O/S, you are changing the sum total of APIs available to the programmer.

Windows CE is very similar to Windows XP, except that some subsystems aren't available, and others may have minor differences in some of the APIs. Porting a Windows XP program (especially one using the modern managed code interfaces) to Windows Mobile is usually pretty simple.

It is a "port", however, since it has to be recompiled for a different processor type and OS subset.

Rocketman
Jan 14, 2007, 10:38 AM
Okay, I will post.

The release of Intel Macs went well AHEAD of schedule so when Macworld rolled around, they were all Mac-ed out!

The "iPhone" (Apple Tablet Nano) is actually a full-on computer with power comparable to, say, a Powermac G4-800 mhz. This is a handtop display centric computer. How much did you pay for your Mac Plus with a small fraction of the power and capacity of the ATN? $2700, and that was 1984-1986!

"iPhone" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN! "iPod" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN! "SMS" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN!

This means something really interesting. More apps are trivial to add and the list of possibilities runs into the dozens at minimum.

Now some will fixate on the "mere 8gb" capacity. Remember this well. The ATN is an internet always-on appliance via cellular Edge and 802.11g now. Rev 2 or 3 will have 3G cellular and 802.11n, and even 802.16 wimax.

You only need local storage for apps and cache. The device can stream from the internet and download from the internet on a real-time or near real-time basis.

Is your music and movie collection on a computer which is on the internet? You can log onto your OWN computer with this device from ANYWHERE there is either cellular Edge or 802.11b/g access. There may be a very few places that does not apply, but not many.

As for flash, Samsung has announced 16gb flash now. I wonder how long it will take Apple to go to that in this device?

In the old days we used to have client-server, where you sat at a "dumb terminal" and talked to the mothership. Then we had "thin clients" which were real computers wired on where the dumb terminal used to be, and it could display graphics and do minimal local tasks. Then we had "thick clients" which were full-on local computers able to do main tasks as well as talk to several other motherships.

ATN is a "physically" thin, "virtually" thick client which is quite capable of talking to multiple motherships (multi-homing), and has MORE local compute capability than so-called thick clients of only 5-10 years ago. It does so WIRELESSLY FROM ANYWHERE, IN YOUR HAND!

For those of you interested only in Macs, Upon Leopard release, Intel will also be updating the chipsets behind the main processor. It will make practical 4-core chips in medium class computers like iMac, and 8-core chip-groups in higher class computers like MacPro, and many-core chip-groups in X-serves, and beyond.

Buckle up for safety and prepare for Warp drive folks.

Rocketman

Zadillo
Jan 14, 2007, 10:51 AM
lol, smart phones don't claim they have OSX, apply are using the "OSX" vaguely in order to connect iPhone to the the "most advance" OS in the world-Mac OSX, its business tricks, implying, but not directly.

so when ppl are happy with 5MB palm OS 5.4, they might not happy with 500MB OSX Lite simply because their expectation is too high.

I and many other Treo owners are NOT happy with the 5MB Palm OS 5.4, especially given how little it has even changed over the past few years. And the worst thing of course is knowing it's a dead platform, but Palm won't even have anything to replace it with until Access finishes up Access Linux Platform (which will be the successor to Palm OS and run older Palm apps), and the only other option is their Windows Mobile Treos, which only are suitable if you like Windows Mobile.

migue
Jan 14, 2007, 10:56 AM
At least Microsoft has the honesty to call the light version of Windows by the name "Windows Mobile", and not stretch the truth to the breaking point by saying it's the "full OS".

I'll bet when all's said and done, people will realize that the Apple Phone runs a subset of OSX, similar to the Windows subset called Windows Mobile (Windows CE).

Which isn't a bad thing (except for the dishonesty^H^H^H^H^H^H^H marketing part) - once you start stripping down the O/S, you are changing the sum total of APIs available to the programmer.

Windows CE is very similar to Windows XP, except that some subsystems aren't available, and others may have minor differences in some of the APIs. Porting a Windows XP program (especially one using the modern managed code interfaces) to Windows Mobile is usually pretty simple.

It is a "port", however, since it has to be recompiled for a different processor type and OS subset.


Not exactly. While Mac OS X's and Windows XP's respective XNU and NT kernels all were born from the work of the Mach microkernel research team at Carnegie Mellon University and are modular, Windows Mobile's Kernel is totally different from Windows NT 5 (Win2000, XP, etc) and thus it is a different OS that had to be developed from scratch.
I think it's not far-fetched that Mac OS X and the iPhone's OSX share the same (optimized) XNU kernel, possibly with some useless subsystem parts tropped, with a Leopard framework library dropped on top of it. If you think about it, most of the bloat comes from the multiple windowing GUI system and networking and drivers. Carbon libraries are also not needed (and they weren't in the keynote slides). This way, they can have a supple but full OS X kernel with the core services built on top of it (Cocoa, Core Services, Animation, security, BSD networking etc). Maybe even quartz and quicktime, and InkWell.
Think about it, the graphics are too fast and smooth for a totally new OS and using OS X's rendering engine makes it easy to develop for (apparently, it also natively reads pdfs in email attachment). The new LG KE850 on Engadget, which uses a traditional touchscreen, has a choppy user interface that seems primitive compared to OS X's.

justflie
Jan 14, 2007, 10:57 AM
rocketman, your posts have been right on about this iphone. Hopefully you're also correct on this one. To be honest, I'll be buying it regardless of any updates come june. However, as other people have mentioned, it would be nice to see a storage update (since this is also an ipod, or has an "ipod application"). I had read in some article (maybe NY Times?) that a software update could make this phone 3G compatible. Does this sound right to anyone? I don't know much about ECE or the hardware of phones, but I would have assumed that you need some new hardware inside to pull that off. Unless apple incorporates the hardware (sneakily) for a later firmware update...

guzhogi
Jan 14, 2007, 10:58 AM
They must have left quite a bit out... the System folder on my iMac is nearly 2GB, the Library folder is another 600MB.

I remember running system 7 on my Macintosh LC and it being able to fit on a 1.4 MB floppy w/ room left over. I kinda miss the old days of system 7 where the only software you needed to boot up the computer was the Finder & System suitcase in a folder in the root directory of your hard drive. Now, as you said, OS X needs several gigabytes and files all over the place. I guess that's what we get for all the cool features of OS X.

Cepe Indicum
Jan 14, 2007, 11:02 AM
Okay, I will post.

The release of Intel Macs went well AHEAD of schedule so when Macworld rolled around, they were all Mac-ed out!

<<snip>>

Buckle up for safety and prepare for Warp drive folks.

Rocketman

This is a fantastic overview, thanks Rocketman.

Guess everyone has already thought of this, but why can't the following be a reality:

- When you buy music / TV shows / movies / etc., you buy the right to view them whenever you want, but they are actually accessed from Apple servers when you view them (rather than downloading).

- You can then access them on your iPhone wherever / whenever you want, just like your .Mac mail / shared calendars.

- The AppleTV is a set-top-box, which also accesses the remote server, thereby cutting out the PC altogether.

I'm actually asking, where are the flaws in this?

Marx55
Jan 14, 2007, 11:03 AM
Apple, please, do not KILL the great iPhone potential, which relies on Mac OS X:

- Posibility to move files between the Mac/PC-Windows and the iPhone.

- Possibility to open native Keynote/PowerPoint presentation on the iPhone.

The above features will give us the ultimate wireless computerles presentation remote:

1. Make your Keynote/PowerPoint presentation on Mac/PC-Windows.

2. Save it to the iPhone.

3. Use the iPhone to give your presentation. No cables or computers involved.

Huge halo effect on the education, corporate and domestyic markets.

WE NEED TONS OF SUCH IPHONES!!!

Another possibility is to sell different iPhone models with different features. We just need the above features. We do not need the "phone" features!

OR CALL IT iPod INSTED OF iPhone, BUT WITH THE ABOVE FEATURES... THANKS.

Cubert
Jan 14, 2007, 11:04 AM
OS D, baby! "D" for device.

clevin
Jan 14, 2007, 11:07 AM
I and many other Treo owners are NOT happy with the 5MB Palm OS 5.4, especially given how little it has even changed over the past few years. And the worst thing of course is knowing it's a dead platform, but Palm won't even have anything to replace it with until Access finishes up Access Linux Platform (which will be the successor to Palm OS and run older Palm apps), and the only other option is their Windows Mobile Treos, which only are suitable if you like Windows Mobile.

lol, ur opinion is not towards the functionality of the machine when you got it, all i was saying is about expectation before you buy it and reality when u actually have the machine in hand.

Is that clear for you?

Im not promoting Palm here, if thats what u think I was trying to say. Obviously u now sounds very excited about this iPhone, probably already begin to save money for it (if you do need to save for it). Im sure u have the expectations for iPhone, but you won't have in in hand and compare the reality with your expectation. So what YOU and OTHER future iPhone users will feel? lets wait and see.

Rocketman
Jan 14, 2007, 11:25 AM
rocketman, your posts have been right on about this iphone. Hopefully you're also correct on this one. To be honest, I'll be buying it regardless of any updates come june. However, as other people have mentioned, it would be nice to see a storage update (since this is also an ipod, or has an "ipod application"). I had read in some article (maybe NY Times?) that a software update could make this phone 3G compatible. Does this sound right to anyone? I don't know much about ECE or the hardware of phones, but I would have assumed that you need some new hardware inside to pull that off. Unless apple incorporates the hardware (sneakily) for a later firmware update...

Apple certainly knows -now- what hardware cellular 3G (or 4/5G) needs. We can presume that Apple/AT&T (Cingular will be announcing their own demise this week) have a plan going forward not only for (software) updates to THIS hardware but additional hardware in future devices. iPod updates seemed to happen less frequently than mac updates. About annually. I suspect ATN ("iPhone) updates will also be slower.

As such we can reasonably "presume" this V1.0 ATN ("iPhone") has a bit of future built-in. Steve himself said in the keynote he wants shipping devices to not suffer from "mechanical obsolesence". He was referring at the moment to buttons, but I wonder if they have given this issue ANY thought WRT other aspects of ATN? Hmmm.

Rocketman

AidenShaw
Jan 14, 2007, 11:39 AM
Not exactly. While Mac OS X's and Windows XP's respective XNU and NT kernels all were born from the work of the Mach microkernel research team at Carnegie Mellon University and are modular, Windows Mobile's Kernel is totally different from Windows NT 5 (Win2000, XP, etc) and thus it is a different OS that had to be developed from scratch.

No debate there, but is "XP" the 2 MB kernel, or is "XP" the set of APIs and libraries and utilities that the user sees?

In my point of view, it's the latter. If the microkernel is adapted for the *very* different environment of a battery-powered handheld, that's a good thing.

It will be interesting to see what the battery life of the Apple Phone really is - and that might help tell if perhaps Apple shouldn't have copied Microsoft (and MontaVista et al) and created a better microkernel.

Rocketman
Jan 14, 2007, 11:45 AM
Why not stream everything?

There are still bandwidth constraints and also serve-capacity limits. If you tried to view the streamed keynote address you noted issues with stoppages due to heavy traffic. You would not experience that when you as a single user download from your home server, but if everybody wants to view the Presidential address all at once or something, streaming has not fullay arrived yet. We need a cache or near-real-time thing for heavy multi-view over internet. The constraints seem to be both at the sending servers and the sending servers' pipes right now.

Why not a portable Powerpoint/Keynote device?

Sir. Intel literally ran a commercial about 2-4 months AGO showing exactly that. Now the ATN (iPhone) is released. Microsoft has no such thing. Please correct me if I am wrong. ATN will send the presentation via 802.11g to ATV (iTV) too! Or old school to a local computer to only be controlled by ATN by remote. But that would be old school.

What does Intel have on the immediate horizon?

http://www.intel.com/

Quad-core
ATV (iTV)

http://www.intel.com/homepage/index4.htm?iid=biztab+newsatinteltab

http://mysearch.intel.com/corporate/default.aspx?culture=en-US&q=commercials&searchsubmit.x=0&searchsubmit.y=0

Rocketman :)

Rychiar
Jan 14, 2007, 12:01 PM
i really wish it had a regular hard drive in it. Based on the current crop of ipod videos it wouldnt be that much of a space hog. As far as durability goes, u drop this thing, its done for anyway. I can't imagine that screen surviving a fall on pavement. And Either way i dropped my 60 gig iPod photo on the ground many a time and that hardrive has held up fine

Stella
Jan 14, 2007, 12:02 PM
500MB!! Thats very large for a smartphone OS. Symbian makes OSX ( in iPhone) look like total and utter bloatware!! LOL.

Doctor Q
Jan 14, 2007, 12:04 PM
Since Apple stripped Mac OS X down to just what was required to operate the iPhone, whether or not to call it "Mac OS X" or something "lighter" was a marketing decision, but didn't change the facts. As long as Apple controls all applications, Apple will include just as much of the core facilities as it needs for those apps. So as consumers of this first model, we shouldn't really care if it's "light" or not; it does what it advertises.

The difference matters more when we think about future development. If they open up to other developers, the demand to restore other OS facilities will grow. It's also possible that Apple would feel they need to limit their own development to avoid having to restore what was previously removed, so they have a conflict of interest: keeping the OS small while adding new apps, and that could put a drag on development and innovation.

Luckily, as time goes on, they will be able to increase the amount of flash memory and beef up the operating system, simply because memory prices fall. I hope that will let them keep ahead of application demands.

BoRegardless
Jan 14, 2007, 12:08 PM
Rocketman, you & I have posted similar things between here Slashdot and elsewhere.

I called it a VCD, Virtual Communication Device. Lots of other names come to mind, but it is a blank slate, capable of doing whatever is needed through local software & a wide array of communication frequencies.

Between added frequencies (think IR & RFID), and newer RF schemas, and larger flash memories, more capable batteries, etc., THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING.

Steve Jobs was fantastic at choosing a manageable set of starting points, rather than defining an unreasonable set of features from day one. After all, we are on what, gen 5 for iPods, at least.

BoRegardless


Okay, I will post.

"iPhone" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN! "iPod" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN! "SMS" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN!

This means something really interesting. More apps are trivial to add and the list of possibilities runs into the dozens at minimum.

Buckle up for safety and prepare for Warp drive folks.

Rocketman

kildjean
Jan 14, 2007, 12:15 PM
I am new around here, but i hope you can read me the same :)

I'll start by saying, that I'm a switcher. That being said one of the things that motivated me t switch, was keeping things simple. OSX is heavy built OS, but its simple.

I think the iphone announcement was awesome. The type of computer it is, and the offerings it has are amazing. I really liked the ease that it lets you merge two calls, and how you can control it without the need of a typepad or keyboard or even a click wheel. The 1st thing that popped in my mind, was that this is the second comming of the "Newton", and this is something I always wanted to see, a PDA running OSX. And the fact that like someone mentioned here, the phone, the sms, the ipod are more Apps than actual features of the system is amazing what it can and not do this great concept.

Sweet.

Now, if we think in the things that made Palm (back in the day), awesome and successful, was the availability to put in it whatever you wanted. One thing i said to myself as i watched the keynote when steve said this was running OSX, "I want to try to run World of Warcraft" in there. Or any other app i regularly use. Since its OSX and not some embedded OS, i thought, this is going to be huge, and i thought the hefty price tag was earning its weight.

I dont understand why Apple, is going to limit people in running any content they want. That was a huge letdown. Many of are fascinated because its a darned phone, whoop-de-doo. I was caught because as steve mentioned all the things that were running on it were applications. And they looked and work amazingly, but what use does it have for me if i cant use the widgets I want, and the apps i want running in there.

I think that is going to hinder it a lot. I can see it would be a great device and it can have a great success. With all the cool things, it has, I dont see it as the true successor of the ipod.

I want it, but i have my doubts if i should sink $600 in something that is goig to cost me everytime i want to put an app on... i really dont care what etwork it runs, i like cigular, my current pos of phone runs on them. But it bothers me a lot people will not be able to control what goes in there.

The bottom line is that this is all speculative wondering... the device is not out yet. So many things can happen, my suggestion is to let Apple drive and us sit in the back and enjoy the ride...

Like others have said, if they did an ipod with all the stuff this does, without the phone, and with 30gb capacity at least, id buy it tomorrow on the spot.

Kil

DTphonehome
Jan 14, 2007, 12:20 PM
500MB!! Thats very large for a smartphone OS. Symbian makes OSX ( in iPhone) look like total and utter bloatware!! LOL.

Not if it's truly OS X...remember, Steve talked about having CoreImage, CoreAnimation, etc, etc, built-in, and those are large (in size) and important technologies to have the iPhone work as it does (ie, CoverFlow, Aqua, widgets, etc).

I was initially skeptical about this running a "real" version of OS X, but as more information comes out, the more I believe it.

Bosunsfate
Jan 14, 2007, 12:29 PM
The thing I want to know: Will there be a hard drive based iPod, like the iPhone without the phone bit...

The answer, IMO, is yes....why wouldn't they have a 100GB version? If they don't replace the high end video iPod with this multi-touch interface then you'll see sales drop off.

Just look at all the people that would just buy the iPhone for the video only..

What we'll have to see is what will the be the first "Just one more thing"....will it be a Leopord, iLife, iWork release, or something to do with the iPods...

The only guarantee...there will be MORE than just one more thing. :D

Rocketman
Jan 14, 2007, 12:30 PM
Rocketman, you & I have posted similar things between here Slashdot and elsewhere.

I called it a VCD, Virtual Communication Device. Lots of other names come to mind, but it is a blank slate, capable of doing whatever is needed through local software & a wide array of communication frequencies.

Between added frequencies (think IR & RFID), and newer RF schemas, and larger flash memories, more capable batteries, etc., THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING.

Steve Jobs was fantastic at choosing a manageable set of starting points, rather than defining an unreasonable set of features from day one. After all, we are on what, gen 5 for iPods, at least.

BoRegardless

Agreed.

Apple has been shipping 802.11n in actual hardware for several MONTHS now. Less than a year after THAT the ATN (VCD / iPhone) gets released.

I'll bet you a beer it ships with hardware capable of being software upgraded to 801.11n.

I'll bet you YA beer that the Edge it ships with is software/network upgradeable later to something akin to or better than Sprint's wireless data protocol.

Remember EDGE is Gen 1 wireless data, and while the most widely deployed in the USA (right -now- when it matters for ATN), is not the most widely deployed in the world, and not the fastest in the USA anymore.

As for the folks saying "why can't" I install my own apps?

I have an answer to that. The boot INSTANCE of OSX is protected. What about a second INSTANCE of OSX running any app and having no access to the phone protocols whatsoever, only a tunnel going out the data streams (internet)?

Hmmm?

Rocketman

Deslock
Jan 14, 2007, 12:36 PM
He also confirms that the only other applications to be expected for the iPhone will be coming from Apple for the time being.
I would like nothing better than to ditch the embarrassment-of-an-OS that is Windows mobile (crappy interface, intermittent syncing, crippled web browser, nightmarish memory management, unreliable alarms!, and all-around temperamental and sluggish behavior).

But the iPhone's amazing hardware and multitouch interface do me no good if it doesn't have a spreadsheet, ssh, file encryption, and Windows remote desktop (either via a standalone app or iPhone's Safari with something like logmein).

oogje
Jan 14, 2007, 12:44 PM
Apple doesn't typically throw around terms willy nilly. How many places on Apple's web site do we see "OS X" that's not preceded by "Mac". I only see "OS X" in reference to the iPhone. The device may be running a full version of "OS X" but I don't know what that is. I'm familiar with "Mac OS X" but not this other version that appears to have recently come into being.

stcanard
Jan 14, 2007, 12:47 PM
No debate there, but is "XP" the 2 MB kernel, or is "XP" the set of APIs and libraries and utilities that the user sees?

In my point of view, it's the latter.

That may be your point of view, but as far as the definition of "Operating System" goes, its the former (plus a few of the very core, basic libraries). "Operating" in "Operating system" refers to the software's ability to operate the basic hardware on which it is installed.

I know this is semantics that will be debated ad-nauseum -- but -- as long as the kernel that the iPhone runs is built off the XNU codebase it is running OSX, plain and simple. There is no debating that.

Now, how much of the Macintosh APIs get carried over into the embedded version of OSX, that can be debated and will be until developer details come out.

mfdynosore
Jan 14, 2007, 12:52 PM
I registered just to say that this is the best explanation of the situation I have seen in the thread or anywhere else for that matter. All of us need to read and understand what Rocketman has written below.
br

Okay, I will post.

The release of Intel Macs went well AHEAD of schedule so when Macworld rolled around, they were all Mac-ed out!

The "iPhone" (Apple Tablet Nano) is actually a full-on computer with power comparable to, say, a Powermac G4-800 mhz. This is a handtop display centric computer. How much did you pay for your Mac Plus with a small fraction of the power and capacity of the ATN? $2700, and that was 1984-1986!

"iPhone" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN! "iPod" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN! "SMS" is literally MERELY ONE APPLICATION on this ATN!

This means something really interesting. More apps are trivial to add and the list of possibilities runs into the dozens at minimum.

Now some will fixate on the "mere 8gb" capacity. Remember this well. The ATN is an internet always-on appliance via cellular Edge and 802.11g now. Rev 2 or 3 will have 3G cellular and 802.11n, and even 802.16 wimax.

You only need local storage for apps and cache. The device can stream from the internet and download from the internet on a real-time or near real-time basis.

Is your music and movie collection on a computer which is on the internet? You can log onto your OWN computer with this device from ANYWHERE there is either cellular Edge or 802.11b/g access. There may be a very few places that does not apply, but not many.

As for flash, Samsung has announced 16gb flash now. I wonder how long it will take Apple to go to that in this device?

In the old days we used to have client-server, where you sat at a "dumb terminal" and talked to the mothership. Then we had "thin clients" which were real computers wired on where the dumb terminal used to be, and it could display graphics and do minimal local tasks. Then we had "thick clients" which were full-on local computers able to do main tasks as well as talk to several other motherships.

ATN is a "physically" thin, "virtually" thick client which is quite capable of talking to multiple motherships (multi-homing), and has MORE local compute capability than so-called thick clients of only 5-10 years ago. It does so WIRELESSLY FROM ANYWHERE, IN YOUR HAND!

For those of you interested only in Macs, Upon Leopard release, Intel will also be updating the chipsets behind the main processor. It will make practical 4-core chips in medium class computers like iMac, and 8-core chip-groups in higher class computers like MacPro, and many-core chip-groups in X-serves, and beyond.

Buckle up for safety and prepare for Warp drive folks.

Rocketman

Marx55
Jan 14, 2007, 01:11 PM
Why not a portable Powerpoint/Keynote device?

Sir. Intel literally ran a commercial about 2-4 months AGO showing exactly that.

Any Internet link for that? Thanks.

Marx55
Jan 14, 2007, 01:21 PM
Sorry for my ignorance, but what does "ATN" stand for? Thanks.

mrrory
Jan 14, 2007, 01:21 PM
Exactly. I want a widescreen/touchscreem iPod with WiFi and web browsing, just replace the phone and SMS parts with iChat, and I would definitly buy one, but as a phone, I just don't see myself buying one.

Yep, I'm kind of with you on this one... I have a Sidekick 3, and I rarely, use the phone... I'd replace the sidekick with the iPhone, but I'm not sure how much I care for the "phone" features... I'm not a big fan of Cingular either.

I bought a new shuffle because I found it inconvenient to carry around my full size iPod... I think I just want the iPhone version that has wi-fi, iChat, Safari, Mail and no contract! That'll do me.

Maybe they'll release an iPhone nano, not necessarily smaller in form, but function.

areyouwishing
Jan 14, 2007, 01:32 PM
I can install a full version of os x at 1.8GB doing a custom install with no extras. That includes all the apps. All this OS X really needs is...

Darwin/Networking
Mail
Widget Support
CoreAnimation
Safari
Google Maps
Inkwell (maybe)
Phone App
iCal
Address Book
iPiddle software (coverflow)

Cepe Indicum
Jan 14, 2007, 01:39 PM
Sorry for my ignorance, but what does "ATN" stand for? Thanks.

Marx55; I was a little confused too, but it's from Rocketman's excellent overview of the iPhone.

See the post by mfdynosore where it's fully quoted. ATN = "Apple Tablet Nano".

notjims
Jan 14, 2007, 01:52 PM
I can understand not allowing native code. But I need certain small bits of functionality, like a tiny monitoring system to see how my servers and networks are at any given time, and I'm looking at dashboard widgets.

Do you suppose you will be able to add dashboard widgets? These operate in a nicely constrained environment and presumably could safely be loaded and run without compromising the phone. I can accomplish the same result in a web page, but at a greater network bandwidth cost and probably a more awkward UI sequence to get to it (browser..bookmarks..pick as opposed to just a poke for my widget).

On the downside..
This lets people put ugly icons on the screen
Widgets are resource intensive in the current incarnation, there may not be enough horsepower
It might sidetrack whatever vision Apple has for future directions

Doctor Q
Jan 14, 2007, 02:13 PM
Sorry for my ignorance, but what does "ATN" stand for? Thanks.Rocketman called the iPhone the "Apple Tablet Nano" (ATN).

Digital Skunk
Jan 14, 2007, 02:35 PM
I have iWork, the first one, not 06. It is great. I am trying to ween myself off of Word. Can't stand word. The only reason I use it is to please and cater to other people that are a bit too Windowy to understand that Word sucks in plenty of places. For what I use it for, Word isn't that great, no where near Pages. I hope that the iPhone can sync with iWork (Pages and Keynote) flawlessly. It would be another addition that would be greatly appreciated by us power users. Will need to do some productivity while on route to a meeting or class, or something like that. Wouldn't mind leaving my laptop at home and working on documents and presentations on my iPhone...

If the battery would last long enough. :D

cyberrob
Jan 14, 2007, 02:46 PM
did anyone see the press release with the little mark usb 2.0 needed?!?

in fulll lenghts:
iPhone requires a Mac with a USB 2.0 port, Mac OSŪ X v10.4.8 or later and iTunes 7; or a Windows PC with a USB 2.0 port and Windows 2000 (Service Pack 4), Windows XP Home or Professional (Service Pack 2). Internet access is required and a broadband connection is recommended. Apple and Cingular will announce service plans for iPhone before it begins shipping in June.

so will the iphone also sync via firewire (400)?!? Anybody read anything about that?!? why isn't it syncing via wi-fi?!? would be so cool :cool:

AidenShaw
Jan 14, 2007, 03:06 PM
I know this is semantics that will be debated ad-nauseum...
For sure ;)

However, if you ask a zillion Mac users why the OSX operating system is better than the Windows operating system - everyone from Steve Jobs to the soccer mom who just switched will say things like "iTunes", "the dock", "aqua", "iwork", "it's pretty", ....

Nobody will mention XNU... :p

celavato
Jan 14, 2007, 03:12 PM
I think the lack of iChat is unfortunate. Instant messaging would be much better on the iPhone than on a Mac, especially when you're not at your desk. Cingular would still make money when WiFi is not available plus SMS is no substitute for IM. I still plan to buy one, but let's hope Apple someday releases an iCommunicator with no cell phone but WiFi, Wimax, and beefed up online communications software, including iChat and perhaps even Skype or Vonage. (One can dream.):D

PS: Let's hope Apple also adds voice dialing without training.

Aardy
Jan 14, 2007, 03:37 PM
I dont understand why Apple, is going to limit people in running any content they want. That was a huge letdown. Many of are fascinated because its a darned phone, whoop-de-doo. I was caught because as steve mentioned all the things that were running on it were applications. And they looked and work amazingly, but what use does it have for me if i cant use the widgets I want, and the apps i want running in there.

I think that is going to hinder it a lot. I can see it would be a great device and it can have a great success. With all the cool things, it has, I dont see it as the true successor of the ipod.

Apple wants to control the 'user experience' and the stability of the iPhone. Allowing third party apps to be loaded in willy-nilly without any sort of control could be disastrous. I saw a quote from SJ himself, the gist of which is this: "You don't want your phone crashing or freezing in the middle of a call or text message just because you have loaded a new app into your phone".

If Apple write everything then they are in the unique position to make sure it works correctly and without everything going belly-up just because you have decided to try the latest version of Doom 3D Mobile.

MS Office interoperability: Virus checker anyone? 'nuff said.

Primarily it's a phone, and as such we want it to be rock solid without all the other bells and whistles mucking things up.

Zadillo
Jan 14, 2007, 03:43 PM
lol, ur opinion is not towards the functionality of the machine when you got it, all i was saying is about expectation before you buy it and reality when u actually have the machine in hand.

Is that clear for you?

Im not promoting Palm here, if thats what u think I was trying to say. Obviously u now sounds very excited about this iPhone, probably already begin to save money for it (if you do need to save for it). Im sure u have the expectations for iPhone, but you won't have in in hand and compare the reality with your expectation. So what YOU and OTHER future iPhone users will feel? lets wait and see.

Actually I've been changing my mind on the iPhone; I'm looking forward to it, but more likely at this point to NOT get the initial revision. I'm probably going to keep chugging along with the Treo for the time being until I have a clearer picture of how third party development will work for it, etc. I don't have a lot of third party needs, but I'm hoping for them to be met one way or the other.

Unfortunately, options are limited. I went to the store to look at the Treo 680, and also the Windows Mobile-based Treo 750. I found both to have problems.... I also tried one of the Cingular 8525 models running WIndows Mobile, and it was somewhat nicer, but the OS still felt really clunky and cluttered to me and unresponsive.

I should probably take a closer look at some of the Symbian devices. And there are also some Linux smartphones coming out which might be interesting.

I think Palm is doing a disservice to NEW Treo buyers though, who generally aren't aware of the mess the platform is in right now.

-Zadillo

Some_Big_Spoon
Jan 14, 2007, 04:05 PM
Exactly. They're not compromising, or doing anything too outrageous, just leaving out all the you pointed to and more.

What goes out, maybe can go back in :-)



[QUOTE=they could probably get rid of a bunch of things that aren't necessary on the iPhone, like printer drivers, unused frameworks, and on the Darwin layer: All the command utilities that aren't used at user level anyway.[/QUOTE]

jhande
Jan 14, 2007, 04:26 PM
As for the folks saying "why can't" I install my own apps?

I have an answer to that. The boot INSTANCE of OSX is protected. What about a second INSTANCE of OSX running any app and having no access to the phone protocols whatsoever, only a tunnel going out the data streams (internet)?

Hmmm?

Rocketman

Exactly. By building a chinese wall (sandbox), or hell, like you say, running a seperate instance of OSX with access to all comms + storage, there would be no possibility of damaging the built-in or approved apps.

In fact, why not just sandbox unapproved (unsigned) apps, while signed apps are 'let in'?

I proposed something like this in another thread (I forget which one, there have been so many) and I really can't see how difficult it can be.

BTW, ATN is hereby adopted as my moniker for this device. Let's see how far this meme spreads. P'haps it will reach SJ, and he'll see how we view it. :D

Bosunsfate
Jan 14, 2007, 04:36 PM
Enough of the complaints about 3rd party support.

For one, get the facts straights...there will be 3rd party products for the iPhone...

All we have to do is look at the iPod and see what life with the iPhone will be about.

The success of the iPod was not just the design, usuability, and the functions ...there was a large component due to 3rd Parties....

In two years time there will be 1000's of 3rd party products for the iPhone...

Enjoy the ride becuase its only getting better out there!

Rocketman
Jan 14, 2007, 04:56 PM
Exactly. By building a chinese wall (sandbox), or hell, like you say, running a seperate instance of OSX with access to all comms + storage, there would be no possibility of damaging the built-in or approved apps.

In fact, why not just sandbox unapproved (unsigned) apps, while signed apps are 'let in'?

I proposed something like this in another thread (I forget which one, there have been so many) and I really can't see how difficult it can be.

BTW, ATN is hereby adopted as my moniker for this device. Let's see how far this meme spreads. P'haps it will reach SJ, and he'll see how we view it. :D

Thanks everyone for your positive comments.

I do agree it would be handy for the world at large to "adopt" the term ATN=Apple Tablet Nano since it is literally descriptive of what it is. It could even appeal to general media and financial outlets since it does expose the vision of the device despite the closed releases of Apple itself.

I suspect Steve himself would choose not to confirm or deny things like this, but hey, I have been by his house before, perhaps he wants to invite me over for tea and chat. I would of course immediately insist he "fly a rocket" before I would "spill the beans".

Fun aside, this ATN (iPhone) is a new "platform", exactly like the Macintosh was a platform. Look how many Macs there have been and how many apps it has spawned. It is mindboggling.

I agree with Steve. This new announcement is one of those once in a lifetime things. He had had quite a prolific lifetime indeed!

Apple I: The first personal computer kit
Apple II: The first personal computer, became downright popular and dominated schools.
Macintosh: The first graphics centric, mouse pointing, consumer personal computer. Dominated the printing and media markets.
NeXT: Used for, among other things, to literally invent the "World Wide Web". Okay, and Doom.
iPod: As Steve said, not only reinvented the MP3 player but also the music industry itself.
iTunes: secure micro-transaction sales of songs, books, podcasts, TV shows, movies, internationally. Gift cards available in retailers worldwide.
"iPhone" (ATN): The -new- internet appliance with full desktop class applications. That's all.

Rocketman

blueflame
Jan 14, 2007, 05:59 PM
The only make or break for me is the exclusion of ichat mobile? hwy did they not bundle aim, or video conferencing. I feel like apple has the exclusivity to do it right, and they just didnt. im just curious, were there legal reasons? there shouldnt be a physical reason, they have the camera, wifi and OS with hardware powerful enough to decode h.264. WHY didnt they ad video chat or any chat really?
Andreas

Porchland
Jan 14, 2007, 07:47 PM
The iPhone is definitely a foreshadowing of things to come for iPod. I think you could easily bet on the fact we will see a full on touch screen, widescreen iPod video this year.

I think you're exactly right. Death to the click wheel.

And with the technology obviously in place already with the iPhone and the Beatles Easter eggs at the Macworld keynote, I think we'll see a music event soon.

Zadillo
Jan 14, 2007, 08:17 PM
I think you're exactly right. Death to the click wheel.

And with the technology obviously in place already with the iPhone and the Beatles Easter eggs at the Macworld keynote, I think we'll see a music event soon.

Well, I think that is something that remains to be seen. There is something nice about the physical click wheel, and it may still be preferable in some cases.

I think Apple has taken the right approach though to come up with new touchscreen specific interfaces for the music playing on the iPhone (and presumably a widescreen video iPod of the future). There had been rumors about a "virtual clickwheel", but it's smarter to come up with the new interface elements they did.

barnaby
Jan 14, 2007, 08:34 PM
I'm still not convinced that the iPhone is running anything but an OS X lookalike. I doubt it's so much a question of what's left out as what's included. And when you start to build up what you need rather than strip down what you don't, I have no trouble believing they could get it down to well under 500 MB.

There is probably a substantial amount of OS X codebase there. The problem with having a separate system is that updates to one don't effect the other.

I've never had a cellphone with multitasking. Even my PDA doesn't do it. But the iPhone claims to be able to download email while browsing. That's not saying it'll be running universal binaries. But there's a lot under the hood they'll have in common.

This will be good news, because maybe we'll get updates to cover flow to do what the iPhone does.

barnaby
Jan 14, 2007, 08:36 PM
Thanks everyone for your positive comments.

I do agree it would be handy for the world at large to "adopt" the term ATN=Apple Tablet Nano since it is literally descriptive of what it is. It could even appeal to general media and financial outlets since it does expose the vision of the device despite the closed releases of Apple itself.

I suspect Steve himself would choose not to confirm or deny things like this, but hey, I have been by his house before, perhaps he wants to invite me over for tea and chat. I would of course immediately insist he "fly a rocket" before I would "spill the beans".

Fun aside, this ATN (iPhone) is a new "platform", exactly like the Macintosh was a platform. Look how many Macs there have been and how many apps it has spawned. It is mindboggling.

I agree with Steve. This new announcement is one of those once in a lifetime things. He had had quite a prolific lifetime indeed!

Apple I: The first personal computer kit
Apple II: The first personal computer, became downright popular and dominated schools.
Macintosh: The first graphics centric, mouse pointing, consumer personal computer. Dominated the printing and media markets.
NeXT: Used for, among other things, to literally invent the "World Wide Web". Okay, and Doom.
iPod: As Steve said, not only reinvented the MP3 player but also the music industry itself.
iTunes: secure micro-transaction sales of songs, books, podcasts, TV shows, movies, internationally. Gift cards available in retailers worldwide.
"iPhone" (ATN): The -new- internet appliance with full desktop class applications. That's all.

Rocketman

don't forget Pixar. He is the CEO of that too.

Stella
Jan 14, 2007, 08:40 PM
You have fallen for Steve's RDF, tragically.

Name me ONE , just ONE application on a smartphone that has crashed a cellular network. His quote is a pity-ful excuse. I've never had an app that forced the cellphone to crash in mid call.

MS Office interoperability - Virus checker.
Crap. ALL office suites on smartphones do need virus checkers for the reason you give. Smartphones do not need virus checkers full stop. The only viruses out there are very rare and hard to infect.

Your last point: sigh, once again, Apple shouldn't be comparing this against smartphones.

Apple don't stop 3rd party software / widgets on OSX just in case it may crash your computer. Its all about control, the usual, for Apple.

"You don't want your phone crashing or freezing in the middle of a call or text message just because you have loaded a new app into your phone".


MS Office interoperability: Virus checker anyone? 'nuff said.

Primarily it's a phone, and as such we want it to be rock solid without all the other bells and whistles mucking things up.

To the above poster, plenty of smartphones multi-task, nothing new there with iPhone.

Zadillo
Jan 14, 2007, 09:13 PM
You have fallen for Steve's RDF, tragically.

Name me ONE , just ONE application on a smartphone that has crashed a cellular network. His quote is a pity-ful excuse. I've never had an app that forced the cellphone to crash in mid call.

MS Office interoperability - Virus checker.
Crap. ALL office suites on smartphones do need virus checkers for the reason you give. Smartphones do not need virus checkers full stop. The only viruses out there are very rare and hard to infect.

Your last point: sigh, once again, Apple shouldn't be comparing this against smartphones.

Apple don't stop 3rd party software / widgets on OSX just in case it may crash your computer. Its all about control, the usual, for Apple.



To the above poster, plenty of smartphones multi-task, nothing new there with iPhone.

My Palm OS Treo Smartphone can't multitask to any degree that I've ever seen. I certainly can't do anything else with it while I'm on a call, and I can't switch to my web browser while using my GPS program, for example.

-Zadillo

Rocketman
Jan 14, 2007, 09:40 PM
You have fallen for Steve's RDF, tragically.


No, I agree, you are right. I have fallen for it.

Sorry.

I apologize.

Rocketman

:)

Asar
Jan 14, 2007, 10:05 PM
You have fallen for Steve's RDF, tragically.

Name me ONE , just ONE application on a smartphone that has crashed a cellular network. His quote is a pity-ful excuse. I've never had an app that forced the cellphone to crash in mid call.

MS Office interoperability - Virus checker.
Crap. ALL office suites on smartphones do need virus checkers for the reason you give. Smartphones do not need virus checkers full stop. The only viruses out there are very rare and hard to infect.

Your last point: sigh, once again, Apple shouldn't be comparing this against smartphones.

Apple don't stop 3rd party software / widgets on OSX just in case it may crash your computer. Its all about control, the usual, for Apple.



To the above poster, plenty of smartphones multi-task, nothing new there with iPhone.


i dont know about crashing, but shielding has truth to it. i have a smartphone, and while running SNES emulator, the phone gives off a high pitch noise through the speaker, even when the phone is on silent! could be them controlling, could be safety, but bottom line, these issues do exist.

uNext
Jan 14, 2007, 11:44 PM
tHE IpHone is piece of attractive ****

My god people just keep finding excuses for the iphone.

There is nothing revolutionary like many of you thought. Mac os x lite wow
cant claim it an os and dont have 3rd party supoprt that every os have.

Come on the RDF owns you. Slap your self and wake up the iPhone is nothing impressive
and lacks many features, I really dont see how somebody can beta test for apple or even spend 600 bucks
for a crippled PHONE where its main feature is not even that. If it was it would be considered a smartphone with 3rd party support to enhance its phone features. Apple is trying to create a new genre of phones but all i see, a big hype and nothing spectacular
a jack of all trades but useless.

The no removable battery part kills me lol on a 600 phone lol

i can just see it.

customer walks in to apple store.......(END USER) my phones battery is not holding a charge and it dies quick.......(GENIUS)..OK we will have to send it out for repair at out state of the art iphone factory..(END USER) so what do i do? i cant be without a phone....(Genius)...no problem here is a lender....(END USER) but i need my contacts and important notes and messages how do i transfer it to tghe lender....(GENIUS) hmmmmmmm...

lol just plain stupid on apples part

let the excuses start.

uNext
Jan 15, 2007, 12:01 AM
Enough of the complaints about 3rd party support.

For one, get the facts straights...there will be 3rd party products for the iPhone...

All we have to do is look at the iPod and see what life with the iPhone will be about.

The success of the iPod was not just the design, usuability, and the functions ...there was a large component due to 3rd Parties....

In two years time there will be 1000's of 3rd party products for the iPhone...

Enjoy the ride becuase its only getting better out there!


Wow accesory and software is completely diffrent.
yes the ipod had major 3rd party support but on software o improve it?
did i miss something?

Zadillo
Jan 15, 2007, 12:06 AM
tHE IpHone is piece of attractive ****

My god people just keep finding excuses for the iphone.

There is nothing revolutionary like many of you thought. Mac os x lite wow
cant claim it an os and dont have 3rd party supoprt that every os have.

Come on the RDF owns you. Slap your self and wake up the iPhone is nothing impressive
and lacks many features, I really dont see how somebody can beta test for apple or even spend 600 bucks
for a crippled PHONE where its main feature is not even that. If it was it would be considered a smartphone with 3rd party support to enhance its phone features. Apple is trying to create a new genre of phones but all i see, a big hype and nothing spectacular
a jack of all trades but useless.

The no removable battery part kills me lol on a 600 phone lol

i can just see it.

customer walks in to apple store.......(END USER) my phones battery is not holding a charge and it dies quick.......(GENIUS)..OK we will have to send it out for repair at out state of the art iphone factory..(END USER) so what do i do? i cant be without a phone....(Genius)...no problem here is a lender....(END USER) but i need my contacts and important notes and messages how do i transfer it to tghe lender....(GENIUS) hmmmmmmm...

lol just plain stupid on apples part

let the excuses start.

Get over yourself.

Again, the iPhone is their first entry. Would you criticize the first Handspring Treo, or the first Windows Mobile smartphones (not to even discuss the current ones)?

All sorts of phones lack one thing or the other.

But to say there's nothing impressive at all about the iPhone is just willful ignorance. Is it perfect? No. But no phone is (and the smartphones of the world have plenty of deficiencies in various areas).

bmoseley07
Jan 15, 2007, 12:29 AM
Get over yourself.

Again, the iPhone is their first entry. Would you criticize the first Handspring Treo, or the first Windows Mobile smartphones (not to even discuss the current ones)?

All sorts of phones lack one thing or the other.

But to say there's nothing impressive at all about the iPhone is just willful ignorance. Is it perfect? No. But no phone is (and the smartphones of the world have plenty of deficiencies in various areas).

Thank you. :)

bmoseley07
Jan 15, 2007, 12:40 AM
I do agree it would be handy for the world at large to "adopt" the term ATN=Apple Tablet Nano since it is literally descriptive of what it is. It could even appeal to general media and financial outlets since it does expose the vision of the device despite the closed releases of Apple itself.

Rocketman

I don't think that name would catch on at all with SJ. ATN doesn't have even close to the ring that iPhone does or even iMobile, iTouch or iFeel. SJ doesn't like using acronyms and I doubt ever will if it's up to him.

ATN sounds too corporate, too MS, and too un-Apple-like to ever be seriously considered; that is, assuming you're being serious when you say you think it should be adopted.

stcanard
Jan 15, 2007, 01:18 AM
(END USER) but i need my contacts and important notes and messages how do i transfer it to tghe lender....(GENIUS) hmmmmmmm...

lol just plain stupid on apples part

let the excuses start.

(GENIUS) My god, I can't believe how thick you are <rolls eyes> First off the sim card stores your contacts, do you know nothing about how cell phones work? Then you just take this bloody thing home, sync it with your computer and all your notes will be back.

(GENIUS turns away muttering) This guy said he used to have a Treo, obviously not otherwise he would have these simple things figured out by now.

EagerDragon
Jan 15, 2007, 09:15 AM
The killer app for this phone will likely be in the next version of the hardware, a video phone!!!!!!!

People would be able to use iChat video. But it needs an iSight camera in the front. That is the ultimate social thing, not the crappy stuff of the Zune.

I hope the new iPod (no phone) keeps all of the rest of the functionality + video iChat - phone.

both the iPhone and the video iPod will sell like hotcakes (IMHO). Hope we see it soon.

Porchland
Jan 15, 2007, 11:32 AM
Well, I think that is something that remains to be seen. There is something nice about the physical click wheel, and it may still be preferable in some cases.

I think Apple has taken the right approach though to come up with new touchscreen specific interfaces for the music playing on the iPhone (and presumably a widescreen video iPod of the future). There had been rumors about a "virtual clickwheel", but it's smarter to come up with the new interface elements they did.

If I had to guess, I would say the next iPod lineup will look something like this:

iPod shuffle > 2 GB > $79 (same price, twice the storage)

iPod nano > 4 GB > $149 (price drop for 4 GB; elimination of 2 GB; keeps click wheel)
iPod nano > 10 GB > $200 (price drop)
iPod nano > 20 GB > $249 (new model, maybe a Beatles edition)

iPod > 50 GB > $300 (widescreen only)
iPod > 100 GB > $400 (widescreen only)

I'm not married to the specifics, but I think we're going to see slight bumps in the iPod nano, elimination of the current iPod, and the new iPod as widescreen only.

Stella
Jan 15, 2007, 12:24 PM
My Palm OS Treo Smartphone can't multitask to any degree that I've ever seen. I certainly can't do anything else with it while I'm on a call, and I can't switch to my web browser while using my GPS program, for example.

-Zadillo

Hint: Treos are not the only smartphones :-)

Wow - Treo won't let you switch applications in normal use and not even whilst on a call? That is so retro.

No, I agree, you are right. I have fallen for it.

Sorry.

I apologize.

Rocketman

:)

LOL.
A lot of your posts are very interesting and insightful BTW.

Rocketman
Jan 17, 2007, 11:35 AM
Balmer of Microsoft was on CNBC today with comments about iPhone. He basicly was aghast at the extraordinarilly high price of the device with a 2 year contract commitment.

He stated existng devices have dedicated keyboards which are "necessary for business customers" and that there are devices that provide key subsets of the functionality for about $100.

So the FUD has begun.

Yes the first Apple Tablet Nano (ATN) is a premium priced and premium features device with several innovative features.

Mr. Balmer also touted the introduction of Vista, predicted very brisk adoption rates and stated it will make possible new applications. Really? Which ones?

Balmer also touted the "improved" interface of Vista.

So we have a Balmer vs Jobs jabfest.

Microsoft stock is up 50% or so in 6 months ahead of the release of Vista. The market cap is around $100,000,000,000.

Rocketman

Rocketman
Sep 6, 2007, 11:15 PM
Any Internet link for that? Thanks.

Rocketman, you are the man and you rock!!! Many, many, many thanks indeed for your great help!!!

The video is named "No Baggage" and can be downloaded from

http://www.microsoft.com/business/peopleready/overview/default.mspx

-------
No Baggage: Your business isn't limited to your desktop; sometimes the demands of the business will take you into the field. With the right software and tools, however, you'll have everything you need in the palm of your hand.

http://www.microsoft.com/business/peopleready/overview/default.mspx

----------------


Rocketman