OS X 10.9 to Include Siri and Maps Integration

[Odd]

Originally Posted by Drunken Master

Lynx is the rumor

Cougar would be more appropriate. Same old ****, but painted in stronger colors.

Maps is not an OS feature, it's an app. Just like Twatbook integration.

A functional Siri would be fun to play with for about three seconds, unless you need it for accessibility. Even Tiger (or was that Leopard?) did voice recognition and could execute commands spoken to it using a keyword, like "Computer... Open Safari". It didn't work very well, though. Sort of like Siri.

The basic issue with these "updates" is that the UNIX underpinnings of OSX are solid and really, really hard to improve on. So basically by updating you're buying a couple of apps that are not available for individual sale. Plus you get increasingly pointless interface changes just for the sake of claiming "new features".

As you might have guessed, it's not for me anymore. So why do I care? I really do want to see OSX improve. I just don't agree with Apple on what constitutes improvement.

[Tar Sniffer]

Siri will most likely be built into Notification Centre so it can be conveniently accessed with a single gesture. I can't imagine it having much practical value though.

Also, what good is maps on a desktop/laptop? These aren't portable devices that we use in the car or on the street.

I sincerely hope this isn't 10.9's major features. If it is than I'll wait and see what 10.10 or OS Xi has to offer.

[Northgrove]

Originally Posted by Jsameds

Only 1 major release from OS XI.

I wonder what they've got up their sleeves? Dock and menus removed in favour of a 'metro' style interface?

Computer versioning schemes often allow a 1.10 to follow a 1.9.

[Franciturci]

What about solving the existing issues on Mountain Lion (memory leaks, cpu usage, etc.)? What about releasing 10.9.0 version of the system that does not need to wait till 10.9.3 or .4 in order to be polished? Why should we all be considered beta-testers?

I think that, given the price we pay for the machines, we deserve more attention to the details in order to have really polished products. Ubuntu or any Linux distribution can afford to have some bugs when released (and, often, they are minor bugs) because it is free and works on hundreds of different machines. Mac OS or even iOS should be practically bug-less, since it could be tested on the few different models eligible to any upgrade.

Do you agree?

[the8thark]

Originally Posted by skaertus

That's true. Although MacRumors.com is not the first to bring the rumors, it has high quality articles. It is definitely my favorite Mac-related rumors website and the first one I check, BTW.

I agree they are not the first to bring the rumours. And in my opinion the quality varies from very bad to quite good. But it is still one of the first rumours websites I check up always.

Originally Posted by koban4max

I rather pay 129 or whatever for quality os x like SL than dysfunctional ML.

Dysfunctional or operator error. I've only had one issue in Lion or ML. Quicktime 7 won't play .midi music files at a proper volume level. Always too way too low. Annoying for me but that's it. Apart from that I like ML a lot.

Originally Posted by ixodes

No... "We _Don't_ All Think This".

Fortunately there are a few of us who have managed to remain free thinking individuals. Avoiding Apple's desire to suck in all people, programming them to avoid thinking and simply embrace the Apple mantra.

Well MS is merging the portable and desktop OS's too. So it's not only Apple. I agree not everyone thinks like this. People can live with the heads in the sand. But this merge is what the future is looking like from today's viewpoint.

Originally Posted by RMo

As long as they keep the ability for us to create content. That's my biggest issue with iOS at the moment and one thing OS X facilitates much better.

I think the big issue here is a keyboard/mouse/whatever is a better input device for creating content then your finger on a touch screen is. But I have to agree. losing the ability to create content would be a death blow.

Originally Posted by BRLawyer

YET MORE iOS CRAP into OS X?

What about a totally revamped Finder, a better/more capable file system, overdue customization options, improved built-in codec support, better GPU drivers, an innovative/revolutionary UI paradigm, ANYTHING TRULY INNOVATIVE OR LONG-AWAITED?

Damned, if you are that short of ideas at least buy XtraFinder or resurrect some System 8 features! At least OS X Jaguar made me smile - on the other hand, Lion and ML are just the epitome of OS boredom.

Memo to Apple: Forstall is OUT! Does Apple need Serlet and Tevanian back just to get out of that stupid iOSification sameness?

If this is all they can do, I am definitely going to consider another platform - Commodore, Apple //, anything...this is just pathetic.

iOS features brought to OS X is not the devil as some people think. I think both OS's have a lot to learn from each other. Jaguar was only good cause it was the first truly usable version of OS X. For me personally I much preferred Panther and Leopard.

Also if you ask people what their most wanted feature or fix to OS X would be, I'm sure most people would not say better file system or better cpu/gpu optimisation etc etc. The people who care about all of that in the minute detail are in the minority. Most people just want to get to their content fast. And enjoy creating more content. That's why the iMac was invented in the first place. 5 mins from box to the internet. ie accessing your content (on or off line) fast.

"What about a totally revamped Finder, a better/more capable file system, overdue customization options, improved built-in codec support, better GPU drivers, an innovative/revolutionary UI paradigm, ANYTHING TRULY INNOVATIVE OR LONG-AWAITED?"
I am repeating this what you said, simply because everything you said there is evolutionary and not revolutionary. All of that stuff would be great to have, but it's just improving on what we already have. Long awaited? Sure. Truly innovative and revolutionary? No. The things you don't even know exist but tomorrow didn't know how you ever lived with out is the revolutionary stuff. Does not have to be hardware. Time Machine fits this for me.

Is Apple capable of something new and innovative in the near future? Only time will tell.

I've never owned an iOS device but I'm ok with the good parts from each OS going to the other. So I disagree with your view that both OS's should be totally separate entities.

[Jayomat]

Originally Posted by Saladinos

Hey, now - XCode is awesome. Best IDE out there by miles.

Have you tried writing Android apps with Eclipse?

Trying to navigate the hellish world of Android documentation (i.e. thousands of outdated javadoc mirrors polluting every Google search)?

Using their crappy QEMU-based emulator (it actually emulates an ARM core rather than run an Intel port of Android - don't ask me why!)?

I'll take XCode, with the iPhone simulator any day. The rest of the toolchain lives up to it, too - Clang/LLVM is superb (ARC is amazing), etc.

Yeah the difference is that the apple ios crap is just a simulator, so you run your app with 8GB of ram on a Intel Core i7 whatever, instead of an EMULATOR, which emulates the real hardware... which basically means one thing, all you can test on your stupid "ios simulator" is UI.

[leo.andres.21]

Well, I wouldn't care for Siri on my Mac to be honest.
Though having offline Maps would be nice, though Apple needs to improve its Maps significantly before releasing it, it's lacking finesse and details that Apple is known for.

[powers74]

Originally Posted by Abazigal

Now, if only we can get siri on ipad2 and iphone4 as well. Specs notwithstanding, I find it criminal that Apple is deliberately withholding them on devices perfectly capable of supporting them.

Start a Class Action Lawsuit. I bet Timmy would bend.

[Saladinos]

Originally Posted by Jayomat

Yeah the difference is that the apple ios crap is just a simulator, so you run your app with 8GB of ram on a Intel Core i7 whatever, instead of an EMULATOR, which emulates the real hardware... which basically means one thing, all you can test on your stupid "ios simulator" is UI.

Uhm... they also share the same logic. Same frameworks, etc. Just compiled for x86 and linking to OSX versions of lower-level frameworks.

In practice, I've never spotted a difference between the simulator and real hardware (other than speed, which also varies between different devices, and is hence something you need to test on real hardware anyway).

OSX has always been very architecture-portable. The iOS-specific frameworks are the same, as are the iOS apps they're built on. When you test on the simulator, you're basically building an x86 version of your app and running it on an x86 version of iOS. It's the same code the ARM version uses, and any portability issues are bugs.

[thekeyring]

Originally Posted by DarkWinter

I'd much rather they focused on getting Siri out of it's Beta state and maybe added some of the US-only functionality to the rest of the world before expanding across the platforms.

Won't expanding it across platforms help get it out of Beta? The more people the software can learn from the better, I guess.

[Tech198]

My parents think i'm already a crack pot with Siri, talking to my iphone 4s.

Why would I want this on a Mac ? I just hope the its allot improved by then at least.

[macnerd93]

Originally Posted by Ramius

"next generation"? Lol. "Next Update" is more the right term.

I was hoping mountain lion was the final version of OSX. I have been waiting for OS11 since 2010!

Are people actually excited about another update on this? Do we, the users, need it?

you'll have a long wait then. OS X has set Apple up for the next 8-9 years at least. Steve Jobs said back during its introduction that OS X has set Apple up for the next 20 years.

[Tech198]

Actually if they could make OS X 10.9 run on a future version of the iPad this would compete with the Surface.. How many people would want that ? I bet most would...

Then we say goodbye to the desktop.

[Drunken Master]

Originally Posted by Tech198

Actually if they could make OS X 10.9 run on a future version of the iPad this would compete with the Surface.. How many people would want that ? I bet most would...

Then we say goodbye to the desktop.

iPad Pro.

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by Drunken Master

iPad Pro.

Wouldn't that be copying Microsoft's game plan?

Call the Lawyers! (Call them what - opportunistic scum?)

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by macnerd93

you'll have a long wait then. OS X has set Apple up for the next 8-9 years at least. Steve Jobs said back during its introduction that OS X has set Apple up for the next 20 years.

Steve Jobs is history, and he said a lot of crap to sell whatever toy he was making at the moment.

Remember "no one wants to watch video on an Ipod", or "3.5 inch is perfect for a phone", or "10 inch is the minimum for a tablet"?

[Drunken Master]

Originally Posted by AidenShaw

Remember "no one wants to watch video on an Ipod", or "3.5 inch is perfect for a phone", or "10 inch is the minimum for a tablet"?

Those things are all correct on some level though.

Watching video on a small iPod kind of sucks; there's nothing wrong with 3.5" for a phone and 7" tablets are too small for productivity.

[Abazigal]

Originally Posted by AidenShaw

Steve Jobs is history, and he said a lot of crap to sell whatever toy he was making at the moment.

Remember "no one wants to watch video on an Ipod", or "3.5 inch is perfect for a phone", or "10 inch is the minimum for a tablet"?

He did sound like he did indeed have a long-term plan though.

However, competition is fierce, and assumptions made 10 7 years ago may no longer be valid today, and I wonder if this is forcing Apple to rethink or even hasten their long-term goals?

[rabidz7]

Originally Posted by macnerd93

you'll have a long wait then. OS X has set Apple up for the next 8-9 years at least. Steve Jobs said back during its introduction that OS X has set Apple up for the next 20 years.

OS 11 would be great!

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by macnerd93

you'll have a long wait then. OS X has set Apple up for the next 8-9 years at least. Steve Jobs said back during its introduction that OS X has set Apple up for the next 20 years.

Considering the pace of the industry, it would be foolish to believe that a comment made by a salesman 12 years ago will be relevant 8 years from now.

Of course, evolution is common in operating systems design, and revolution is rare. In 2020 the Apple OS may be of the same family as the new Apple OS from 2000 - but radically incompatible at the same time. Windows NT came out in 1992 - but the Windows OS in 2012 is culturally similar but at the same time very different. (Although I do have 1992 binaries that still run on Win8 today....)

Apple OS today still has some family ties to the classic Apple OS from the 68k days.

So it would be just as valid to say that classic Apple OS in 1982 has set Apple up for the next 40 years....

[Spike099]

Oh awesome another update with 2 features i'll never use. The OS is getting bloated imo. I might have to start exploring what other UNIX systems are doing again.

[Sky Blue]

Originally Posted by Spike099

Oh awesome another update with 2 features i'll never use. The OS is getting bloated imo. I might have to start exploring what other UNIX systems are doing again.

feel free