Apple to Begin Merging iOS and OS X With Quad-Core A6 Chip Next Year?

[darkplanets]

Wont happen yet. This is just some analyst trying to get attention... big surprise there. At the moment ARM isn't capable of providing the horsepower for high to medium end computing. Perhaps in the next couple of years, however this "prediction" is just that-- a prediction. The switch from PowerPC to Intel wasn't so bad because many developers were used to Intel; switching from Intel to ARM is going to be a bit more troublesome because let's be honest, many iOS developers aren't exactly pumping out high complexity applications, and they're the only ones that would be ready for such a switch outright.

Maybe once regular PC's start to make the transition (along with Windows, which may happen soon) we could see this, but to put a date on it is a bit... preemptive. Especially to talk about something so jarring-- this isn't like OSX is just gaining ARM support-- now you're talking about taking something that's an offshoot of 10.4 and trying to tie it back into the main branch 10.7.... no small task.

Of course we're all worried about the loss of function and capability from such a merger.

 

[dexthageek]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)

Ur all missing something!!! It's all about the cloud!!!! The cloud will advance to a point that all ur files will be online!!!! The data center severs will do the heavy CPU and gpu work for you!!! It's also possible you will dock your machine to an external gpu to take care of heavy workloads!!!!! 5 years is quite far away!!!

yeah, and then we can only use those machines for 30minutes a day or get wacked with massive overage fees from our ISPs. :-(

 

[patohi]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)

Ur all missing something!!! It's all about the cloud!!!! The cloud will advance to a point that all ur files will be online!!!! The data center severs will do the heavy CPU and gpu work for you!!! It's also possible you will dock your machine to an external gpu to take care of heavy workloads!!!!! 5 years is quite far away!!!

yeah, and then we can only use those machines for 30minutes a day or get wacked with massive overage fees from our ISPs. :-(

Who said it would eat up alot of bandwidth???? If done right it shouldn't be a problem...

 

[Vader]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)



Who said it would eat up alot of bandwidth???? If done right it shouldn't be a problem...

If it is doing GPU and CPU work in the cloud, that is a lot of data, it will be a problem at current data caps!

 

[Canubis]

Apple has always gone a different, usability centered way of creating an OS. In its cores iOS and OS X are the same, they always were – iOS is based on OS X. As well as the old Apple TV software was (and newer versions of it are based on iOS). The software for the current iPod nano is certainly based on iOS too (with a lot of strip offs and some enhancements).

But all of that doesn't matter so much, though it's all the same core, and changing a processor actually should nothing have to do with the rest of the OS and how the user experiences it! At least that's obviously the view of Apple.

So long story short, it absolutely makes sense to use a 3.5" device with only touch input different than a 20-30" device with several input devices and completely different tasks to accomplish. Apple knows that and was going a completely different way than e.g. Microsoft. For Apple, user interface and user experience, never was "just a graphical layer" above the rest. So the user experience actually IS the OS and therefore it is designed for the tasks that Apple thinks are most likely to be done with this device. And that again is the reason, why a 3.5" device from Apple will also work differently than a 9" one (with touch input) and that again different from a 27" once (with e.g. keyboard & mouse & touch & and whatever) input for completely different tasks.

Apple wants to sell hardware – so it is in their interest to have many different devices, working slightly different and being perfect for different tasks. One device hypothetically built perfectly for every possible task simply can't make as much money as selling a desktop+notebook+ipad+iphone+ipod+aTV to someone.

 

[patohi]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)

Who said it would eat up alot of bandwidth???? If done right it shouldn't be a problem...

If it is doing GPU and CPU work in the cloud, that is a lot of data, it will be a problem at current data caps!

????? You have ur files uploaded to the cloud already! U have a UI ur using to send commands to the severs.... Or ur. Viewing a video stream of the UI! how is that different from watching Netflix or YouTube or streaming music or playing an online game as we do now????

 

[phpmaven]

Complete and utter nonsense. People are going wild with all of this OSX is becoming IOS nonsense. Just because there are a few features in Lion that are IOSish, doesn't mean that the two platforms are going to merge at some point. There is absolutely no reason why all of these decides can't work seamlessly without having the same OS. They are practically there already.

This isn't just "highly speculative", it's complete horse hockey.

 

[0007776]

What's wrong with having one OS? Nothing.

The problem is since they already use similar code bases the main difference is the UI, touch isn't good on desktops, and a UI that is good for a desktop with a mouse or trackpad and keyboard isn't good for touch. So that's why I think this rumor is completely fake.

 

[Tilpots]

The problem is since they already use similar code bases the main difference is the UI, touch isn't good on desktops, and a UI that is good for a desktop with a mouse or trackpad and keyboard isn't good for touch. So that's why I think this rumor is completely fake.

Don't you think they could find a proper balance, though? Or at least a way to recognize which input a user will perform for certain operations? If any company has proven they get UI, it's Apple. Lion, at their insistence, is the next evolutionary step for a computing OS, and it's main influence is a touch OS. If they believe they can do it, so do I.

 

[Nicolas4ever]

i don't like the idea of having one OS. And im sure apple won't merge them for many reasons

 

[dexthageek]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)



????? You have ur files uploaded to the cloud already! U have a UI ur using to send commands to the severs.... Or ur. Viewing a video stream of the UI! how is that different from watching Netflix or YouTube or streaming music or playing an online game as we do now????

The difference is that you can choose how long to watch a movie or stream music and control your bandwidth. Based on what you are saying (CPU & GPU performed in the cloud) you wont have a choice, every action on the device would require bandwidth to update the display.

 

[Swift]

Yeah, right

Look at Apple's numbers before Intel and after.

There may be some convergence in this space at some time. There could be another version of OS X in the wings that will run on an A6, though I'm not sure for what platform. "Truck" owners won't want it. Maybe a portable, special-purpose device of the future that needs low battery power? The point is, Intel is the 800-pound gorilla here. Their processors are fast and reliable, if power-hungry. Why go into the processor business for the whole brand? Doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

Why I believe this may happen

iOS has evolved greatly since it was launched, and still has a lot of room for improvement.

MAC OS X is a mature product, but it seems that Apple considers the iOS GUI is more natural and user friendly that the traditional Windows-Oriented operating system.

We all may not agree on this possible merge at the present time, but the merge is still about 5 years in the future.

During these 5 years or so, both iOS and MAC OS X are going to continue to evolve until both meet at the right point of merge.

With the release of iOS 5, the cord between a computer and an iOS device will be gone (I certainly hope so!). This is going to be a big change we have all been waiting.

I would dare to assume Apple will make iOS less restrictive, find a reasonable solution to the application protected-storage problem we always complain about, and add the expanded connectivity we all wish for with the addition of Thunderbolt support.

Five years in the future, iOS is not going to be the same iOS we currently know and use, and neither will be OS X. And the same will happen to the hardware currently being used.

So let's have this same discussion in 2 years, and lets see where iOS and OS X are going.

 

[dexthageek]

I see no problem if Apple decides to go ARM across the board for all devices. If they can deliver the performance required to meet expectation more power to them. But crippling the OS on a desktop would be a bad move.

 

[ratzzo]

I would say it's still a bit early to merge their products. I don't see ARM as a strong desktop chip provider, at least not for now, and at least not against a giant such as Intel. Besides, next-gen Macs will be blessed with Ivy Bridge, which is especially good for laptops as they have managed to reduce power consumption by a whole lot. Just to remind you guys that ARM is the major smartphone CPU producer because they can manage to push out high quality low voltage chips. And Intel is heading right this way.

 

[macUser2007]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Hooray! Back to the days of limited software selection and overpriced, under-performing ports. The transition from PPC to Intel was the best thing to happen to Macs. The ARM processors are getting much better, but so are Intels. They will never be as capable or compatible, and a move like this would make the Mac suffer and fade into the background again. But 2016 is a lifetime away in tech terms, so I'm not going to worry for quite some time.

Hear, hear!

I hope this never happens, although Apple does like this "walled garden" thing, so I wouldn't totally discount it.

I hated PowerPC, despite all the bogus numbers Apple and the fanboys kept citing. Apple boxes (and I've had a lot of them) were grossly overpriced and underpowered.

Nowadays I really believe most Apple products are competitively priced and powered, factoring in the construction quality and design.

But 5 years IS a long time away, so who knows what will happen by then.

 

[darbus69]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

"Users want to be able to pick up any iPhone, iPad, or Mac (or turn on their iTV) and have content move seamlessly between them and be optimized for the user and the device currently being used," writes Misek. "We believe this will be difficult to implement if iOS and OS X are kept separate."

Users also want to determine which content moves seamlessly between devices. This just looks like one more layer in Apple's walled garden.

"choice" don't plant your seed in their garden;personally I am loving everything we have (icloud, iOS, iTunes match) and everything which is coming-you sound like a Tea Party conspirator who believes the government is "big evil" (ok, say maybe it is big, just not as evil as they imagine...

 

[Gasu E.]

if it means i can play Starcraft 2 on my iPad then i'm all for it

You won't even be able to play SC 2 on OS X by then, since it uses Rosetta.

 

[Gasu E.]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E128 Safari/6533.18.5)

Ur all missing something!!! It's all about the cloud!!!! The cloud will advance to a point that all ur files will be online!!!! The data center severs will do the heavy CPU and gpu work for you!!! It's also possible you will dock your machine to an external gpu to take care of heavy workloads!!!!! 5 years is quite far away!!!

Excitable chap.

 

[SockRolid]

Don't confuse the two issues

There are two claims: one that OS X will be (or has already been) ported to Apple's ARM variant, and another that OS X will become even more like iOS.

I'm certain that Apple wants to transition Macs to ARM as soon as it's practical. That means quad cores or more in an A6 SoC, it requires porting OS X back to RISC from CISC, and it also means dragging developers along. Developers using Xcode will be able to change one build setting and do a recompile. Developers using other platforms (e.g. Adobe) might need years to port their apps.

The benefit of all that work? Lower component costs, a possible increase in battery life, and the freedom to advance their hardware and software together. When can Apple do this? As soon as the A6 or faster SoCs are ready, and when OS X runs solidly on them, and there are enough 3rd party App Store and non-App Store apps. That will likely take years.

The other issue is creating a hybrid OS X / iOS platform. This is vastly harder. As we've see from all the "I hate Lion scrolling" posts, people become deeply attached to each and every feature they use in OS X. Remove the feature or change its function and there is an uproar.

Look at it this way: the Mac is a legacy platform. iMac, Mac Pro, and all MacBooks and their OS are simply refinements of what Apple has been shipping since 1984. That long history comes with an enormous amount of emotional baggage, rational or irrational. Real improvements are met with resistance even though they are change for the better. We do things the old way out of habit. Not necessarily because the old way is the best way.

And on the objective side, there are limits to the size of a multi-touch screen. You could probably easily carry a 13" or 15" iPad. Especially as battery technology gets better and the entire unit becomes lighter. But simply dragging your finger 50% farther would be fatiguing. Especially for a hybrid OS that still has drag and drop on a desktop with folders and finder windows.

Now imaging dragging and dropping, with your finger, on a 20" to 30" screen. It doesn't matter if the screen is vertical or horizontal. You'd get Gorilla Arm in a few minutes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorilla_arm#Gorilla_arm).

I think Apple will be moving to ARM on its lower-end MacBook Airs and iMacs in the next few years. And I used to think a hybrid OS would come along with the deal. But now I'm thinking that an OS X / iOS hybridization will take 10 years. As long as it took from Mac OS X to go from the awkward 10.0 to today's 10.7.

 

[dexthageek]

You won't even be able to play SC 2 on OS X by then, since it uses Rosetta.

SC2 does not require Rosetta, SC1 does.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

You won't even be able to play SC 2 on OS X by then, since it uses Rosetta.

Wow! Now that's a deal breaker... In 5 years Starcraft 3 may be a "Universal Application", running on both ARM and Intel.

 

[RichardBeer]

IF this did ever happen. I would no longer use macs. I want a desktop with a desktop system. Not a machine trying to push mobile computing with a chip that will be inferior to x86 in power. I say no to the cloud. I'll keep the power on my end thanks.

 

[kirky29]

iOS has evolved greatly since it was launched, and still has a lot of room for improvement.

MAC OS X is a mature product, but it seems that Apple considers the iOS GUI is more natural and user friendly that the traditional Windows-Oriented operating system.

We all may not agree on this possible merge at the present time, but the merge is still about 5 years in the future.

During these 5 years or so, both iOS and MAC OS X are going to continue to evolve until both meet at the right point of merge.

With the release of iOS 5, the cord between a computer and an iOS device will be gone (I certainly hope so!). This is going to be a big change we have all been waiting.

I would dare to assume Apple will make iOS less restrictive, find a reasonable solution to the application protected-storage problem we always complain about, and add the expanded connectivity we all wish for with the addition of Thunderbolt support.

Five years in the future, iOS is not going to be the same iOS we currently know and use, and neither will be OS X. And the same will happen to the hardware currently being used.

So let's have this same discussion in 2 years, and lets see where iOS and OS X are going.

Thank goodness somebody gets it.

People seem to picture iOS like it is now, in 5 years time.

 

[aeaglex07]

by 2016 everyone will probably be using tablets and other mobile devices as primary machines anyways. who knows what can happen in the next 5 years. look how far technology has come in the last 5 years.