Apple Unveils iOS 7 with Major Design Overhaul, Multitasking and Control Center

[Gudi]

A curious interpretation, what that graphic shows is the same that shows the growth of a technology when its price decreases. It has nothing to do with having a GUI or not.

Yes, in your interpretation, not what reality is.

Mac prices are not decreasing, they stay flat for years and then go up. The entry price for the cheapest 27" iMac in October 2009 was $1,699. The entry price for the cheapest 27" iMac since October 2012 is $1,799. Meanwhile Macs outgrew PCs for how many consecutive quarters? Technology adoption is not a matter of price but of usefulness.

Most people started using computers in their homes because GUIs made it a lot easier. But still to hard for my mother, she couldn't figure out what to do in a multi-window multi-tasking environment. Her personal computing started with the iPhone. One App at a time, no context information to mess up with.

No, a sharper, more clearly defined image is pretty much a given with a resolution bump.

Yeah right. So much that Microsoft now is doing its own high-res display support in the same way Apple did with the Retina MBPs.

Windows 8.1 will finally add high-res display support

„The Surface Pro, Lenovo ThinkPad Helix, Toshiba Kirabook, Dell XPS 12, and many other high-end Windows 8 machines suffer from the same nasty flaw: even as their high-resolution touchscreens are crisp and beautiful, the user interface is often too small.“

Told you so.

„Windows 8.1 will add support for high-density displays, finally scaling the user interface to these increasingly high-quality devices. And to get there, Microsoft appears to have adopted the same strategy that Apple used with its Retina display-equipped iPad, iPhone and MacBook Pro.“

Improvement but not innovation since someone else did the doubling-trick before. The 15" MacBook Pro Retina introduced in June 2012 is already in the middle of its second generation and proper high-res display support is still only announced for the coming version of Windows. That right there is your example of unique innovation only available in a Mac.

 

[Renzatic]

That right there is your example of unique innovation only available in a Mac.

Jesus, man. How is quadrupling the resolution of a series of icons to fit a screen that's twice the size on X & Y a unique innovation? It's a given, considering every OS out there has been upping the resolution of their icons and assets to conform with the current average screen res of the day. 16x16px icons gave way to 32x32 icons, and eventually 64x64 icons, all in an effort to maintain roughly equivalent icon sizes for higher density displays. Every OS out there is capable of supporting at least 256x256px icons.

If anything, I wonder why Apple decided to continue working with fixed sized bitmaps. Resolution independent UIs via vectors should be the major goal of every software company currently producing an OS.

I give Apple credit for leading the push towards higher DPI screens (we've been languishing at "HD" levels for far too long now), but they didn't have to invent an entirely new standard or way of thinking to achieve it.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Because running MS-DOS defines what a PC is. Right?

Wrong. A personal computer really defines itself. It's a computer typically operated by one individual on a personal basis (that final implication being a micro-computer). The operating system it uses, the software it runs and the amount of market share are IRRELEVANT to that definition. A non-personal computer would be something akin to a shared computer environment using terminals to access it (e.g. a Mini-Computer or a Mainframe computer are examples of non "PC" computers.)

Because PC is an acronym for Personal Computer formed from the initial letters.

My Commodore Vic-20 was a personal computer before MS-Dos even existed, let alone Windows.

For an non circular definition lets see Wikipedia again:

„A personal computer (PC) is a general-purpose computer, whose size, capabilities, and original sale price makes it useful for individuals, and which is intended to be operated directly by an end-user with no intervening computer operator.“ (Wiki)

In my interpretation of useful for individuals and usable without intervention a graphical user interface is an absolute necessity for an overwhelming majority of end-users.

I've highlighted the problem with your argument. Your interpretation is irrelevant. By you logic, the "PC" didn't even exist until at least the 1990s if not later by sheer numbers. It would make more sense to use a percentage of the overall computer market share (i.e. the C64 suddenly becomes a massive player in the early '80s that way) than overall population numbers, but then you are arguing that ordinary people are just NOW finding computers useful in the form of things like the iPhone or Android smart phones or the iPad and what not. That up until this point (or at least until the Internet started really taking off), MOST people wouldn't touch a computer with a ten foot pole unless they had to as part of their job. I don't argue with that premise, but what does that have to do with what a "PC" is?

This article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_personal_computers#Etymology) shows the term "personal computer" dating back to 1962 with popular usage becoming apparent as a substitute for the micro-computer class by the early 1980s.

In a world where over 95% of all personal computers run windows variants its fine to use PC to mean Windows, cause most times it means exactly that.

Ignorant usage of a word shouldn't equate to condoning improper usage. The proper term is "Windows PC" which indicates both the fact it's a micro-computer and that it runs some variant of the Windows operating system.

On the other hand, even that isn't true anymore since I'm typing on a Mac right now that can run multiple operating systems from boot, including Windows. It's classification as a "PC" is not affected by the operating system, however. In short, the use of "PC" to mean a Dos or Windows machine as opposed to a Mac, Linux or other (Amiga, Atari, whatever back in the days when we had more choices) was started by ignorant popular usage, not the definition itself.

 

[Oletros]

Yes, in your interpretation, not what reality is.

Mac prices are not decreasing, they stay flat for years and then go up. The entry price for the cheapest 27" iMac in October 2009 was $1,699. The entry price for the cheapest 27" iMac since October 2012 is $1,799. Meanwhile Macs outgrew PCs for how many consecutive quarters? Technology adoption is not a matter of price but of usefulness.

Who is talking about 2009? When you don't have the reason do you try to change goalposts?

 

[Gudi]

Ignorant usage of a word shouldn't equate to condoning improper usage. The proper term is "Windows PC" which indicates both the fact it's a micro-computer and that it runs some variant of the Windows operating system. On the other hand, even that isn't true anymore since I'm typing on a Mac right now that can run multiple operating systems from boot, including Windows. It's classification as a "PC" is not affected by the operating system, however.

Of course it is, operating systems determinate how a computer can be used and therefore what kind of computer it is. OS X and Windows NT are multi-user operating systems. They are not meant to be operated by one individual only. Many PCs are used as workstations, not on a personal basis. Android since version 4.2 Jelly Bean has also support for multiple users. Only iOS is still strictly a single-user operating system and fully complies with your definition of personal computer. But no one is using the term PC to describe iPhones. A words meaning is defined by its usage, as much as by its definition.

 

[Renzatic]

Of course it is, operating systems determinate how a computer can be used and therefore what kind of computer it is. OS X and Windows NT are multi-user operating systems. They are not meant to be operated by one individual only. Many PCs are used as workstations, not on a personal basis. Android since version 4.2 Jelly Bean has also support for multiple users. Only iOS is still strictly a single-user operating system and fully complies with your definition of personal computer. But no one is using the term PC to describe iPhones. A words meaning is defined by its usage, as much as by its definition.

A words meaning is defined by what it is, period. A car is a car, even if it has a back seat or not, two doors or four. If I had two accounts on my Windows machine for two people, it's no less a PC than it would be if I were using it myself.

A Commodore64 is a PC, as is a Vic-20 as is an Amiga as is an Apple II as is a ZX-Spectrum as is a Macintosh. The operating system installed on a machine and how it performs has nothing to do with the term itself. You can't change the definition of a word to fit your argument.

 

[Gudi]

Who is talking about 2009?

You are.

 

[Oletros]

You are.

Are you joking and trying to waste our time?

 

[Gudi]

You can't change the definition of a word to fit your argument.

So tell me, is a smartphone a PC or not? And if not, which part of the definition does not fit?

 

[Renzatic]

You are.

I'm starting to get the impression that you're just posting to goad us on.

So tell me, is a smartphone a PC or not? And if not, which part of the definition does not fit?

Actually, I'd consider a smartphone a PC. One that isn't as capable as the other machines the word applies to, but still a PC nonetheless.

 

[Oletros]

I'm starting to get the impression that you're just posting to goad us on.

Yes, this is my impression

 

[Renzatic]

Yes, this is my impression

And yet we keep replying to the guy. I dunno if we're being stubborn or complete suckers here.

 

[Gudi]

Are you joking and trying to waste our time?

You are wasting my time. In 1982 the introduction price for Commodore 64 was US$ 595 (today $1415.48). Reductions in price can not explain why hundred times as many PCs are sold today. Increased usefulness due to GUIs can.

 

[Renzatic]

You are wasting my time. In 1982 the introduction price for Commodore 64 was US$ 595 (today $1415.48). Reductions in price can not explain why hundred times as many PCs are sold today. Increased usefulness due to GUIs can.

Another example of your failed logic and willingness to ignore your previous statements in order to prove your point.

Computer prices have gone down considerably over the years, and have become more needed over time. The reason more computers sell today is because they're easier to afford, and necessary to do many things. The computer industry was still relatively niche back during the Commodore 64's heyday, mostly a scene for businesses and hobbyists than it was for moms and dads wanting to talk to their kids on Facebook.

 

[Gudi]

Actually, I'd consider a smartphone a PC. One that isn't as capable as the other machines the word applies to, but still a PC nonetheless.

Great! Now go and convince Gartner that Worldwide PC Shipments are not falling. Because the people who research the PC market professionally, do not count smartphones and tablets as PCs. They think they are another kind of computers.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Of course it is, operating systems determinate how a computer can be used and therefore what kind of computer it is. OS X and Windows NT are multi-user operating systems. They are not meant to be operated by one individual only. Many PCs are used as workstations, not on a personal basis. Android since version 4.2 Jelly Bean has also support for multiple users. Only iOS is still strictly a single-user operating system and fully complies with your definition of personal computer. But no one is using the term PC to describe iPhones. A words meaning is defined by its usage, as much as by its definition.

There's a big difference between a mini or mainframe computer that REQUIRES separate terminals to use with it and is designed for multiple terminals and a computer that is designed for one person AT A TIME to use it. I'm not talking about multi-user operating systems, but multiple user computers (multiple people using it at the same time with little to no transportability, etc.)

Yeah, my Commodore64 (actually it was my brothers originally) was used by multiple household members. Its' OS was not really single or multi-user. It was simply BASIC and you booted discs or cartridges to run other software. It was and still is a personal computer.

As for naming conventions, people don't often "call" a Mac a "PC", but it IS. People don't have to call smart phones computers, but they ARE. Even if you call your car a Prius and never a "car", it's STILL a car by definition. In short, your arguments don't hold water.

 

[Gudi]

There's a big difference between a mini or mainframe computer that REQUIRES separate terminals to use with it and is designed for multiple terminals and a computer that is designed for one person AT A TIME to use it.

Right. But there is much more to a PC than being designed for one person at a time. Cause a smartphone is used by one person at a time and its not a PC. A PC today has a GUI and a mouse pointer. And yes that was introduced with the Macintosh in 1984. That machine defined what we think of PCs today.

People don't have to call smart phones computers, but they ARE.

Of course they are, but are they also PCs? They are not. Because they have a completely different type of user interface. Touch-GUIs and Pointer-GUIs separate mobile computers from personal computers. And both of these major control concepts were introduced into the mass market by Apple Computer.

 

[Renzatic]

Of course they are, but are they also PCs? They are not. Because they have a completely different type of user interface. Touch-GUIs and Pointer-GUIs separate mobile computers from personal computers. And both of these major control concepts were introduced into the mass market by Apple Computer.

No, they don't. Touch displays vs. pointers vs. keyboard inputs are all methods of interaction, and don't recategorize a device. If I were to hook up a capacitive touchscreen monitor to my computer, it wouldn't be any less a PC than it was before.

So tell me this, what makes a smartphone and tablet a Not-PC? Would you also classify a Surface Pro as a Not-PC?

And yes, the mouse and GUI were introduced to the mass market by Apple, but that shouldn't matter much to you because, according to your previous arguments, they weren't the first to develop either ones (anything that's based on previous work is development, not innovation according to you), and wasn't wildly successful, being too steeply priced to be widely adopted. The lowly GUIless Commodore 64 was the hot seller of that era.

 

[Gudi]

Touch displays vs. pointers vs. keyboard inputs are all methods of interaction, and don't recategorize a device.

Methods of interaction do categorize computers. Hence „one person at a time“ personal computers.

If I were to hook up a capacitive touchscreen monitor to my computer, it wouldn't be any less a PC than it was before.

Because you only added another input device, it would remain what it was before. A Tablet-PC which is just a kind of PC. But if you completely undo the previous method of interaction and also change the file-, task- and process-management to accommodate for mobile usage, than you have created a new class of mobile computers. A Tablet-MC if you will.

So tell me this, what makes a smartphone and tablet a Not-PC?

You have no mouse pointer. You have no file explorer. You have no process manager. You have no window management. Instead you have a Touch-UI, AutoSave, AutoResume and always fullscreen „one app at a time“.

Would you also classify a Surface Pro as a Not-PC?

Its a hybrid trying to be both. But more than that its a failure.
With two concurrent UIs its even more complicated than PCs alone.

Windows 8 — Disappointing Usability for Both Novice and Power Users

• Double Desktop = Cognitive Overhead and Added Memory Load
• Lack of Multiple Windows = Memory Overload for Complex Tasks
• Flat Style Reduces Discoverability
• Low Information Density
• Overly Live Tiles Backfire
• Charms Are Hidden Generic Commands
• Error-Prone Gestures
• Windows 8 UX: Weak on Tablets, Terrible for PCs

Its only something if it works. Maybe there is room for a new class of computers between personal and mobile, but Windows 8 ain't it.

And yes, the mouse and GUI were introduced to the mass market by Apple, but that shouldn't matter much to you because, according to your previous arguments, they weren't the first to develop either ones (anything that's based on previous work is development, not innovation according to you), and wasn't wildly successful, being too steeply priced to be widely adopted. The lowly GUIless Commodore 64 was the hot seller of that era.

And that era ended in the decade following the introduction of GUI-PCs. Nokia didn't die the day the iPhone was introduced, but half a decade later they are almost gone and virtually every phone now has a touchscreen. You don't have to reinvent the wheel every time to be inventive. If you are the first to apply known technologies successfully into a new field of usage than you are an inventor.

Take him for example, he did not invent electromotors or trains, but he combined both to create electric powered trams. A new kind of public transport systems used by millions every day. Clearly something different than the horse-drawn trams before. When we speak of old trams, we don't mean a horse-powered carriage on tracks. When we speak of smartphones, we don't mean a Nokia Communicator.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Right. But there is much more to a PC than being designed for one person at a time. Cause a smartphone is used by one person at a time and its not a PC.

I think a few grammar lessons might be in order before you try to discuss what a word does or does not mean.

A PC today has a GUI and a mouse pointer.

That's odd since the Windows8 machine I just looked at had a GUI and a touch screen.

And yes that was introduced with the Macintosh in 1984. That machine defined what we think of PCs today.

Maybe that's what defined it for you, but the Commodore Amiga is what defined it for me in 1985. For one thing, it had COLOR (and yeah a pesky mouse and GUI too). And what "PC" ships with monochrome today?

Besides, you're telling me that a Macintosh is what defines a modern "PC". You've now defeated your own argument.

Of course they are, but are they also PCs? They are not. Because they have a completely different type of user interface. Touch-GUIs and Pointer-GUIs separate mobile computers from personal computers. And both of these major control concepts were introduced into the mass market by Apple Computer.

So the interface is what defines a "PC"? How do you explain the new Windows8 desktops with touch screen interfaces? They aren't PCs either?

Frankly, I think you're making up your own definitions and trying to fit what you see to those definitions. A PC is a generic acronym meaning personal computer. Now what is a personal computer to you obviously is not for me since I believe the moniker fits any micro-computer. Frankly, the only thing preventing an iPad from being a full blown Mac is the operating system version Apple chose to load onto it. That's a limiting factor, not an entirely different machine. The iPad could run full OSX and use a mouse and keyboard with Bluetooth if Apple so desired. Would that make it a PC? The only real difference between a Mac Air and an iPad is the touch interface and OS version it's running. They're both thin and an Air could be shipped with a touch interface if Apple so desired (and probably will in the next 2 years to finish merging iOS with OSX proper). The point is that it's just a flipping word. This reminds me of people arguing over whether an "action figure" is a "doll" or not. Yes, it's a doll. "Action figure" was designed to make the doll seem less feminine and more masculine. That doesn't change what it is. All those kids in the 1980s playing with Star Wars DOLLS. LOL.

 

[Grandpa1947]

Hate

People are going to love it. People are also going to hate it.

This should be interesting.

Looks like they hired a Microsoft person to mess it up so it's like Windows 8

 

[garirry]

Looks like they hired a Microsoft person to mess it up so it's like Windows 8

Windows is falling down. I am no kidding but Windows is the worst system right now. Someday, Apple will kill PCs, Windows will not exist, and some smart dude like Steve Jobs was will revolutionize the PC market and Apple and that company will be the only two, consumers will use Macs and performance users will use that new kind of pro computers.

Hate Windows. Apple will always be the best.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Windows is falling down. I am no kidding but Windows is the worst system right now. Someday, Apple will kill PCs, Windows will not exist, and some smart dude like Steve Jobs was will revolutionize the PC market and Apple and that company will be the only two, consumers will use Macs and performance users will use that new kind of pro computers.

Hate Windows. Apple will always be the best.

Keep dreaming. Windows is so embedded that it will be around for at LEAST the next 20-30 years no matter what happens. Their market share is so enormous that they can afford to screw up every other release (Vista/Windows8) and it will still have very little effect market share-wise. I'm still running XP on my Windows only machine for goodness sake. The shelf life of their operating system for any given versions is like 10x that of any given OSX release. That alone ensures it will be around for a long time. If you bought XP back in 2001, it's STILL useful today in 2013 (even if the hardware it was originally installed on is not). If you bought Lion a year and a half ago, it's already effectively dead and will not have much support at all within 2-3 years at most (given that most Mac users that CAN upgrade, DO upgrade statistically speaking leaving few people for developers to bother to support).

 

[jcpb]

Windows is falling down. I am no kidding but Windows is the worst system right now. Someday, Apple will kill PCs, Windows will not exist, and some smart dude like Steve Jobs was will revolutionize the PC market and Apple and that company will be the only two, consumers will use Macs and performance users will use that new kind of pro computers.

Hate Windows. Apple will always be the best.

HFS+ is light years behind what a proper filesystem should be. OS X security lags behind Windows by years, never mind *nix.

 

[garirry]

Windows simply doesn't work. OS X does. My iMac G4 still works normally after 10 years. I NEVER reinstalled it. All I did was upgrading to Tiger, then to Leopard and will work for another 10 years. My 2008 PC was so bad I had to reinstall Windows 6 times. 6 TIMES! Not a single reinstall lasted even a year. This is a shame, I had a pro graphic card inside that burnt BECAUSE of Windows. I replaced my graphic card and it started to make scary sounds when powering off. So, I HAD to destroy it in parts, and hopefully never use it again. Windows is getting worse, and worse. I hope one day people will realize that their using a system that sucks, and they will switch to Mac.

They will sell their computers for cents, Windows will become an collector's system, like these other "unknown" systems. Pay 300$ for a ****** system? No way. Pay 20$ for an new, advanced system that will be usable for years? Of course I will. Why you think Apple sell they new systems for cheap? Because there's so many people that buy it that if every person that buys the system will give me 1 cent, I would be rich. As for Windows, it's so bad there's like 3 people that buy legitime copies of Windows. Everyone else pirate them. Prepare for Microsoft's death.