Don't know about Android but I was under the impression that Windows takes up more resources than iPhone OS (and Atom is more power-consuming than ARM).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Asking App Developers to Prepare for Large Screen Demos Next Month?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the physical design is done by Apple (PA Semi), it can be a very fast chip indeed.
Cocoa Touch doesn't have all the functions of cocoa, but it does have many of them. A large percentage of the SDK is present, but not everything. And some of what is present is incomplete compared to full-blown cocoa. It does of course, have additional packages, like UIKit.
It has GUI based features removed according to my Obj-C book. I was talking about useful features though.
---
Remember those specifications are at 65nm, what if Apple used 45nm?
It would probably be slower than Android, but I doubt it would be slower than windows, which is far more bloated.
It would have a smaller API, but a better API than windows. Core Data, Quartz, etc. are all very powerful. It's also far easier to program than Windows, at least Win32. .net is a different matter, but that's part of the charm of windows - decades of sdk cruft and different sdk's to do the same thing.
I don't buy your flash memory point. OS X has support for flash memory, as does iPhone (cocoa touch). There's just no mobile equivalent of "finder," but that doesn't mean the tablet won't have one.
Advantages of ARM/Cocoa touch: much better battery life, UI designed for touch, comparatively consistent UI without decades of cruft, 21st century SDK that is incredibly easy to code for, presumably some version of the app store makes it easy for people to go into business to sell their apps (of course the sdk and app store stuff works for a mac os-based approach, as well).
It's also missing a bunch of non-gui stuff, like support for rich text in nsstring, high-level coredata stuff, etc. The gui stuff is just the most obvious difference, but any mac programmer invariably runs into little non-gui gotchas any time they write any code for iphone.
I'll have to tell the author. Hes a local guy, I'm just going through it to see if it makes sense.
You got a definitive source for that?
Well, I'm an iphone developer, so...
Here's just one of the examples to which I earlier referred (no rich text string on iphone):
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/729135/why-no-nsattributedstring-on-the-iphone
That's where things start to get interesting. While it's good to have easy-to-use API, inevitably this comes with some tradeoffs and in this case the tradoff is limited functionality. It might be fine for the phone but a tablet is a different matter. Would the customer prefer 130K amateurish applications or, say, 100 good ones. Will Google maps work there? (Well, we all know that's a totally different story
) Well designed, content and GUI rich applications are important.
I cant do any development of any sort until i get an Intel Mac. I started learning Obj-C and Cocoa but its just too hard on this slow computer and tiny screen. Ive put it on hold for the moment.
That's where things start to get interesting. While it's good to have easy-to-use API, inevitably this comes with some tradeoffs and in this case the tradoff is limited functionality. It might be fine for the phone but a tablet is a different matter. Would the customer prefer 130K amateurish applications or, say, 100 good ones. Will Google maps work there? (Well, we all know that's a totally different story
Agreed. The good news is that cocoa touch really does contain the vast majority of important cocoa functionality. The reason iphone apps aren't "more functional" has much more to do with lack of hardware resources and natural tradeoffs that come from having such a tiny screen. Of course, there are some important limitations to iphone that need not be present on the tablet. The most important, IMHO:
1) no shared filesystem, or any other reasonable method of communicating between programs or between machines (the url method doesn't cut it for anything other than simple messages, and having to create ad hoc connections constantly for each program that wants access to files on your desktop/laptop is dumb)
2) no multitasking/background apps
3) apple's arbitrary app store limitations (no replacing springboard, no web browsers, no interpreted code, etc.)
Only if you think that the well over 10 million iPod Touch tablets sold are a failed product category. Or that the App store is a failed app distribution medium (that everybody else is trying very hard to copy, and even Microsoft is busy developing apps for.)
Given the minuscule sales of Windows tablets over the past several years, you are one of the very very few (except for a couple vertical niches), much too insignificant and tiny a market share to interest Apple (especially compared to the several magnitudes greater iPod Touch sales numbers). Why do you think these Windows tablets have historically sold so poorly? Why would Apple want to copy such a huge failure of a product idea?
I actually know someone who bought a Toshiba Tablet PC to run some Windows drawing apps, but never used it after the first month because the UI was so awkward (but uses his iPhone all the time for other stuff). So, go ahead, buy one, and learn for yourself.
But what does full OS add that's useful.
Carbon legacy but that isn't going to pick up the touch screen controls like cocoa apps can so is it worth supporting.
They can add any of the rest the API's and built for LLVM.
So ARM or x86 is not much and issue in choosing between the two that is the joy of LLVM even the GPU can be used.
The last big difference is Cocoa vs Cocoa Touch UI elements?
Not there is much difference in the structure of those other than the important thing one works plug in mouse/keyboard the other touch screen.
Although adding window resizing to cocoa touch when on big screen could be really useful.
It would seem like a lot of the work Apple did with Snow Leopard was bring Mac and iPhone OS closer together so a device lie this can be added to the line up.
That's a pretty good summary of why the tablet won't need to run full OS X and why it will be running iPhone OS.
At some point Apple will address the shared file system issue, not just for the table but for the iPhone and iPod as well. I reckon there is a good chance it will be based round iDisk as that would be a logical step, with a local replication for when you're offline.
The whole multitasking / background apps issue is seemingly a result of the battery life and processor power in current devices. Again, this limitation will be removed at some point across all the iPhone OS products.
Not sure about the app store limitations though. I can see them maybe being relaxed a bit more, something which seems to be happening already. But on the whole I still think its a good thing as it solves a lot of potential issues and makes the devices more consumer friendly which has always been missing from computers since day one. Computers need to and will at some point, be as consumer friendly as a TV or DVD player, controlling the apps is important in that happening.
I said this a while ago and I'll say it again - the iPhone OS and the app store is the future of Apple computers. At some point OS X will be dropped and replace by a future version of iPhone OS. Obviously there is still a lot of work needed on iPhone OS for this to happen but the next version for the tablet will be a major step towards it.
I get ya, but the ability to run Photoshop, office, etc is very valuable, and don't count on there being reasonable replacements any time soon. iWork and openoffice are not reasonable replacements for office for many people, and nothing on iPhone comes close. Likewise pixelmator, etc. is no Photoshop, and neither is Layers .
. I get ya, but the ability to run Photoshop, office, etc is very valuable, and don't count on there being reasonable replacements any time soon. iWork and openoffice are not reasonable replacements for office for many people, and nothing on iPhone comes close. Likewise pixelmator, etc. is no Photoshop, and neither is Layers
But its not the iPhone OS that is limiting the ability to run applications like that; its the screen size, battery life and processor speed. Once those issues are resolved companies like Adobe and Microsoft will be all over it like a rash.
If this happens, I will gladly go back to Microsoft world.
One of the reasons I love iPhone is the Cydia store...
Wasn't the State of the Union address usig the phrase Core OS?
I'd imagine that Apple has a few things that can't be shown till after te tablet demo/announcement.
WWDC Will be interesting to see - as it'll show how Apple see thugs changing. Doesn't the newer iPhone OS have some concepts ideas etc to give back to the Mac OS that's more shakled with older APIs etc?
I'd imagine that Apple has a few things that can't be shown till after te tablet demo/announcement.
WWDC Will be interesting to see - as it'll show how Apple see thugs changing. Doesn't the newer iPhone OS have some concepts ideas etc to give back to the Mac OS that's more shakled with older APIs etc?
No, it's the fact that these apps already exist on mac os. Photoshop still hasn't been ported to cocoa- I'd expect a cocoa touch port right around the time duke nukem forever arrives. And MS makes half assed attempts at mac office- how much effort do you think they'll put in tablet office?
Excellent Post Mike. I also have a collection of Apple products both new and old. I also have a 24" Acer Monitor that is fantastic, use logitech mice, have Win 7 installed, love my FLIP, and like my Hackintoish as much as my Macs...
The tablet, if all reports are accurate, is turning out to be a plaything for multimedia, games, and the 100,000 silly little Apps in the app store (My 3GS has Shazam and iHandy Level installed - the only 2 apps I found useful for myself)...
I'm sure the Tablet will do well. If it sells 2,000,000 units at $1000 ($500 profit each) Apple will make a killing. Apple doesn't need to convince the masses - just some fraction of 1% of all the population.
Different strokes for different folks - I buy what interests me and what I find useful. Unfortunately this site is descending into the "Mac Daily News" mentality where everything without an Apple logo is "Junk" and anyone who disagrees (or God Forbid uses Microsoft Products) is a "Troll" or an "Idiot"...
Pathetic..
Oh yeah, they'll be standing in line to support Apple's newest Platform of the week.
This is 2010, not 1985. Microsoft won the PC wars alone time ago (paraphrasing Mr. Steve Jobs), ..the Mac is a good alternative and several of the big dogs are supporting the platform. I seriously doubt they will have any reason to support/develop for another platform from a company that "doesn't care about market share"....
If you really need to run one of those legacy apps, some of which would likely suck a thin handheld device's battery dry in minutes, you can do that right now using a VNC or Remote Desktop app (there are over a dozen in the App store), and connect back to a much faster and really hefty server (quad core, 16 GB of DRAM, etc.) in the cloud somewhere (rent them for pennys a minute from Amazon or Rackspace), while waiting in line at the coffee shop, from your iPod Touch.
No reason that remote viewing of legacy apps wouldn't work even better from a hypothetical tablet device with a larger display area.
Latency makes that not fun for graphic apps. Probably fine for office apps. Still, it would be nice if whatever this thing is ran enough of Cocoa for microsoft to be willing to put in the effort required to port office. This thing will likely be ideal for viewing and interacting with corporate documents, most of which are in .doc or .docx and many of which simply don't show up properly in iWork, openoffice, or the built-in mac rich doc handling.
Still, I predict whatever this is will be hugely successful. Apple has learned a ton about ecosystems, the rumors are steve jobs has had his hand in it personally and it's gotten a lot of his attention, they have great technology to build off of, and the market for digital distribution of all manner of printed and other material is finally developed.
people keep forgetting the iphone os is os x, it was designed for tablet like devices, just because the iphone version is closed that doesn't mean they can't open up the tablet version
The reason why tablets have failed is because of the OS . Now we have an OS made for tablets and there is complaining? Wait and see what they do before complaining atleast
The reason why tablets have failed is because of the OS . Now we have an OS made for tablets and there is complaining? Wait and see what they do before complaining atleast
The iSlate - I still don't get it.
I've been an iPhone evangelist for 2 years, it's simply the best pocket computer available today, and I just don't get the point behind The Tablet. The iPhone is the perfect size, works 110% perfectly... so why would I want a larger one that will be harder to carry and easier to damage? To watch movies on the go? I drive, and when I'm away from my computer I'm working and don't have time to be reading online magazines or watching TV, so no good for me and I suspect many others.
I've long wished Apple would work on a journal device - The Tablet seems to be going down the road of a 'big iPhone'. Meanwhile the world's media becomes ever more trite as MegaCorps push fluff and brush away journalism, so I'm not going to be watching news / reading magazines in the future anyway.
When rumours of The Tablet first emerged I was really hoping for something I would actually use, like the fabled DynaBook - something along the lines of a Filofax-running-on-iPhoneOS. Multiscreen, book format, all that jazz. Something, dare I say it, like Microsoft's (vapourware?) Courier.
I'm a fan-boy, but its going to take something a lot more than a 'big iPhone' to wow me in 2010.
I've been an iPhone evangelist for 2 years, it's simply the best pocket computer available today, and I just don't get the point behind The Tablet. The iPhone is the perfect size, works 110% perfectly... so why would I want a larger one that will be harder to carry and easier to damage? To watch movies on the go? I drive, and when I'm away from my computer I'm working and don't have time to be reading online magazines or watching TV, so no good for me and I suspect many others.
I've long wished Apple would work on a journal device - The Tablet seems to be going down the road of a 'big iPhone'. Meanwhile the world's media becomes ever more trite as MegaCorps push fluff and brush away journalism, so I'm not going to be watching news / reading magazines in the future anyway.
When rumours of The Tablet first emerged I was really hoping for something I would actually use, like the fabled DynaBook - something along the lines of a Filofax-running-on-iPhoneOS. Multiscreen, book format, all that jazz. Something, dare I say it, like Microsoft's (vapourware?) Courier.
I'm a fan-boy, but its going to take something a lot more than a 'big iPhone' to wow me in 2010.