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 Considering Rebranding Mac OS X Under New 'iOS' Umbrella?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ruined?
The recording artists would beg to differ on that...
The only one's who ruined it were the record companies who've screwed artists and underpaid them for decades for corporate profit.
The iPhone OS is inferior to the main OS X.
Why name something better after something derivative?
Sure, branding. But that can backfire.
Unifying the name structure can also lead to everything sounding the same.
The iEverything is getting tired.
OS X also looks better written and sounds better spoken.
Why name something better after something derivative?
Sure, branding. But that can backfire.
Unifying the name structure can also lead to everything sounding the same.
The iEverything is getting tired.
OS X also looks better written and sounds better spoken.
Why, have they run out of C2Ds?
Dell has been shipping workstations with the new Intel Xeon for some time now. I don't think it's intel's fault that we haven't seen a refresh yet of the Mac Pro.
Now, if Apple is re-designing the whole thing or is a business decission, we don't know, but I don't think Intel is to be blamed for the delay at all.
Jeez, this isnt the end of the Mac. Apple sell a lot of notebooks and imacs, and there is no way Mac is going to be killed off. Any change will be by name and branding only.
Apple have, however, spent a lot of time concentrating on mobile devices and the ex-iPhoneOS-now-iOS to the detriment of development of Mac OS X.
We all know the recent WWDC was all iOS, iOS, iOS. What about the Mac?
iPhone 4 has now shipped as has iOS 4, so lets hope Apple now invests a bit more time in Mac OS X.
I know everyone likes new release of Mac OS X, but remember that most of the new features of Snow Leopard like GCD and OpenCL won't be used widely and fully by developers for a few more years.
Apple have, however, spent a lot of time concentrating on mobile devices and the ex-iPhoneOS-now-iOS to the detriment of development of Mac OS X.
We all know the recent WWDC was all iOS, iOS, iOS. What about the Mac?
iPhone 4 has now shipped as has iOS 4, so lets hope Apple now invests a bit more time in Mac OS X.
I know everyone likes new release of Mac OS X, but remember that most of the new features of Snow Leopard like GCD and OpenCL won't be used widely and fully by developers for a few more years.
EU is already looking at it...
classic anti-competitive action, leveraging an increasing market share in one area to force sales of another product.
not long now..
You're right, not long now till all these "investigations" are killed when they determine there is nothing. Nothing.
Well then, why don't you tell me about how the EU is forcing Microsoft to port Visual Studio/.Net?
Gonna port the Windows Phone SDK? Doubt it.
I will gladly eat my words if the opposite happens (and maybe be slightly happy), but they will do NOTHING.
Oh could you?
Excellent point. I'm not crazy about the iOS name at all, but as you said, OS XI is a name that will never exist due to the way it sounds. I wonder if this will be Mac OS 11 or somehow 10.7? iOS 10.7? I mean they advertise the animal names more than the actual point releases anyway. No one ever really saw "10.6 Snow Leopard", Apple just advertised it as Snow Leopard. iOS Snow Leopard? In any case, this will be an interesting turn of events, if true.
The time lapse between System 7 and System 7.6 was more than 6 YEARS. The mac operating system slowed down because it had matured, stabilized.
I feel the same thing has happened with OSx. Many seem to feel development has slowed down because Apple is ignoring it. I feel it's slowed down because there's much less that needs to be done with it at this point. It's reached that level of maturity.
Exactly what are all these revolutionary features and changes everyone is still hoping for from OSX anyway? It's already a world class piece of software.
Ok, I'll bite
No bias or fanboi here, just facts.
Putting two machine side by side, one running OSX and one running Windows 7
Is there anything you can do on Windows 7 (as it comes) that you can't do on OSX (as it comes) ?
Just perhaps file operations, the way the desktop works/interacts with you, that could be put into OSX ?
I've no idea, perhaps others do.
If you can load up Windows7 and just do something you can't do in OSX without 3rd partty add-ons, then I'd argue it should be added to OSX also.
who cares about the name- gimme more function....
I am not impressed with what the name is BUT i would like to see the same attention given to the mac os and enthusiasm as the consumer devices. apple needs to innovate and differentiate themselves (again) vs. windows 7. and not in hardware but in the OS!
I am not impressed with what the name is BUT i would like to see the same attention given to the mac os and enthusiasm as the consumer devices. apple needs to innovate and differentiate themselves (again) vs. windows 7. and not in hardware but in the OS!
With each end is a brighter beginning. Apple isn't stopping the Mac, only extending it into new territory, and why not? Why leave everything the computer can do when it's possible to add all the capabilities of the app store apps?
Jobs has always said the iOS contains 100% of OSX. If your Mac could run what it does now PLUS everything in the app store, why would that displease you. Imagine the day Mac sales goes through the roof because it was compatible with the app store...who cares that it can run Windows...it can run app store apps!!!!
I agree...and in addition the personal computer, whatever OS is runs, is reaching full maturity as well.
iOS is not a subset of OSx, it's an extension that allows the Mac to evolve into something much more then location aware. All the iDevices except the iMac is aware of which way it's pointed, what the operator is saying, where in the world it is being operated, what other similar devices are nearby, additionally they know if the operator is moving and what wifi spots are nearby. Essentially the iMac is deaf, blind and senseless compared to all the other iDevices.
What a load of whining! How is OS X better then iOS? Give me one reason beyond "OS X is bound to the power-sucking Intel processor." iOS is OS X on a different processor. iOS knows when it is being touched, talked to, moved and manipulated. iOS knows where it is at, which way it is being pointed, and if someone is sending it a message. iOS is free of the power cord.
Quietly, without the competition and some people like you realizing it, the Mac has evolved into something that can move about on land and stand upright.
Already been there
There already was the iBook G3 and G4.
Eventually, we will have
iBook, iBook pro, iPro
There already was the iBook G3 and G4.
On the other hand, when we were early cave men (or babies) we stuck our hand into paint and drew with our fingers.
As our brains developed we learned to use tools, crude at first, but over many thousands of years developed those tools to perfection where, whatever job we wished to do in the real world we had the best tool for the job.
Do we want to move back to crudely stabbing at a screen with a fat greasy finger for doing fine work?
No, I don't think we do.
Yes, if all we want to do it turn a page, press a button that says OK, or swipe to scroll around something that's too small too see due to the limitations of the mobile display device.
I don't think fingers on screens is a great tool for fine work.
Browsing and playing yes perhaps but not to replace any of the proper tools we have developed.
I find using a computer (mouse/trackball and a keyboard) far far faster than using a touch screen.
Plug I can have the screen in the optimal position for my eyes, and the controls at the optimum position for my hands.
I can't imagine anyone would want to sit at a desk with a Apple screen in front of them and lift their arms up to slide their fingers around it's screen.
That's a little harsh !!
Though I must admit, even myself to thinking that perhaps Apple might LISTEN a bit more to it's loyal consumers and give them what they want if Steve was not there as opposed to telling them what they should have.
Be honest, if they sold a cheap (er) mac like a normal PC in a PC'ish type seperate case, with a nice i5, i7 CPU and a very nice graphics card, they would storm off the shelves.
Admittedly it would upset some mac purists, but no reason to stop making the all in one model also.
So, you're saying that Apple is focusing MORE on the Macs now that they are selling iPods. And just because they had more versions doesn't mean they increase development. Most of the versions were the same except for the Intel switch in Tiger which was actually necessary because the G5 processor couldn't get any faster while the Intel could.
Right when the iPod came out, development didn't slow. It slowed down eventually as the iPod took over. The iPod Touch and iPhone are the ones that actually significantly slowed it down because they are handheld computers (with fewer features). The 2001 iPod just set this in motion.
Touch Screen
I concur. Touch screens are just there to impress people. They are ONLY useful on little phones so you don't have to hit the tiny little buttons under it (like on a Blackberry). I would never want a full-sized, touchscreen computer.
It's kinda like the Wii. Extra work. It just looks cooler. The idea of a "magic wand" remote for video games sounds cool, but it sucks. The only game that you really use it for is Wii Sports. The other games could be just fine on a GameCube controller, which they are.
Touch screens are not the way to go for desktops. However I don't say that they are bad just because you have to jab with your fingers like a caveman.
I concur. Touch screens are just there to impress people. They are ONLY useful on little phones so you don't have to hit the tiny little buttons under it (like on a Blackberry). I would never want a full-sized, touchscreen computer.
It's kinda like the Wii. Extra work. It just looks cooler. The idea of a "magic wand" remote for video games sounds cool, but it sucks. The only game that you really use it for is Wii Sports. The other games could be just fine on a GameCube controller, which they are.
Touch screens are not the way to go for desktops. However I don't say that they are bad just because you have to jab with your fingers like a caveman.