Apple Considering Rebranding Mac OS X Under New 'iOS' Umbrella?

[bspence]

iOS and Mac OS X will never be equal

Who wants a laptop/desktop without the productivity you get in current OS X or Windows? I love my iPhone and my dad's iPad, but I'll never be able to use photoshop, illustrator, or even the MS Office apps on either device. You need the peripherals of a mouse, keyboard, and pen tablet. Sure, it's POSSIBLE to do some light work in those kinds of apps, but it's really not practical. Apple would need to go a long, long way to getting me to ditch an OS like OS X or Windows.

 

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

blah

 

[dsdevries]

This makes me wonder, why on earth did they changed the names of their desktops en notebooks. If they didn't they could by now have the iPod, iPad, iPhone, iMac (pro + mini), iBook (pro + air) all containing some form of iOs (mobile, desktop of server).

You could then name the individual stores: 'iTunes Music Store', 'iTunes App Store' and the 'iTunes Book Store'. This would give a clean line of brands.

 

[angevil]

Why so negative? (speaking in the voice of Joker)

They are the same OS basically, but with a different user interface, so why not merge with the same OS name? iOS is fine.

 

[aiqw9182]

Yeah - I've stated before that I think Steve is right to target the mobility market, it's just that the way Apple is doing it with the DRM locking (for video, anyway) and capricious policies governing everything related to the App Store and iAds really makes me nervous.

It's true that portable devices like the MacBook and mobile phones are becoming powerful enough to meet the everyday needs of most people who would have purchased a desktop system 5 years ago.

But my meaning in that Apple is permanently on the mobile train is that I would expect that over the next 5 years there won't be much differentiation in its desktop lineup - as it stands now, there's essentially 2 different Mini models, about 4 different iMacs, and 2 different Mac Pros. I think over time we're going to see the choices for these diminish and the variation of Apple's portable/mobile lineup continue to increase (iPhones, iPads, maybe the return of some sort of iBook, iPods, etc.).

As these changes happen, I think as a business cost-cutting decision Apple will merge the iOS and OS X threads as much as possible into a single unified OS. Just as we had "Fat Binaries" and "Universal Binaries" in the past, I'd expect to see some sort of universal iOS installer for all Apple hardware in the next 5-10 years. After which the ability to use "OS X" on a desktop becomes a configuration choice instead of a default installation. Unfortunately, with the iOS merge will come the worst of Apple's App Market, DRM management, and iAds lock-ins.

But from a business cost management perspective it doesn't make sense for Apple to continue to have an OS X development team, an iOS development team, and a legacy iPod OS development team for the iPod "Classic" (these don't run iOS, right?). It probably also means we could see the end of the iPod "Classic" very soon, maybe even this year or next.

You seem to not understand what rebranding means.

 

[FoxyKaye]

This makes me wonder, why on earth did they changed the names of their desktops en notebooks. If they didn't they could by now have the iPod, iPad, iPhone, iMac (pro + mini), iBook (pro + air) all containing some form of iOs (mobile, desktop of server).

You could then name the individual stores: 'iTunes Music Store', 'iTunes App Store' and the 'iTunes Book Store'. This would give a clean line of brands.

They needed to do something from a branding perspective to signal the switch to Intel processors? This doesn't completely hold water, as the iMac retained its name, but just idle speculation.

 

[Val-kyrie]

Looks like a lot of people disappointed with this news. From my own understanding the iOS will run on top of the layer of Mac OSX. What's the difference nothing just an extra OS running on top of OSX maybe the UI looks like the current iOS....

And perhaps eventually the iOS mobile will gain feature parity with the desktop version. I have no objection to running the two together.

Also, Apple will have a problem after OS X 10.9. To say, "OS ten ten point ten point ..." or "OS ten, ten, ten, ..." sounds awful and redundant. My dad already has a hard time distinguishing OS X 10.5 from 10.6. If the iOS mobile develops faster than the desktop, then there will reach a point at which the numbers will converge. Hypothetically,

iOS ------ OS X
iOS 4 ---- OS X 10.6 ------ 2010
iOS 5 ---- OS X 10.6 ------ 2011
iOS 6 ---- OS X 10.7 ------ 2012
iOS 7 ---- OS X 10.7 ------ 2012 (convergence)?

 

[johnnymg]

Damn............. I get a real kick out of the replies from the doomsters here. .

 

[AppleMacFinder]

"Get a Mac" would no long make sense.
"Hi, I'm a Mac" would symbolize being an old, out-of-date computer.
MacRumors.com would need a new name.

The words Mac and Macintosh are as well known as the word Apple, and I thin keeping the desktop OS and the mobile OS completely separate is the best way to go.

90% of all the rumors on this site are iPhone rumors.
MacRumors.com -> iPhoneRumors.com

UPDATE: Oh, it's already taken

 

[globalhemp]

Get rid of Mac name is like the "new" Coke; Should be Mac iOS and Mac OS X

I think this is a horrible idea. Getting rid of Mac name is like Coca-Cola introducing the "new" Coke around 1985. This is one of the most famous marketing blunders of all time.

When the term "Mac OS X" came out, I thought that it was fantastic, even though most people call it "Mac OS 'EX'"

Steve Jobs made matters worse when he described the "new" numbering scheme as really Mac OS X System 10.0. OK, so say this out loud, "Mac OS Ten, System 10 dot zero (most say "oh").

It would actually have made more sense to call it "Mac OS X (ex), system 10" than "Mac OS Ten, System 10"

Anyhow, getting rid of the Mac name is like the new Coke. Think about it! iOS is OK, though generic for iPhone, iPad, iWhateverelse. The "i" is actually getting pretty passe after being used as a term for an Internet enabled device. What personal computing type of device is not hooked-up to the Internet now that its 2010?

Want to be trendy? How about the "new" cMac? The Cloud-based Mac that stores all your information in Apple's cloud -- aka .Mac -- now MobileMe?

Should use the Mac name and have another descriptor for it being the EMBEDDED version of Mac OS X. Perhaps Mac iOS 4.0 for embedded devices?

So, Mac OS X (lets call it EX) and Mac iOS.

Latest versions would be: Mac OS X 10.6 and Mac iOS 4.0

Anyhow, the bottom line is: think "new Coke" ... marketing blunder. Best to stick with the classic "Mac" than to screw it all up.

 

[Albatrossflyer]

Who remembers when Steve stood on the stage at macworld and ripped Microsoft for have 7 versions of windows? I guess 3 is the maximum allowed.....

 

[JAT]

No one calls it MAc OS Ex. We all say OS 10 with the version number after (10.5 or 10.6 etc.) the X is redundant. Mac OS Ex 10? in the mac world we just say the name of the cat. "oh this is running Snow Leopard".

This is a non-issue.

I call it "oh ess ex". I realize the "accepted" way by those with at least 10 minutes Mac experience is "ten", but I started on System 3 or something like that, it's 5 versions past 10, now. To me, we're either on OS 15 or version 6 of OSX (ex), calling it "ten" is stupid. So I choose my own path, just like in everything else.

 

[FoxyKaye]

You seem to not understand what rebranding means.

That it's the first step towards making the public aware of internal shifts at a business without getting existing customers caught up an a sea of technobabble? Businesses don't rebrand unless they're making an internal realignment and want to bring their customers with them - be it providing more or less (look at how many cereals changed their brand identities to cover up a decrease in weight from 12oz in a box to 10oz, or even the ancient change from "Sugar Smacks" to "Honey Smacks"), or Apple changing its name a few years back from Apple Computer to Apple, Inc. Yeah, there's a lot about increasing brand identity and awareness in there as well, but at the end of the day, rebranding is about getting customers used to current or pending shifts in business operation.

 

[baryon]

I don't mind the iOS name, it's easy to remember and pronounce, while OS X is hard to figure out. Many people have no idea if it's pronounced "os ten" or "os ex". Ask a non-Apple maniac what Apple's operating system is called, they have no clue. Ask them what Microsoft's os is called, they will all answer "Windows". iOS won't change this but at least the pronunciation will be obvious.

I just hope that Apple's desktop OS and desktop line stays. I don't want a desktop app store and a closed OS system.

 

[Simplicated]

No please. Look how messy Microsoft is doing.

Keep the "X" there. It's really cool, at least for me.

 

[aiqw9182]

That it's the first step towards making the public aware of internal shifts at a business without getting existing customers caught up an a sea of technobabble? Businesses don't rebrand unless they're making an internal realignment and want to bring their customers with them - be it providing more or less (look at how many cereals changed their brand identities to cover up a decrease in weight from 12oz in a box to 10oz, or even the ancient change from "Sugar Smacks" to "Honey Smacks"), or Apple changing its name a few years back from Apple Computer to Apple, Inc. Yeah, there's a lot about increasing brand identity and awareness in there as well, but at the end of the day, rebranding is about getting customers used to current or pending shifts in business operation.

Just like how going from the name iBook to MacBook totally rocked the world, right?

The current iOS is based on Mac OS X. The fact that you mentioned Apple killing off the iPod Classic just because of the OS when the iPod Nano runs the same OS is just hilarious. Apple is going to kill their most popular iPod now just because they need a different development team? What a joke.

 

[Val-kyrie]

iOS 10.6.x
iOS x.x.x
iOS 4.x

Makes no sense.

iOS desktop 10.6.x
iOS server x.x.x
iOS mobile 4.x

Is too much of a mouthful.

That is why I think that it is possible Apple will converge the OSes at 10.7 or better at 10.8:

iOS 7/8 server
iOS 7/8 desktop
iOS 7/8 mobile

And perhaps eventually the iOS mobile will gain feature parity with the desktop version. I have no objection to running the two together.

Also, Apple will have a problem after OS X 10.9. To say, "OS ten ten point ten point ..." or "OS ten, ten, ten, ..." sounds awful and redundant. My dad already has a hard time distinguishing OS X 10.5 from 10.6. If the iOS mobile develops faster than the desktop, then there will reach a point at which the numbers will converge. Hypothetically,

iOS ------ OS X
iOS 4 ---- OS X 10.6 ------ 2010
iOS 5 ---- OS X 10.6 ------ 2011
iOS 6 ---- OS X 10.7 ------ 2012
iOS 7 ---- OS X 10.7 ------ 2012
iOS 8 ---- OS X 10.8 ------ 2013 (convergence)? [changed]

 

[FoxyKaye]

Just like how going from the name iBook to MacBook totally rocked the world, right?

The current iOS is based on Mac OS X. The fact that you mentioned Apple killing off the iPod Classic just because of the OS when the iPod Nano runs the same OS is just hilarious. Apple is going to kill their most popular iPod now just because they need a different development team? What a joke.

I'd bet money that in 2-3 years time the iPod "Classic" will be gone entirely (supplanted by the iPod Touch) and the iPod Nano will be running some form of iOS.

 

[aiqw9182]

I'd bet money that in 2-3 years time the iPod "Classic" will be gone entirely (supplanted by the iPod Touch) and the iPod Nano will be running some form of iOS.

Maybe you missed this part of my post?

Just like how going from the name iBook to MacBook totally rocked the world, right?

The current iOS is based on Mac OS X.

And even if Apple were to kill off the iPod OS that is COMPLETELY unrelated to what will happen to the Mac OS. I'm sure you cried when Apple changed the name from System 7 to Mac OS 8 claiming the doom of Apple's computers.

 

[Winni]

Of course they will. Imagine how much funds they are pumping into mobile technology compared to desktop technology.

Apple is deciding our future, and our future is an under-featured, air-tight OS with flashy animations and little room to grow without Apple's help.

Speak for yourself. They are certainly not deciding my future. I like Mac OS X, but I am not dependent on it - I can live with Linux, FreeBSD and even Windows. And I doubt that someone will ever axe the desktop versions of those non-Apple operating systems.

 

[ranReloaded]

Stop the hysteria! The full-fledged Apple desktop OS will never die. If it did, who's gonna code/design all the AppStore apps!??

 

[slb]

As anticipated - there goes the Macintosh and it's valued operating system. Pros not updated, no real innovation in the Mac branded computers, MBA not renewed...

Another indication to say good bye to the Macintosh Computer line. Apple is really focusing these days only on the consumer portable device. Sad day indeed...

Congratulations on firing the first predictable response right out of the gate. Apparently, renaming OS X makes the Macintosh go away!

 

[markosb]

As anticipated - there goes the Macintosh and it's valued operating system. Pros not updated, no real innovation in the Mac branded computers, MBA not renewed...

Another indication to say good bye to the Macintosh Computer line. Apple is really focusing these days only on the consumer portable device. Sad day indeed...

Its those consumer products i this and i that has made Apple into the company they are today... not the Macintosh. They may be focusing too much on it but its making them all their money. My fear (and this coming from a Windows user) is it could ruin them if they move into making their desktop computers into idevices running the iOS or whatever it will be called next. I think their direction is better than the direction Microsoft is going... which inevitably will be in copying what Apple is doing.

 

[ValSalva]

iOS layered on top of OS X? Sounds like bloatware. Is Apple trying to become Windows? OS X, we hardly knew thee. Such a rapid rise and seemingly just as quick a fall.

 

[deannnnn]

90% of all the rumors on this site are iPhone rumors.
MacRumors.com -> iPhoneRumors.com

UPDATE: Oh, it's already taken

That's because there are just more iPhone rumors out there. The more popular a product is, the more rumors there are going to be about it. It's not like they are doing it on purpose... Not to mention that iOS is based on Mac OS X so really it still applies.