Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Executives Consider Thirty Years of Macintosh, Say iOS and OS X Convergence 'A Non-Goal'

"...when it makes sense"
"...without a good reason"

Apple is known for saying "We think X doesn't make sense at all, because of the problem of Y." We tend to interpret that as "See? They're not going to do X". What they really mean is "we're working on solving the problem of Y."

Then they get on stage and say "Well, X doesn't make sense, because of Y. But introducing this little twist on X! We've solved Y!" and suddenly they have a huge hit and they upend the way the industry sees things. And everyone says "Duh, why didn't we think of this before."

They said small-capacity flash MP3 players didn't make sense... so they built the hard-drive based iPod.
They said smartphones with tiny keyboards didn't make sense... so they built a touchscreen iPhone.
They said cheap netbooks didn't make sense... so they built the first ultrabook instead.

Now they (seem to be) saying convertible touchscreen laptops don't make sense... so what are they up to?
 
Last edited:
yossi said:
So what do you think OS X will be named after 10.9?
Click to expand...

I don't understand why there can't be OS X 10.10. I mean, OS X 10.x doesn't even make sense, because the 'X' in OS X stands for '10' -- although it could mean 'UNIX' and stuff.

It's just a version number. If they had released Snow Leopard version 10.6.10, it wouldn't be version 10.6.1. 10 comes after 9, right?

I dunno, this whole argument just has a smell of Y2K about it. ;)
 
proline said:
No it isn't. We knew this already and Apple has said it many times already. If you weren't listening then you probably aren't listening now. At the most recent event they specifically mocked their competitors for "trying to turn tablets into laptops and laptops into tablets". They also committed to making several California themed OS X releases, and Steve Jobs has mocked touch screen laptops and "gorilla arms". Stop talking and start listening.
Click to expand...

Somehow all these people who didn't listen convinced Microsoft to beat Apple to it - and the result was Windows 8 :D Apple just stepped back. The old rule: "Never get in your opponents way when they are making a mistake".

That reminds me: Welcome, Samsung Gear watch!

keysofanxiety said:
I don't understand why there can't be OS X 10.10. I mean, OS X 10.x doesn't even make sense, because the 'X' in OS X stands for '10' -- although it could mean 'UNIX' and stuff.

It's just a version number. If they had released Snow Leopard version 10.6.10, it wouldn't be version 10.6.1. 10 comes after 9, right?
Click to expand...

There was 10.4.10 and 10.4.11.

MacOS X has been there for 12 years, and I'd think it will stay at least for another 20.
 
Northgrove said:
I don't think this is where Microsoft wanted to go at all (they wanted to kill the desktop in the long term and move ahead with Metro).
Click to expand...

While I have seen this before--I have never found it convincing. There is no way a touch based app can provide the precision and complexity of a x86 application. Its hard to imagine MS couldn't see this. MS did want to force exposure to metro, however, in hopes of gettng desktoppers to go to the MS store. And this was the root of the "start menu" war, and the wide spread loathing of windows 8. MS overplayed their hand and are now contritley back tracking.
 
Northgrove said:
Why? The people backtracking here are Microsoft. Metro failed as a unified desktop/tablet dream interface as the "way forward" and now they're busy updating Windows 8.1 to be able to launch Metro apps from the desktop interface. I take this as a first step to divergence. It may seem like a further unification at the first sight, but think about it...

Windows 9 will most likely keep treading this path, letting the user do as much from the desktop as possible, even accessing Windows Store bought and Metro apps. Great, huh? Because the users complained so much about Metro and Microsoft do want to listen. The end result will be one good, flexible desktop interface for the desktop, and another one for the tablets.

And then what? Then they're back at square one. Then they could just be two different operating systems altogether again, because they're living in separate worlds. Unless developers and end-users are really excited about running Metro apps from the desktop, apps that share a completely different look & feel and feel alien. I haven't even heard a single person asking for this. Because the Metro apps are dumbed down versions of the desktop apps at best, and not even aimed for the input device being a mouse and keyboard.

I don't think this is where Microsoft wanted to go at all (they wanted to kill the desktop in the long term and move ahead with Metro), but I think they'll be forced to go there. What a waste of time to first try to seek a middle ground in Metro, release Windows 8, then accept that the desktop users wanted to use Desktop and the tablet users Metro anyway, release Windows 8.1 + 8.1 Update 1 which will have this fleshed out further in Windows 9...

Meanwhile, Apple is like... what the ... are you doing.
Click to expand...

The site below has leaked updated Windows 8 screen shots...reminds me a lot of Windows 7. Not a live tile in site.

http://wzascok.livejournal.com/12194.html
 
I still think they need to do plenty of visual tweaks on OSX to merge the aesthetics more seamlessly with iOS -- not the function, mind you, just the aesthetics.
 
I don't understand how some people still have doubts about the convergence thing. Apple kept saying over and over that they are not planning such a convergence, yet whenever they say it one more time, people say "thank god".
 
If the rumors of a 12" iPad Pro are true, I hope Apple gives us either a hybrid experience or a seriously revamped iOS to take better advantage of all those Retina pixels and larger surface area. An iPad of this size almost begs to be used as a convergence device, as it can bridge the iPad and MacBook worlds.

I can dream.
 
iBug2 said:
I don't understand how some people still have doubts about the convergence thing. Apple kept saying over and over that they are not planning such a convergence, yet whenever they say it one more time, people say "thank god".
Click to expand...

The good and old "not gonna happen" like they did with USB 3 or the upcoming big-screen iPhone.
 
rowspaxe said:
This is the same hubris that produced the power pc. Apple will have touch laptops within 3 years
Click to expand...

:D They already have touch laptops. The just put the "touch" part down with the keyboard where it makes more sense ergonomically.
 
What do you all think convergence means. I think Apple is well on it's way to converging operating systems!

Apple has moved to Apps on Mavericks, dumbed down iWork so it'll work seamlessly on both and moved iWork to iCloud,

That's convergence - with more to come!
 
THANK YOUU!!!!

Finally this will end the completely nonsense topic " will the next air will become a mix of iOS and OSX" who in his right mind wants that?!
 
RedOrchestra said:
What do you all think convergence means. I think Apple is well on it's way to converging operating systems!

Apple has moved to Apps on Mavericks, dumbed down iWork so it'll work seamlessly on both and moved iWork to iCloud,

That's convergence - with more to come!
Click to expand...

Who says it's going to stay "dumbed down"?
 
brdeveloper said:
Convergence is the way to go. Of course it's not interesting for companies narrowing a product line into a single one, but for consumers of course it's a good thing.
Click to expand...

Why do people seem scared of owning multiple devices?

As it stands now, you don't need a MacBook Air and an iPad. If you need a MacBook Air, just get a MacBook Air. All the iOS stuff you might want to do can be done on your phone.

----------
BaldiMac said:
:D They already have touch laptops. The just put the "touch" part down with the keyboard where it makes more sense ergonomically.
Click to expand...

THIS :apple:
 
Apple made the Newton OS and Mac OS (Classic) at the same time for many years, and integrated them both to some extent. That seems to be much in the same as what Apple is doing today with iOS and Mac OS X, but integrating them a bit more extensively.

Still....Apple had no problem doing two platforms at once....heck they were doing AIX as well at the time too!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back