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.
Cisco Licenses 'iOS' Name to Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Are you implying there aren't people out there that would be qualified to hire/train to do these things? The last time I looked we are in a major recession and especially after the whole Y2K thing years ago, Computer Science jobs aren't as plentiful as they once were. My point is money buys qualified people to do work. I'm sure Mr. Jobs would love certain people to work on both areas, but it seems impractical especially when it causes major delays to things like 10.5 Leopard, which was purely due to having certain people working on iPhone and its OS and not on the primary Mac OSX. Otherwise, it seems you are implying that only a select few people in the entire world are qualified to work on operating systems and they are busy with iOS. I simply would have to disagree with such an implication.
And once again my point is hire more people so those same people don't have to be shuffled around between projects. Apple clearly has the funds to have dedicated teams working on both projects at the same time. It seems obvious to me that certain areas aren't just behind, they're practically rusting away into oblivion. A year is a long time for computer hardware and what should be Apple's flagship product, the Mac Pro is no longer very pro and obscenely overpriced for what you get. Their notebooks come standard with more RAM for goodness sake. And that wouldn't take any effort what-so-ever to update something basic like hard drive space and RAM included for a given price range or to reduce the price given the outdated state of the hardware, let alone improve things or get a decent quality GPU out there. I won't even go into things like Apple TV that are SO outdated they're utterly laughable.
If the reason these most basic of things aren't getting done is that their "teams" are busy with iOS and related products then once again I reiterate that it is indeed a problem of too few employees and should be rectified (that is where excess cash comes in and Apple could hire a literal army of programmers with the kind of cash they have and so I see no legitimate excuse why things like the Mac Pro should languish with out-of-date technology for over a year, especially given that Apple has no other real desktop offerings what-so-ever (the iMac is a notebook with a big monitor attached to it and not much more and cannot rightly be called a real desktop by anyone that knows what a desktop SHOULD offer). I've been looking at buying a new desktop computer to replace this aging PowerMac, but the Mac Pro is a total rip-off for what you get for $2500+ and the GPU is practically ancient for a flagship level product. That leaves me with either waiting or building a Hackintosh as my only choices. An iPad or iPhone CANNOT and WILL NOT replace a desktop when you have more to do than just check your email or play a song or movie. It just seems like Jobs has given up on that market completely just as others (e.g. Steam engine) are finally starting to support it. That may not be completely true, but waiting another year to see an update while they push more cell phones out as their top priority just seems like a slap in the face to Mac users, many of whom couldn't care less about yet another cell phone.
There shouldn't be a conflict at all because a cell phone and a giant iPod Touch have little in common with a full blown desktop Mac. Maybe I'm just a geek, but a real computer to me has 4+ cores these days, a powerful GPU and a 22-32" monitor attached to it with an ergonomic workstation to set it on, not giving myself carpal thumb syndrome trying to type on a tiny 3.5" screen, wishing I had a full sized notebook to work with. None of Apple's (consumer) offerings even have a quad-core CPU in it yet (save the Mac Pro which I don't call a consumer option given its insanely high price and terrible ram/hard drive options for that kind of money so Apple has no room IMO to rest on its laurels. I can easily go buy a quad-core desktop or laptop from Apple's so-called "competitors" but short of hacking, I cannot run them with OSX. But then Apple is making record profits, so it's OK. Who cares what real computer users want when they have masses of cell phone kids buying iPhones like they're going out of style....
If you were hired as a developer or engineer at Apple tomorrow, which team would you want to work for?
Given my preference for real computers, not glorified cell phone type toys, I would want to work on OSX and/or future desktop hardware, the latter of which is sorely lacking good choices, IMO.
This one bit I've quoted shows just how little you understand of systems design, and why iOS was so capable right out of the gate.
You're right. The iDevice continuum shares virtually nothing with the desktop Mac continuum.
Except for virtually everything below the layout of the interface layer.
Seriously, that's about the only aspect of iOS that isn't shared with Mac OS X. They're not being pulled *off* OS X to work on iOS, they're being told that the current priority is iDevice-focused work. It's the same code-base, and that's something you should be thankful for. Virtually every code change made to ensure performance is acceptable on an iPhone or iPad will make the corresponding subsystem run like greased lightning on something with as much beef as a MacBook Air or Mac Pro.
You're right. The iDevice continuum shares virtually nothing with the desktop Mac continuum.
Except for virtually everything below the layout of the interface layer.
Seriously, that's about the only aspect of iOS that isn't shared with Mac OS X. They're not being pulled *off* OS X to work on iOS, they're being told that the current priority is iDevice-focused work. It's the same code-base, and that's something you should be thankful for. Virtually every code change made to ensure performance is acceptable on an iPhone or iPad will make the corresponding subsystem run like greased lightning on something with as much beef as a MacBook Air or Mac Pro.
I am right. It does not have a THING to do with desktop or notebook HARDWARE. NOTHING. The FACT is that Mac Pro hardware is completely out of date. Not one iMac even has a quad-core available for it yet and you're telling me that it is the right move for Apple to delay their Mac products and push forward with cell phones and tablets that require another computer to even operate.
Please. There are things from OSX in iOS, but I see absolutely NOTHING coming FROM iOS in OSX. Name even ONE thing or spare me the lecture. Apple COULD have an iOS front-end for OSX (like Front Row is similar to Apple TV's 1st generation interface), but they do not and will not because it might cannibalize sales. That seems to be their excuse for not offering a lot of things in their products come to think of it. Basically, their profits win and the consumer loses in choices and options.
I wonder how many times I have to say that this would not be an issue if they would just hire more people so that they don't have to put a "priority" on one or the other. But that just doesn't sink in. Some people would rather argue for months on end than admit the other person has a good point.
Yeah, thankful that they'll get done with iOS sooner rather than later. There is NO benefit to OSX for desktops and notebooks, however in sharing code because there is nothing in these cell phones and pads that are of use in the primary Mac operating system. But feel free to prove me wrong and point a long list of things that came from iOS *to* OSX and not the other way around. I cannot think of a single thing, personally.
Prove it. I've seen zero evidence of any such thing (thinking it sounds good doesn't count).
Was wondering how this would play out
And there's more:
Given that FaceTime has now also been announced as an Apple backed open protocol to extent the SIP protocol to video chat. I wonder if Cisco have had an involvement with Facetime. It may have been part of the agreement on the use of the 'iOS' trademark.
After all Cisco (and their other brands) are a big player in Business phone systems add Apples ability to drive an idea into the popular culture. That would make a formidable force in getting Video chat standardised. Plus a chance for Cisco to sell all new phone handsets and drive demand for in office bandwidth.
That’s exactly what Jobs thinks. Apple hires a certain type of person that meets their internal requirements as an employee. It appears to work for them considering they generate about 1.5 million dollars per employee. Their number of employees is very lean compared to other companies their size and they like it that way.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/particle_debris_week_ending_11_13_the_expensive_employee/
Easy, QuickTime X’s trimming capabilities. There, that’s one thing. They look and work exactly the same way.
But there are tons of others especially the Core Services APIs. 10.6’s Core Location API came directly from iOS. 10.6’s h.264 hardware acceleration support came from iOS. 10.6’s Microsoft Exchange support came from iOS. UI elements like the Stack’s back button came from iOS.
It doesn’t matter how many resources you have (employees, cash, etc). Resources are always going to be scarce, and priorities will always exist. That’s how businesses are run.
I guess we'll just have to disagree then. We have historic unemployment numbers and MANY of those are in computer science. Telling me that none are "good enough" for Apple is completely absurd, IMO, particularly when from the employees standpoint, Steve will fire them for looking at him funny (or rather some mysteriously jump out windows?). OSX isn't rocket science. It's Computer Science and there is a plethora of unemployed qualified people out there and Apple has the cash to hire more employees. It really is just that simple.
BTW, telling me that I should be grateful for iOS contributions back into OSX on one hand while listing "Quicktime trimming" as your first and biggest example isn't exactly convincing me that the primary computer division is benefiting much from iOS while clearly iOS benefited its entire existence from OSX.
I am right. It does not have a THING to do with desktop or notebook HARDWARE. NOTHING. The FACT is that Mac Pro hardware is completely out of date. Not one iMac even has a quad-core available for it yet and you're telling me that it is the right move for Apple to delay their Mac products and push forward with cell phones and tablets that require another computer to even operate.
I have had a quad core i7 in my 27" iMac since November.
I have been waiting for a quad core in a MBP. Then they released the dual core i7, so I am still kind of holding off.