Do you think iPhone OS 3.2 will be released to iPhones alongside iPads on April 3rd?

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by klamse25, Mar 31, 2010.

  1. klamse25 macrumors 6502a

    klamse25

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #1
    I'm curious to see your thoughts and opinions. :D
     
  2. angemon89 macrumors 68000

    angemon89

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    The place where Apple designs stuff
    #2
    I don't see why it would. Although the iPad and iPhone are running the same basic OS, they have vastly different features compared with the iPod touch/iPhone. So I don't think the iPad and iPhone/iPod updates will release alongside eachother.
     
  3. siurpeeman macrumors 603

    siurpeeman

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Location:
    the OC
    #3
    you mean os 4.0? i think you're getting version numbers confused with android.
     
  4. klamse25 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    klamse25

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #4
    I meant 3.2
    Edited
     
  5. klamse25 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    klamse25

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #5
    Haha yeah I was just reading how the Droid has the new option so I guess that was on my mind. But I meant 3.2.
     
  6. -aggie- macrumors P6

    -aggie-

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Location:
    Where bunnies are welcome.
    #6
    Nope, will not see anything until June/July now.
     
  7. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #7
    No. I think 3.2 was only made to get the iPad from its launch this week until June when it will get 4.0 along with the iPhone.

    I mean, MAYBE we'll get 3.2 on the iPhone just to add the book store to iPhones, but I strongly suspect they'll want a few months of making sure the book store works on iPads before they add it to iPhones.

    My guess is that iPhone 4.0, iPad 4.0, and iPhone book store will all come in June and you'll see no further iPhone updates between now and then.
     
  8. NorrisKillsKids macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #8
    I don't understand why people still think there will be a 3.2 for the iphone.
     
  9. angemon89 macrumors 68000

    angemon89

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    The place where Apple designs stuff
    #9
    I'm confused. Is the initial build on the iPad 3.x? or is it 1.0?
     
  10. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #10
    It ships with OS 3.2
     
  11. profets macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    #11
    new OS name?

    not to get off topic, but do you guys think it'll keep the name as "iPhone OS"? considering its now being used for the iPod and iPad as well as the iPhone, the naming is kind of weird.
     
  12. pdpfilms macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #12
    This is what is so confusing. If the iPad is using an operating system that is fundamentally different from the iPhone, then why follow the iPhone OS's labeling system?

    If there won't be a 3.2 for iphone, why not just call it iPad OS 1.0?
     
  13. klamse25 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    klamse25

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #13
    I was thinking the same thing. But what else could they name it?
     
  14. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #14
    Take your pick:

    A) No, they won't keep it. It makes no sense. They'll have to change it to 'Mobile OS' soon.

    B) Yes, they'll just leave it as 'iPhone OS.' They kept the name 'iTunes' even though it does movies, apps, TV shows, ringtones, podcasts, photo-syncing, and books. Clearly these name doesn't matter to Apple that much.

    It's not different. It's the same OS. It just comes with different apps. iPhone Mail and iPad Mail are different, for example. But the OS is the same. That's like saying Mac OS X on a 13" laptop is different than Mac OS X on a 24" iMac. Well, they're on differnt screens, but they're the same OS.

    And sure, the iPad OS doesn't have the phone-call parts in it, but just taking stuff out doesn't make it a different OS. The Macbook OS has trackpad software in it and the Mac Pro OS doesn't. But they're still both Snow Leopard, right?
     
  15. klamse25 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    klamse25

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #15
    I see the logic in this, and that's why I made this thread.
     
  16. profets macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    #16
    I think at one point they need to make it more generic. OSX Mobile? iOS? OSX Touch? maybe something with the word touch, since its an OS focused on touch.

    Interesting point about iTunes name!
     
  17. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #17
    At first, I agree with this. I think 'Mobile OS X' or 'Touch OS X' are the two most likely names.

    Then, I think some more and start to change my mind and disagree. (Seriously. I just literally changed my mind.) A Macbook is already 'mobile' and what happens when regular Macs start gaining more multi-touch ability? A "multitouch mobile Macbook" and it doesn't run mobile OS or touch OS?

    Hmmm...that starts to get confusing. So there goes that plan.

    So now I'm back to thinking they'll just leave it as 'iPhone OS.' I mean, it's not really wrong, exactly. It's like:

    Q: What OS does the iPad use?
    A: Oh, it uses the OS from the iPhone...you know, iPhone OS.


    I mean, that's kind of ok, I guess? The iPad runs the iPhone OS. Nothing incorect about that, really. So I suppose they could just leave it like that! It's a little odd but certainly less confusing than naming it after features that regular Macs are likely to gain eventually.
     
  18. pdpfilms macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #18
    I suppose I should clarify my point.

    Apple has two options here. The first is to release 3.2 to both iPhones/iTouches alongside the iPad this Saturday. This communicates to consumers that the OSes are essentially the same, and will continue to be updated simultaneously.

    The second is not to release 3.2 to iPhones/iTouches on Saturday. This communicates that the OSes are fundamentally different, to the point where they will be receiving separate updates. If this is the case, why is the iPad OS labelled based on past iPhone OS versions? Why wouldn't it start at 1.0?
     
  19. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #19
    I guess I consider "fundamentally different" to mean more than just "being 0.1 numbers off."

    I would call Windows and Mac OS X fundamentally different.
    But I wouldn't consider Quicktime 7.6.3 to be fundamentally different from Quicktime 7.6.1.

    My point is, I think you're overthinking it. I don't think that having the iPhone on 3.1 and the iPad on 3.2 will "communicate" anything, really. It's not a secret messge, it's just a fact of life that not evetything gets updated at the same time.

    Because that WOULD make people think they are very different when they're actually not all that different at all. It seems like a huge overreaction. It would make people think they can't run iPhone apps on the iPad, for starters. That's certainly not a 'plus' for the marketing department.
     
  20. goobot macrumors 603

    goobot

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Location:
    long island NY

Share This Page