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.
Scott Forstall's Personality, Origins of iOS, and Lost iPhone 4 Prototype
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He was talking about things in generall. OS X is a great foundation for anything in the areas Apple is interested in and going with OS X in iPhone was a no brainer move. Obviously whatever the was it would require a lot of effort and work anyway, but having same core foundation accross all devices is smart move and obvious move and if you look into the not so distant future that line between desktops and mobile devices is geting thinner and thinner and at some point will be gone.
I stated that in my original post, but essentially they would have had to distribute more source if they went with Linux.
First and foremost any kernel changes would have had to have been distributed, end of story. Secondly you have to be very very careful what you link against and how you link against it when using the GPL. Most, but not all library code is LGPL, which permits some leeway, but even there there is some debate on static vs. dynamic linking etc. It's also unclear as to where Apple would stand with using DRM and GPL software, as it was pretty clear by the time this debate would have occurred that Linux would be GPL v3, which could potentially have meant that Apple would have to release how to get around the DRM.
Not to mention that by using GPL software Apple would have put themselves at much greater risk of being forced by a court to divulge at least some of their code to 3rd parties as people could have sued Apple for potentially violating the GPL and would have demanded access to the source to prove that they had not.
Android phone masers don't often release a lot of the code they write, but that doesn't mean the they aren't in violation of the GPL at some level, they just aren't a big enough target to make suing them worthwhile in a lot of cases. However, Apple's objective was to become the biggest target, so you can sure as hell bet that they would have been taken to court over something.
Yes, it was a smart decision to use OS X in iPhone. I'm not disputing that. What I am saying is that Moving Mac OS X from PPC to x86 is totally different undertaking that moving OS X from computers to smartphones. Just because you can to the former, does not mean that the latter is a sure thing.
And there will ALWAYS be a difference between computers and things like phones. Yes, current iPhone is as fast as a computers we had few years ago. That's just technology marching forward. And the computers we have today are A LOT faster than the computers we had few years ago.
When you can design a computer with very little consideration for things like power-consumption, heat, physical space and the like, you will end up with a device that is a lot faster than a device that is designed with those things in mind. Don't believe me? Well, just compare Mac pro and iPhone or iPad. iPad has 1Ghz dual-core CPU (although we can't stare at the Mhz really), Mac Pro can have 12 cores running at close to 3Ghz. iPad and iPhone have 512MB of RAM, Mac Pro can have 64GB (128 times more). You can have 64GB of storage in iPad or iPhone, Mac Pro can have 4TB (or more, if you go third part) of storage, that's 64 times more, and that does not include external storage. You get the idea...
Yes, some day the iPhone will be as fast as the Mac Pro we have today. That's just normal thing to happen. And at that time the mac Pro (or equivalent) would be about as fast as a modern supercomputer. At no time will we have smartphones that are as fast as their contemporary computers are. We will have smartphones that are as fast as old computers are (and we have that today), but they will never be as fast as contemporary computers are.
Of course, one thing that could change all that would be if we offloaded computing to the cloud, and computers and smartphones will simply become screens to the cloud. But I don't think that locao computing power can ever be completely replaced by the cloud.
Of course and I never said it was, I said that the inclusion of fat binaries is one indication of a concern of hardware independence, and it's not restricted to PPC and x86 for that matter.
I feel in a few years, Scott's either going to split away and form his own company, or he'll be primed and take on the CEO post.
I'm not surprise that this forstall fella has a lot of ambition, desire for perfection etc
Apple did not get this big because of jobs alone, apple become this big because jobs managed to gather a team of talented individuals who together have made this company great and massive, Jobs left apple fully knowing the people he employed can carry on doing the fantastic job they have been doing for years.
well done steve!
----------
oh and he looks like he is going murder you in that picture
Apple did not get this big because of jobs alone, apple become this big because jobs managed to gather a team of talented individuals who together have made this company great and massive, Jobs left apple fully knowing the people he employed can carry on doing the fantastic job they have been doing for years.
well done steve!
----------
oh and he looks like he is going murder you in that picture
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)
That's business boys and girls. So, if you have any plans of going into the rough and tumble world of tech you better be prepared for war. It ain't easy.
And as much as people looked up to Jobs I heard he was a nasty indevedual. And I heard Apple is a brutal company to work for.
That's business boys and girls. So, if you have any plans of going into the rough and tumble world of tech you better be prepared for war. It ain't easy.
And as much as people looked up to Jobs I heard he was a nasty indevedual. And I heard Apple is a brutal company to work for.
Forstall seems to me to be caniving. He has this Ora that says be nice and sweet in public, but remember its all business behind closed doors. I have a feeling he's just as much a jerk as Steve was......BUT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT!!
I like Forstall. His energy on stage with that what seems to be fake smile to me is so Steve Jobs. You can tell he loves it at Apple and really wants them to be successful.
If you haven't noticed, he wears his own version of Steve's uniform with his consistent black shirts and dark colored jeans. He personality is senical and sarcastic like Steve's. Remember when he said "NO" in the text message at WWDC? But again, I see Forstall as the personality that replaces Steve
Try Consulting if you want to see plenty of blood and broken bones figurative. Competition can be brutal but dam it its one hell of a ride and not for the weak of nerve or ego. Its not for everyone that is for sure.
Now combine healthcare and tech and your for a ride in crazy ville.
I agree to an extent - you have to remember Ivy wanting to leave Apple for London? All happened under Steve. While Steve is gone now it's up to the team to carry on the legacy and I think this may be a drive for them in the future.
This is not to say no conflicts will arise but Steve's death might have as well a unifying effect on them.
And that 'douche' is famous, has millions of dollars in his name, and is set for life. Now, please go back to your cubical and finish that exciting Excel sheet you have been working on.
I don't remember Jony Ives wanting to leave Apple for London. I remember _rumors_ of Jony Ives wanting to leave Cupertino for Somerset. Somerset is most definitely not London, and personally I'd much rather live in Somerset. And rumors are not always the truth. In this case, there was no confirmation whatsoever that Ives had ever told anyone that he wanted to leave Cupertino.
Licenses can change. Like the license for the gcc compiler has changed, which is the reason why XCode doesn't ship with any of the latest releases of gcc, and one of the reasons why Apple has invested heavily in the Clang compiler. For a compiler that was merely inconvenient; for the basis of your operating system it could be fatal. (On the other hand, Torvalds seems quite a reasonable bloke whose interest is to make Linux as good as he possibly can, unlike the more fundamentalist approach of say Stallman who preferred to dance on Steve Jobs' grave).
Last edited:
That fits with the other insider histories written by the NYT, WSJ, Wired et al.
In Fall 2005 Apple was still using clickwheel iPods as UI test mules, and Fadell was apparently arguing for using iPods as the base for a phone. (To be fair, every fan prediction rendering of what an iPhone would look like, pretty much did the same.)
So when Apple approached Verizon in mid-2005, they probably didn't have a prototype of any kind to show, and iOS was still six months away from being started. No wonder that Verizon politely declined at the time.
Even AT&T (Cingular) didn't sign up for the iPhone until mid 2006, a year later and deep into its actual engineering phase.
Many people think it should've been obvious to trust Apple, but hindsight is always 20-20. At the time, the only Apple related iPod+phone was the disastrous ROKR.
Last edited:
It was *very* advanced for it's day but it hasn't changed much since then and the world has moved on.
Xcode4 is a great improvement but doesn't compare to Visual Studio.