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.
What is ix.Mac.MarketingName?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They probably made a change to the app store to add items to the "list of supported devices" and the developer left his test string in there. The Mac app store and iTunes app store probably share that bit of code, hence the mention of "mac". Its most probably meaningless.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Could it be a placeholder for an apple branded television that we heard about recently? I think it would be a given that said TV would have app capabilities.
Could it be a placeholder for an apple branded television that we heard about recently? I think it would be a given that said TV would have app capabilities.
Let's look at this from the developer's point of view. If it's not an accidental glitch it must be a placeholder for something not yet released. We [developers] use such placeholders/variables in templates all the time and don't put dots at random places. Usually when we put a dot after something it means that we are talking about particular trait or side of the object. E.g: person.age means 'age*of the person'.
In this case ix.mac.marketing is likely to imply:
- there is something with codename ix;
- ix.mac can be interpreted as 'ix for mac';
- thus there should be ix for something else (e.g. iOS)
- ix.mac.marketingname means 'marketing name of ix for mac';
- ix is not a completely new product, in such case variable must have been named just ix.MarketingName;
If put into the sentence 'application compatible with ix.mac.markertingname':
- application runs on (or over) ix.mac.marketingname;
- ix might be an application compatibility layer;
- application might be incompatible with it (thus should be rewritten/recompiled for id);
If we add the fact that there already applications which are compatible with ix.mac.marketingname:
- there shouldn't be any code rewrites to support;
- a. thus target screen size should have same resolution;
- a. current ios 4.3 frameworks are supported;
- 2. probably those apps were compiled with XCode 4;
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
possibly Apple TV?
possibly Apple TV?
Apple has crippled the ix.MMN® again
Why would you want one? Apple is once again using outdated tech for ix.MMN®. The specs on everything else are so much better. And I'm so tired of the ix.MMN Closed Garden.
Guys, which one should I get?
I've been trying to score an iPad2 and now here comes the new ix.Mac.MarketingName, which sounds awesome! So between this and iPad2, ATV2, Air, MBP, iPhone, Mac Pro, Nano and iMac, what should I get?
Mostly I would use this for web surfing and light photo editing, but it also needs to dry laundry and serve as daily transportation for my 8 mile commute. But, I'm worried the new ix.Mac.MarketingName requires Z-rated tires, which are quite expensive. I'm also curious whether, with the right apps, the ix.Mac.MarketingName can serve as a prophylactic or if it's better to have a dedicated device for that.
So, whaddya think? What other ix.Mac.MarketingName rumors have you heard?
Why would you want one? Apple is once again using outdated tech for ix.MMN®. The specs on everything else are so much better. And I'm so tired of the ix.MMN Closed Garden.
Last edited:
Yes, we don't know what conventions Apple use for placeholder names, it could be that ix.Mac is a prefix for ALL their placeholder names. The reason could be something as far fetched as 'ix' as in all i-devices, 'Mac' for everything derived from Mac OS X, could be no real reason at all.
Many manufacturers use the term 'CPU' to referr to their entire computer branch of their business, which is also confusing since a CPU really is something very specific
The fact that it's showing up on existing apps with no secret changes is a bit odd.
That would seem to rule out anything that involves an Intel processor. So Apple TV, then? Or nothing.
That would seem to rule out anything that involves an Intel processor. So Apple TV, then? Or nothing.
Why would it be Apple TV and have the word "Mac" in it?
I think in lion you will be able to emulate iOS and play all of your apps on your Mac.
OT: My problem with the Mac OS is how redundant it is. In lion you will be able to access your applications from the dock, launchpad, and finder. I just don't get why you need both a launchpad and a dock. Plus in the dock you can just place your applications folder.
I think in lion you will be able to emulate iOS and play all of your apps on your Mac.
OT: My problem with the Mac OS is how redundant it is. In lion you will be able to access your applications from the dock, launchpad, and finder. I just don't get why you need both a launchpad and a dock. Plus in the dock you can just place your applications folder.
thank you! thats what i have been thinking since this popped up last night. but no one posted it and it was bugging me, so thank you for posting it.
Software has bugs, Apple is no exception. It's most likely a key that should resolve to a value (e.g. maybe the marketing description "iPhone" really comes from a key-value pair labeled "ix.MobileDevice.MarketingName") and due to a bug it's showing the key instead of the value.
Speculating on what the product is makes sense, it's more likely than not that it refers to something. But speculation like "Why on earth would this happen?" "I don't think Apple is stupid enough to" is just headless-chickenry... bugs are bugs, don't read into them.
Something like that I'm sure, you have:
ix.Mac.MarketingName
you have the "i", as in iOS
then you have the "x", as in OS X
and then you have the Mac
and you have the possibility of "iX" as in iOS X as in iOS for Mac OS X?
WHAT exactly it is or refers to, is an open question, but with the i, the X, and the Mac in the iOS App Store, it is definitely interesting.
ix.Mac.MarketingName
you have the "i", as in iOS
then you have the "x", as in OS X
and then you have the Mac
and you have the possibility of "iX" as in iOS X as in iOS for Mac OS X?
WHAT exactly it is or refers to, is an open question, but with the i, the X, and the Mac in the iOS App Store, it is definitely interesting.
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
Well, If I was in product development at Apple*, I might look around and see what the biggest iPad competitors were producing and come to the conclusion that if I produced a 7" iBook running iBooks and a few other iOS Apps and priced it to compete reasonably well with the Kindle, then launched it shortly before Christmas then I might hook quite a lot more customers into the Apple ecosystem.
At the same time I'd hopefully attract the I-have-a-laptop-so-I-don't-want-a-tablet-but-an-eReader-would-be-nice segment of the market which, judging by the number of MR posters saying that here, is quite large.
*But I'm not. However I'll have a tenner on at Ladbrokes that that's what's coming in September.
I see that name, and I think of Dune, not HHGG. Ix is the planet where all the cool machines & gadgets are made.