Would the inclusion of an iOS Interface to OS X be enough to warrant 10.7

[Polish97]

I was thinking the easiest way to start the migration from keyboard and mouse interfaces to the touch screen interface is to make it optional.

By using a Dashboard type integration to OS X, where you can switch from touch-based interaction to keyboard mouse interaction, at the touch of a button. This will allow users to pick how they interact with the iMac. Keyboard for typing, touch for surfing the web.

This would help the development of touch based interface for productivity applications as well as keep keyboard and mouse for large text input situations.

What do you think?

 

[flopticalcube]

No Mac could take advantage of the touch interface.

 

[Polish97]

Just waiting for an iMac refresh that includes a touch screen.

 

[LouieSamman]

I believe we wont see a touch input OS until OS X 11.

By that time iMacs, Macbook Pros would have touch input on the monitor along with the new OS X 11 whenever that comes out.

But I could be wrong and the OS X 10.7 could have the capabilities of touch input, but of course there won't be any way to use our monitors to use the OS as a touchscreen so we have to wait for updated macs.

 

[Polish97]

I agree, OS X 11 would be a next step place, but the integration of touch with the new magic trackpad and ultra flat keyboards are huge hints at a new form of mac coming ala the iPad.

Just like iOS 4.0 is incompatible with the original iphone, the next version would be incompatible with older iMacs.

 

[yg17]

Don't know, but it would be enough to warrant me never going near a Mac again. Apple will lose me, and many others I imagine, if their computers become glorified iPhones and iPads.

 

[Polish97]

So the addition of another feature would scare you away from the product?

The ability to make the iMac into a giant ipod exists already with front row why would touching the screen be so frightening.

Imagine the people too scared to use traditional computer able to use the iMac touch interface to interact with an environment usually not accessible to them, similar to the iPad.

 

[jav6454]

No Mac could take advantage of the touch interface.

No current Mac. But still, iPhone OS running on Mac OS, sounds more of a disaster than good. Why? The iPhone OS is based on the ARM architecture; trying to rewrite it so it'll run half as decent would require lots of work and maybe a Rosetta like approach.

 

[Heilage]

I don't want an iOS interface in OS X, really. Some GUI improvements to OS X, yes (I like the scrollbar in iOS, no need to have it there if you aren't scrolling) but not the whole thing.

Also, don't put touch on the desktop. It's god-awful. Should be avoided at all costs.

 

[Ivan P]

I believe we wont see a touch input OS until OS X 11.

I think you mean just OS 11 as opposed to OS X 11, as that literally means OS 10 11, and makes no sense

 

[roadbloc]

Also, don't put touch on the desktop. It's god-awful. Should be avoided at all costs.

This. And if OS X Lion is like iOS, I'm sticking to Snow Leopard thanks.

 

[maflynn]

No Mac could take advantage of the touch interface.

Not yet, but if they released one that had a touch screen...

This. And if OS X Lion is like iOS, I'm sticking to Snow Leopard thanks.

Agreed and other then adding some iOS type funtionality, I don't see what else apple could/would do to update the OS

 

[KnightWRX]

No current Mac. But still, iPhone OS running on Mac OS, sounds more of a disaster than good. Why? The iPhone OS is based on the ARM architecture; trying to rewrite it so it'll run half as decent would require lots of work and maybe a Rosetta like approach.

iOS is Mac OS X. The kernel can run on multiple processor architecture. Linux doesn't have any problems running on ARM, ia-32, ia-64, x86-64, etc.. Same as Darwin doesn't have problems running on ia-32, x86-64, ARM, and PPC back in the days.

UI Kit/Cocoa Touch are just higher level frameworks and the display server is userspace code. None of it requires particular knowledge of the underlying CPU architecture if properly coded.

Welcome to 2010 Operating systems design, where component re-use is the name of the game. BTW, OS X and iOS are already the same Operating System. Just like Android uses Linux with a custom userspace display server and some custom programming frameworks, iOS is just a Darwin kernel and a custom display server.

People asking for "iOS integration into Mac OS X" don't actually understand that both are already very much integrated. They want the GUI. The bad news for them is that the GUI concepts of iOS won't work on a desktop.

(I like the scrollbar in iOS, no need to have it there if you aren't scrolling)

Really ? I don't and I do need scrollbars visible even when not scrolling. The scrollbars serve a dual function. They obviously can be used to scroll the document, either using the clickable arrow buttons or by "grabbing and dragging". But with scroll wheels, who uses them that way anyhow ?

However, something scroll wheels on mice can't do is visually inform you of how much page there is still left to scroll. Scrollbars are a visual queue to how much more there is to the page you are reading or the document you are reading. Would you know to scroll horizontally if there was no horizontal scroll bar ? Would you try it every time ? Don't you like quickly seeing if there's a lot or just a little more info on a page without having to scroll it entirely first ?

I sure do and many others do. And you won't realise it until your scrollbars go away. It's actually a beef I have against iOS, forcing to scroll through all the time.

Agreed and other then adding some iOS type funtionality, I don't see what else apple could/would do to update the OS

Uh ? There's plenty to do. Just on the storage front, Apple is so late. Partition based storage definitions are a concept of the 80s that died somewhere in the 90s to everyone but the consumer. It needs to die now. Volume management is both superior and easier to deal with. That is one example of something that could be done in OS X 10.7.

 

[*LTD*]

True

iOS is Mac OS X. The kernel can run on multiple processor architecture. Linux doesn't have any problems running on ARM, ia-32, ia-64, x86-64, etc.. Same as Darwin doesn't have problems running on ia-32, x86-64, ARM, and PPC back in the days.

UI Kit/Cocoa Touch are just higher level frameworks and the display server is userspace code. None of it requires particular knowledge of the underlying CPU architecture if properly coded.

Welcome to 2010 Operating systems design, where component re-use is the name of the game. BTW, OS X and iOS are already the same Operating System. Just like Android uses Linux with a custom userspace display server and some custom programming frameworks, iOS is just a Darwin kernel and a custom display server.

People asking for "iOS integration into Mac OS X" don't actually understand that both are already very much integrated. They want the GUI. The bad news for them is that the GUI concepts of iOS won't work on a desktop.



Really ? I don't and I do need scrollbars visible even when not scrolling. The scrollbars serve a dual function. They obviously can be used to scroll the document, either using the clickable arrow buttons or by "grabbing and dragging". But with scroll wheels, who uses them that way anyhow ?

However, something scroll wheels on mice can't do is visually inform you of how much page there is still left to scroll. Scrollbars are a visual queue to how much more there is to the page you are reading or the document you are reading. Would you know to scroll horizontally if there was no horizontal scroll bar ? Would you try it every time ? Don't you like quickly seeing if there's a lot or just a little more info on a page without having to scroll it entirely first ?

I sure do and many others do. And you won't realise it until your scrollbars go away. It's actually a beef I have against iOS, forcing to scroll through all the time.

I'm in full agreement with nearly everything you've said here. Hell has frozen over and I'm going tobogganing!

 

[jaw04005]

Some of the iOS look will come in 10.7 because Apple wants everything unified (just look at what they're doing with iTunes 10 matching the iPad's iPod.app).

My predictions:

- Mail, address book and calendar will probably look more like iOS.

- They'll do something big in terms of media sharing (expect AirPlay from your Mac and a "Home Sharing" service like Bonjour printer sharing instead of having to launch iTunes to stream content to your Apple TV).

- They'll do some type of new hibernation mode to increase sleep wakeup (based on the rumors about Jobs calling in the MacBook team and complaining about not being able to just press a button and resume computing like the iPad).

- The interface will get darker.

- Front Row will see a major update in line with Apple TV software 4.0.

- Expose will get another overhaul. (I don't think they're happy with the current implementation.)

- Something will happen with Dashboard. They didn't build Dashcode for just OS X. (I would love to see them bring Dashboard to iOS and make the widgets between the two compatible.)

- Time Machine will get a major upgrade.

 

[Heilage]

However, something scroll wheels on mice can't do is visually inform you of how much page there is still left to scroll. Scrollbars are a visual queue to how much more there is to the page you are reading or the document you are reading. Would you know to scroll horizontally if there was no horizontal scroll bar ? Would you try it every time ? Don't you like quickly seeing if there's a lot or just a little more info on a page without having to scroll it entirely first ?

I sure do and many others do. And you won't realise it until your scrollbars go away. It's actually a beef I have against iOS, forcing to scroll through all the time.

That is a very fair point. But there must be some better way than to having a GUI element taking up space.

 

[flopticalcube]

Just waiting for an iMac refresh that includes a touch screen.

No current Mac. But still, iPhone OS running on Mac OS, sounds more of a disaster than good. Why? The iPhone OS is based on the ARM architecture; trying to rewrite it so it'll run half as decent would require lots of work and maybe a Rosetta like approach.

Not yet, but if they released one that had a touch screen...



Agreed and other then adding some iOS type funtionality, I don't see what else apple could/would do to update the OS

Given that we will be seeing a sneak preview of 10.7 on Tuesday and devs have to start working on it fairly soon to see a retail rollout next year, I doubt we will see any touch screen Mac being introduced within a reasonable enough timeframe especially given that they were just revamped a couple of months ago.

 

[gnasher729]

No current Mac. But still, iPhone OS running on Mac OS, sounds more of a disaster than good. Why? The iPhone OS is based on the ARM architecture; trying to rewrite it so it'll run half as decent would require lots of work and maybe a Rosetta like approach.

Not at all. Last time numbers were published, 85 percent of the iPhone code were running on MacOS X identically. Just compiled for ARM instead of Intel processor. That percentage is only growing. And iOS applications _do_ already run on MacOS X, as every iPhone and iPad developer knows, using a library that contains all the iOS parts that are not present in MacOS X. Just the Touch functionality doesn't quite work without a touch screen

 

[maflynn]

Uh ? There's plenty to do. Just on the storage front, Apple is so late. Partition based storage definitions are a concept of the 80s that died somewhere in the 90s to everyone but the consumer. It needs to die now. Volume management is both superior and easier to deal with. That is one example of something that could be done in OS X 10.7.

Ok, let me rephrase it. What options can apple provide to the consumer to warrant 10.7 a must have upgrade. We've had enough updates that are "under the hood" type of changes with little to offer the consumer. 10.6 was this and it will be a hard sell to the consumer, say gee you don't need to worry about partitions anymore, we're managing volumes.

While I don't knock that, nor the need for a new file system, apple needs to provide an incentive to the common user to upgrade and not geeks like us

 

[KnightWRX]

Ok, let me rephrase it. What options can apple provide to the consumer to warrant 10.7 a must have upgrade. We've had enough updates that are "under the hood" type of changes with little to offer the consumer. 10.6 was this and it will be a hard sell to the consumer, say gee you don't need to worry about partitions anymore, we're managing volumes.

Uh ? That's not under the hood at all, that's a pretty big advantage to consumers that are Mac Pro buyers. It's a very visible change. Instead of having 3 HD icons on the desktop or in the Finder or whereever, each time they add an HD to the system, they can elect to grow the existing root volume. A proper volume manager could also be used to do mirroring or even parity based redundancies. It would also help in OS X server for things like the Mini or Xserves, actually make them usable out of the box and at least bring them in-line with Linux for storage management.

That's not all a proper modern volume manager brings either. Laptop/iMac buyers could get snapshot support for a sort of local based Time Machine for quick tests/restores or on the go safeguard of documents. Imagine being able to do your Time machine backup "on-the-go". The system uses spare disk space to create a snapshot and then when you get home and wired (or wiredless har har), moves that snapshot over to the network.

Not everything provided to the consumer needs to be a GUI enhancement. For my part, I prefer my OS updates to not just be Vista with a new GUI and a big price tag slapped under the 7.

"Under the hood" changes refer to API/framework changes (that outside devs need to use before any benefits become somewhat apparent), or kernel tuning/optimization (better process scheduler, the famous 64 bit support, performance tuning). New kernel features are not necessarily under the hood if they provide users with better functionality, like a volume manager would do.

Again, 1 example. Power management has also been named as a potential candidate for a revamp, bringing even quicker sleep/wake functionality to laptops and maybe even desktops (think power savings) and then there is the eventual GUI retooling that happens every few years for every OS/desktop manager out there.

There is a lot that can be done with OS X. iOS emulator tacked on ? Barely on a glimpse on the to-do list if you ask me. Why use crippled iPhone apps on a full desktop when Macs have tons more software available, that is quite more powerful than anything in the App Store and provides all the same feature. What App exactly do you want to run on your Mac that right now doesn't ?