Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Mac News > Opinion: Should Apple release a desktop computer that runs iOS?

Opinion: Should Apple release a desktop computer that runs iOS?
Thread Tools
NewsPoster
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 09:57 AM
 
One of the interesting things about the trajectory of iOS development over the past couple of years is how Apple has continued to extend its capabilities, bringing it continually closer in functionality to OS X. Although not quite there yet, it seems quite plausible that the next iteration of iOS could make a device like the iPad Pro a true notebook killer. Given that for a great many people, the iPad Pro is more than powerful enough to meet their personal computing needs, should Apple take this one step further, and drop an ARM-based, iOS desktop on the market?


Before you scream blue murder, consider the fact that Google has already head some success with Chrome OS -- a thin client, cloud-first, operating system. This was developed first for notebooks, but has subsequently expanded to include Mac mini-like desktop boxes. Apple's iOS is far more capable than Chrome OS, and it works perfectly well both online and offline -- this is something that Google's Chrome-based devices still struggle somewhat with. Not only that, there a ton of amazing apps built for iOS that make working and playing on ARM-based/iOS-based iDevices an absolute joy.

The recently released (and massive Kickstarter success) Remix Mini, an ARM-based/Android-based "mini" PC is a very good proof of concept. I've been playing around with this device recently, and have found its forked Android-based Remix OS to be a surprisingly capable second computer for my kids to use, with its quasi-desktop paradigm. Although underpowered (what do you expect for a device that costs just $70?), my kids are able to use it to play their favorite games like Minecraft, while also getting their school work done on it using Microsoft Office for Android. Really, what more do they need? An iOS version of the Remix PC would be not only far more powerful, it would offer so much more, thanks to the mix of Apple's own free apps including GarageBand, iMovie, Photos, Page, Numbers and Keynote, among others.

Imagine, if you will, a new desktop iOS device based on the same hardware as the fourth-gen Apple TV. Imagine if it ran a slightly tweaked version of iOS that supports keyboard, mouse input, and a file browser system? How much would you want to get your hands on that little beast? Even better still, Apple could also make an iMac-like device that supported both touchscreen and Apple Pencil input.

Although Apple has previously said that it doesn't want to bring touchscreens to its OS X-based devices, I have found using the iPad Pro and Smart Keyboard, sans mouse, quite a natural, and comfortable experience. With iOS is a touch-first OS and ready made to support touchscreen input, there would be no need to try force OS X to support touch input, as Microsoft tried to do (and failed miserably) with Windows 8.

Further, unlike Microsoft, Apple does not make a particularly big chunk of money from OS X as Microsoft does with Windows. Apple's cash cow is in iOS. Apple has already forked iOS into watchOS and tvOS, with interfaces appropriate for the respective use case -- why not add a "deskOS" to the equation?

In fact, not only would Apple have nothing to lose by making such a move, it would actually have a lot to gain -- one of the great strengths of Apple's iOS-powered hardware is that Apple has complete control over both the chip design and the operating system. It would further reduce its reliance on Intel, and also give it the opportunity to boost its margins, saving itself the premium it pays for Intel's chips over its own ARM-based A-series designs. It would also stand to reap the dividends from even more app sales.

I am absolutely certain that this type of product would be an instant hit -- the advantage of this approach over just offering iOS on mobile devices would be the ability to connect to a larger display, and provide a true desktop experience. Schools would love it, as would a lot of people for whom a second computer with a full desktop OS just isn't necessary.

Of course, this would cannibalize Apple's Mac sales, but it would also help to convert thousands more users to the Apple ecosystem, while also further enriching it with a new class of apps. As Apple CEO Tim Cook recently said with regard to the potential of the iPad Pro to cannibalize MacBook sales; it is better that Apple does this to itself than a competitor.

While the arrival of a desktop product from Apple running iOS would probably give Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella nightmares, it should not be forgotten that it will also send some shivers down the spines of long-time Mac users. They are already concerned about the future of the Mac Pro at the top end, and would then have some concern for any further erosion of the Mac ecosystem from the bottom end. However, I still see plenty of space for the OS X ecosystem to survive for some time to come -- there are still a great many users who need the full power of Intel's high-end desktop and notebook chips to get through their workflow that just can't currently be replicated on an ARM-based device.

That said, an iOS-based desktop device would dispense with the complexities and often untapped capabilities of a full blown OS and desktop system, for something much more straightforward, but already familiar to tens of millions of customers who love and use iOS on the iPhone and iPad.

What do you think? Should Apple take the plunge and pump out an "iOS mini" powered by "deskOS"? If not, why not?

-- Sanjiv Sathiah
     
boomer0127
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 10:44 AM
 
No - we don't need a desktop machine running iOS. We need a keyboard that contains the guts of a mac mini and a couple of USB ports and a lightning docking slot for an iPad. When the iPad is docked, it acts as a screen for the mini/computer that is in the keyboard, so you can do the things you need a computer for, holding all your music, data, movies, pictures, etc - including time machine backups.

The key here is that Apple will have to build a way for iOS and OS X to share files, so you can easily move data you need to the iPad without clouds/airdrop/etc. Here is my problem - I have an old MacBook Pro that holds all my stuff and is backed up. I'd love to replace it with an iPad but what would i do with all of my music, photos, etc? I have a full 500GB HD. I need some way of either the iPad to access my time capsule and grab files / music/ photos etc. Maybe even an automagical connection that syncs recent data or targeted folders. Anyway, a desktop running iOS is pointless (pun intended) - you need to use your finger to use iOS. Yes it would be a simple machine but even the elderly these days are fairly computer savvy.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 11:26 AM
 
A desktop machine, by definition, would not run iOS.
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 01:14 PM
 
I think you're channeling Cook, Sanjiv. And this is exactly what long-time Apple fans fear. And, it's the same mistake Microsoft made, just kind of in reverse.

But yes, it would 'consumer-ify' Apple's computing systems fully. It would let any creatives or pro users know it's time to head over to Windows. Consumers might even like it... kind of like how they liked horses before Ford brought them cars. A major leap backwards in productivity and computing... sure, seems just about where Apple with beancounters at the helm is headed.
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 01:22 PM
 
@ boomer0127 - Or, maybe OS X running on an A-series chip for a low-end device. I was just looking at the mini the other day and thinking... gosh, compared to a Macbook Air, it's kind of pricy.... but I don't really need the screen, I kind of want a headless lower-cost unit like that. But, I'm probably very much a minority there. The iMac is the perfect machine for many.

Where I think Apple might pull off a new entry, would be a more mid-level machine that isn't an iMac, but costs less than a Pro. But, again, probably too niche, as the iMac is one heck of a value for the price (considering the screen).

@ Spheric Harlot - Exactly!
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 05:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
A desktop machine, by definition, would not run iOS.
@Spheric Harlot After reading your comment, Apple just issued a world-wide recall of the Apple TV -- although based on iOS, people have not been carrying it on their person, but instead have been placing them on their TV cabinets.
Electronista Staff
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 05:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
@Spheric Harlot After reading your comment, Apple just issued a world-wide recall of the Apple TV -- although based on iOS, people have not been carrying it on their person, but instead have been placing them on their TV cabinets.
Apple TV runs tvOS.
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 07:57 PM
 
See comment below.
( Last edited by Sanjiv Sathiah; Nov 27, 2015 at 08:08 PM. )
Electronista Staff
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 07:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Apple TV runs tvOS.
Which is 100% based on iOS.

If you read the article properly, you will see I call for an "iOS-based" desktop version of iOS modified, as Apple did with tvOS, so that it is an appropriate interface fit for purpose just as per what Jide has done with Android for the Remix mini Android-based Remix OS.
Electronista Staff
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 08:43 PM
 
@Steve Wilkinson

"And, it's the same mistake Microsoft made, just kind of in reverse."

It's interesting that you should say that - it was certainly on my mind as I was ring this piece. The difference, I think, will be in execution - Microsoft's execution of Windows 8 was just dreadful. The Remix OS that is running on the Remix mini is pretty darn well executed. Apple has been able to take iOS and convert its front end to support its new TV controller with both click, touch and motion control. It works exceptionally well. There is no reason not to think that it could not rework the front end of iOS to work on a desktop.

You say I'm channelling Tim Cook - perhaps if I am channelling anyone, it's Steve Jobs vision for personal computing. Absolute simplicity of use, but powerful all the same.
Electronista Staff
     
Deezy
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 09:03 PM
 
Pros and cons but if you judged based on the relative success of these Android desktops, I would have to say... no?????
     
davoud
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 10:38 PM
 
I don't see the need. But the fact is, I don't care what OS is on my computer so long as it is fast, reliable, malware-resistant, and runs the applications that are important to me. I don't think it is likely that the big developers that I rely on are going to port their applications to an iOS desktop, however. It could weaken the Mac OS and strengthen Windows, forcing Macheads to switch to Windows.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 10:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
Which is 100% based on iOS.

If you read the article properly, you will see I call for an "iOS-based" desktop version of iOS modified, as Apple did with tvOS, so that it is an appropriate interface fit for purpose just as per what Jide has done with Android for the Remix mini Android-based Remix OS.
And iPhone already "Runs OS X", as per quote from Steve Jobs himself.

They're all based on Darwin.

That obviously means that we'll see a 19” rackmount iPhone/XServe hybrid.

Also, I'm pretty sure that Apple TV has never run "iOS". It's always run "Apple TV Software", as per Apple.

Building an interface fit for purpose is precisely what differentiates iOS from OS X from tvOS. That's the whole point of, and primary reason for, Apple having separate OSen.
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 10:55 PM
 
You're dead wrong about Apple TV running 'Apple TV Software.' It did in the beginning, when it ran on an Intel chipset. But it is now, as I have repeatedly said, based on iOS. Do your research.

How is it otherwise that it supports iOS gaming apps? They are not running in some wrapper - they are all running natively, with some tweaks to support the new Apple TV remote and specific tvOS extended frameworks.

"That obviously means we'll see a 19" rack mount iPhone/Xserve hybrid" While you are patently being ridiculous, there are already a number of ARM-based servers out there...but the fact of the matter is Apple has left that business behind as it is chasing the mass consumer market -- which makes an iOS based desktop device ideal. OS X is overkill for many, many users, just as the iPad (and iPad Pro) is more than sufficient for most.
Electronista Staff
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 11:00 PM
 
https://developer.apple.com/library/...al/AppleTV_PG/

Quoting from Apple's developer manuals..."tvOS is derived from iOS..."
Electronista Staff
     
jpellino
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: loc
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 11:30 PM
 
Ohdeargodno.
Just sayin'
     
ThePhoenix
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2005
Location: NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2015, 11:56 PM
 
Yes and No. I believe that all desktop/laptop Macs should be able to run iOS apps as dashboard widgets. To me the dashboard is where iOS style apps began, and it is where they should be available on Macs now.

There are a lot of items that will be made into apps that I would like to access on my mac, and many of them are quick access items. For example I have both WeMo and Wink controlled home automation items like lights. I want to be able to access and enable these items from my desktop as well as my iPad and iPhone. Same goes for my Honeywell thermostat. There is no need to make a full Mac app for these, but just allow me to pop up dashboard and quickly access these apps as if they were widgets on the dashboard.

It would also be nice to access some of the games. 80% percent of iOS games are meant for just a few minutes of interaction, every once in a while and the dashboard model would work well for that as well. Similar goes for my apps to control my Apple TV (Remote), Amazon Fire Stick, Receiver, and TV. Building a web interface for many of these or a full time dedicated Mac or Windows app shouldn't be necessary.

If someone does want to run a full iOS app side by side with their main apps, something like a iOS emulator (similar to what Blue Stacks does for Android on a Mac) would be a nice option. So you start with the dashboard, and then have the option to pop-out into a window side by side with your other apps.

It is not something I need all the time, but I definitely have wanted to access iOS apps from my main Mac OS machine on multiple occasions.

This would breathe new life into dashboard as suddenly hundreds of thousands of apps would be available, and would provide useful access to the apps from the desktop without degrading the desktop experience.
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 12:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by jpellino View Post
Ohdeargodno.
Why? Because it's not for you? It's like the 12-inch MacBook debate, and the iPad Pro debate -- just because the (proposed in this case) product may not work for you doesn't mean that it can't work, or be the ideal product, for a great many people.
Electronista Staff
     
gnawbone315
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 12:31 AM
 
No No No No

How about making the iPad Pro run OS-X. The last thing I want is my 27" 5k iMac with fingerprints all over the screen - ridiculous.

I have an iPhone and an iPad and IOS is ok but OS-X is so much better - but then again I actually do more than send text messages and take selfies.

Was the purpose of this thread to get hits on this site? It wasn't serious, was it?
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 01:59 AM
 
Yes, I am absolutely serious about what I propose here - it was not meant to be a piece of click bait, but was aimed at engaging our audience and stimulating debate.

Apple won't make an iPad powered by OS X because it is not designed for touch input - look at what happened when Microsoft tried to do that with Windows 7, which became the nightmare known as Windows 8. If you want an OS X powered iPad, check out the Modbook.

Like you, I don't want finger prints on my 27-inch Retina iMac and that is not what I am proposing at all.

An ARM-based, iMac-like device that could lean back for touch screen interaction could work, because iOS is designed from the ground up to support touch input.

So would a little Apple equivalent to the Remix mini that I refer to here.

It would offer appeal as a first device for children and older users, as well as appeal for people like you and me (and many others) that already own high-powered Apple desktops running OS X, but want a second device for doing lighter productivity, and a bit of gaming and other entertainment.

Does one really need a Mac mini as a second machine, for example, to surf the net and check email? It can't even play games as well as the Apple TV!
( Last edited by Sanjiv Sathiah; Nov 28, 2015 at 03:13 AM. )
Electronista Staff
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 05:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
https://developer.apple.com/library/...al/AppleTV_PG/

Quoting from Apple's developer manuals..."tvOS is derived from iOS..."
Do you not understand the difference between "being derived" from something and "being" something? Or did you just not read my post?

When the iPhone was introduced, it was explicitly mentioned that "iPhone runs OS X". That's a direct quote from Jobs.

Yes, it was based on and derived from OS X. But EVERYTHING user-facing was different.

tvOS is based on iOS, and has been since generation 2. This has never been communicated in Apple advertising copy, nor anywhere in the interface, because it is a completely separate OS. Also, Apple TV does NOT run standard iOS apps. That's just outright WRONG. You cannot run an iPhone version of Plants vs. Zombies on Apple TV, as - now get this - there would be no way to interact with the game due to the differing interface models.

This is why tvOS exists, as a separate entity from iOS and OS X, with its own App Store and everything.

This stuff is not going to converge, because it had to DIverge in the first place to make these machines, and their user-interaction models, possible.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 06:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
. If you want an OS X powered iPad, check out the Modbook.
You've never used one. It's awkward, works okay, but is in all important respects the exact opposite of an iPad.

It's only been five years since the iPad was introduced. Have people really already forgotten that we had TEN YEARS of desktop-OS-based "tablet" computers that absolutely NOBODY wanted, and why?

It's like all these fifteen-year-olds crawling out into the public light and selling brilliant revelations as visions of the future that we already KNOW suck, because they've been tried before.

An ARM-based, iMac-like device that could lean back for touch screen interaction could work, because iOS is designed from the ground up to support touch input.
Unfortunately, iOS is designed from the ground up to support ONLY touch input. The same way OS X is built from the ground up to support ONLY mouse input.

The only overlap the two interfaces have is that they both allow for text input, as well.

I'm pretty much convinced that Apple will, in fact, offer ARM-based Macs at some point. But just dump the silly notion that they would, could, or even should be running iOS. That's just absurd, considering why iOS even exists.
     
OctavioG
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 07:55 AM
 
Unfortunately Apple doesn't listen to their customers, they like leading the way and we have to follow their trends, we have long asked for USB ports, here I have read great ideas , but none are going to be taken , a dock or a keyboard or just been plug to electricity could make or generate a more powerful device, of course that we only talk about iPad , and then the iOS device could run OSX , that is really what we need , IOS on a PC we don't need , too weak to serve us
     
gnawbone315
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 08:03 AM
 
Well, Sanjiv, whatever you want/think/need - I'd never buy a desktop run on IOS and if Apple were to go to that then I''d have to go in a different direction. I can't think of a single thing that I'd do with it as I barely tolerate IOS the way it is.

Also, what did you mean "...iMac-like device that could lean back for touch screen interaction could work" - 'lean back'? Are you saying "revert to for a specific task" - if so, doesn't that mean I'm smearing up my screen or are you talking about trackpad input or Wacom tablet? Or?


Here's how I use a Mac - some PowerPoint, some Word, a lot of Excel and then when I'm home it is Lightroom and Photoshop. I use a Wacom tablet for editing pics and when I first saw the iPad Pro my first thought was if they put OS-X on it and gave me a card slot to load pics from my camera I might be interested. Not interested in cloud storage or transfer for such things - whether it be pics or Office files - I'll control when/where they're saved and in my control - ONLY and WIFI is not 100% available (depends on where you are and on-device storage does not). Yes, I could lose the card but so could my online account be cracked (iCloud anyone?), I could lose my phone/iPad, my house could burn down, etc. I prefer to limit my exposure to an ever increasingly debased society so I'll take responsibility for my 'stuff'. There is too much technology being used simply because it can be done but the utility of it can sometimes be questionable. Windows still struggles with trying figure out how to merge it all together - maybe that is because it doesn't need to be. If the goal is to narrow everything down to one device I hope it doesn't come down to IOS (or Adroid or whatever mess Microsoft has made).

No thanks.
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 09:12 AM
 
@gnawbone315

I'm not suggesting Apple should stop making Macs running OS X - I get that for you, and many people (including myself) that would be a catastrophe.

Does that however, mean, that therefore Apple shouldn't release a version of iOS powering a mini desktop, to go along with the rest of their product line?

No one here has put forward a compelling argument as to why such a product should not exist alongside the rest of Apple's product line.

Check out the Remix mini and imagine an iOS version of this - I can -- try it, it is not that hard.

As for an iMac-like device with a touch interface that could lean back, have a look at some of the Window's all-in-ones out there -- they can stand upright for desktop work, and be tilted back for touch screen use. The problem for Microsoft with Windows 8, was that the overall UI was just horrible as they tried to layer on a touch interface on a desktop OS. What I am suggesting is the opposite of this, and it is possible that it just might work, where Win 8, and Win 10 to some extent, has failed. Why? Because they are trying to do too much. Something that is much more focused, as an iOS-based device would be by its very nature, might just be the solution.

@Spheric Harlot A few years ago, many Mac power users were running Mac minis as media servers. Now that an iOS-based Apple TV exists (are you willing to admit that you were wrong about this yet?) how many would still need to run the same OS X-powered set up? Few, because it is overkill for most, not to mention, a pain to navigate from your lounge chair.

The fact of the matter is though, Apple derives the vast majority of it profit from iOS, not OS X. I can't see the two merging, and I can't see OS X every coming across to an iPad. But after using the Remix mini, I can clearly see that there is a space, and an opportunity, for Apple to take iOS across the iOS/Mac threshold to the desktop. (It has already taken iOS across to your TV cabinet, and it has taken it to your wrist with the Apple Watch).
Electronista Staff
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 10:05 AM
 
We're talking completely past each other.

The ESSENCE of the Mac is that it is mouse-pointer driven. This did not change in over 30 years, even when the fundamental base got entirely ripped out and replaced in the OS X transition.

The ESSENCE of iOS is that it is direct-touch driven.

The ESSENCE of tvOS is that it is operated via the remote. It cannot be operated by touch or via mouse pointer.

If you make a Mac touch-operated, it is BY DEFINITION no longer a Mac, because mouse-pointer operation is what defines it, regardless of underlying software architecture.

If you put iOS on a pointer-operated machine, it is BY DEFINITION no longer iOS, because pointer-less operation is what defines it, not the underlying architecture.

Feel free to ride around on the "Apple TV runs iOS" theme as if it meant anything. It does NOT run iOS. It runs a remote-controlled operating system that is BASED ON iOS. But iOS is based on OS X, as per Steve Jobs' words themselves!
So Apple TV actually runs OS X, obviously, as does the iPad. Right?
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 10:58 AM
 
@Spheric Harlot

I've never once said "Apple TV runs iOS." I've said it is based on iOS, which it is, despite your inability to admit it, and despite Apple saying so itself.

This means that it can use iOS as the basis for a desktop OS if it wanted to. It would of, course, be called something else like "deskOS" as I proposed in the article as it would be reengineered accordingly. But it would still be based on iOS, not OS X per se (despite both being based on Darwin).

If Apple can reengineer iOS into tvOS, if it can reengineer iOS into watchOS, it can reengineer iOS to work with a point and click mouse interface.

And in doing so, it would have tens of thousands of apps ready to go almost straight out of the box. The very same types of apps that developers made for touch interaction on an iPad and iPhone that are now working with the new Apple TV remote.

Is this really that hard to fathom for you?
Electronista Staff
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 12:21 PM
 
I can see now where the sidetrack happened:

I wrote that "a desktop machine, by definition, would not run iOS." To which you responded, "After reading your comment, Apple just issued a world-wide recall of the Apple TV -- although based on iOS, people have not been carrying it on their person, but instead have been placing them on their TV cabinets."

In the context of my post, I interpreted that comment to imply that Apple TV runs iOS. In fact, it's hard to see it meaning anything else.

However, following your logic, if they used something BASED ON iOS and ported that to a desktop machine, then yes, that machine would be running some modified version of iOS.
However, CONTINUING that logic, iOS is BASED ON OS X, so in actual fact, that machine would be running on a modified OS derived from…OS X.

Which…um…it already is.

Which is why your point of argument strikes me as ridiculous: If you claim that things with the same foundation are the same, at which point the only differentiating factor between the OSen is the mode of interface (which is the reality, and why these systems have different names). But that inevitably means that if you change the mode of interface, you're actually turning it into a different OS.


So they reëngineer OS X into iOS by changing the mode of user interaction, and your proposal is to turn it back into OS X? Why on earth?
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 12:37 PM
 
Whether this new computer (that Sanjiv suggests is possible) "runs" iOS or OS X is really not the main point here. This new computer would include the iOS APIs, system graphics primitives etc. that programmers would need to slightly modify existing iOS software to work on the new machine. This is backed up by the tvOS link aimed at programmers that he includes. The same set of tools are not available in OS X which is partly why OS X software can't be easily and quickly modified to run on iOS devices, and vice versa. So, in that sense, it is possible that his computer could be functional, and possibly a hit, quite quickly.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 12:55 PM
 
But it already exists! We already have machines running OS X!
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 01:01 PM
 
Yes, but I think Sanjiv's point is that there are many people out there who have iOS devices, don't want to learn or negotiate a second OS, but do want just a few features of OS X. They will never buy an OS X machine but might very well buy Sanjiv's.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 01:43 PM
 
You cannot make iOS work on a machine with a pointing device.

If you try to do so anyway, you (best case) immediately force people to learn a completely new and completely different OS interaction model, which is exactly the same as having them use OS X, or, worst case, (more or less) randomly switch between the two, alienating all but the most dedicated and savvy users for whom the advantages of having both outweigh the usability nightmare.

What is happening is that iOS is gaining functionality that people have been missing so far, without changing its interface model.
     
edac2
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:18 PM
 
I think one area that Microsoft is ahead of Apple is in responsive apps. Just like responsive websites, the same app could adapt itself to different screen sizes. Microsoft Word on a phone would look and behave differently than on a desktop computer, but it would be the same app. So imagine if you could dock your future iPhone 8 into a desktop-sized touch-enabled monitor and iOS on the iPhone would adapt itself to the larger environment without needing to download desktop versions of all your apps (as you currently need to do for the iPad), or a different version of iOS 10. I think all that would be missing is a mouse driver and the Finder, two simple fixes.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:21 PM
 
All Apple has to do is allow the user of any iOS device to see where their finger is on an external screen when the device is connected to that screen. Then, they don't have to be looking directly at the iOS device to do everything absolutely as normal in iOS. Otherwise, Apple could change absolutely nothing else in iOS or in the iOS experience. Any user, young or old, will know exactly what to do immediately. No mouse, no pointing device of any kind. No change in any iOS software or how you interact with that software. Then Sanjiv's computer would just be a small iPad (6" maybe) but with a trackpad surface instead of the screen and sell for less (for about the same price as an iPod}. I think this could be a big hit for Apple.
     
Inkling
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:21 PM
 
The idea for a desktop iOS is ridiculous. It's a stripped down operating system designed for using numerous small, one-trick-pony apps on the go. It would perform poorly with desktop apps. However, I would be intrigued if Apple gave us a laptop using their power-efficient ARM-based chips.
Author of Untangling Tolkien and Chesterton on War and Peace
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:26 PM
 
iOS isn't really like that anymore when you can use a very powerful program like Excel in iOS and do a large proportion of the things that the full desktop version can do.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:32 PM
 
--and the only thing that needs to happen to make Excel on an iPad just about as productive as on a computer is to let the user see where their finger is pointing when connecting to an external display. Nothing else needs to be changed in the current, finger only, version. Otherwise it is an outstanding example of a powerful finger only productivity tool.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by edac2 View Post
I think all that would be missing is a mouse driver and the Finder, two simple fixes.
A mouse driver is the single biggest "fix" imaginable for iOS. It completely changes every fundamental of how the user interacts with the machine.

If this were a "simple fix", iOS wouldn't exist in the first place.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:37 PM
 
Just allowing the user to see where their finger is on an external screen, but not changing anything on the iPad itself, and also still not allowing pointing devices, in no way changes anything about how we interact with iOS and its software. And it is crazy that if that one small change in iOS would fill a person's needs perfectly (on top of what they currently do in iOS) that they have to buy a Mac for that one thing only.
( Last edited by WizOSX; Nov 28, 2015 at 02:51 PM. Reason: clarification)
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 02:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by WizOSX View Post
Just allowing the user to see where their finger is on an external screen, but not changing anything on the iPad itself, and also still not allowing pointing devices, in no way changes anything about how we interact with iOS and its software.
It changes things completely. You're either pointing at and touching a screen, manipulating content directly, or you're using your finger/hand to remotely control a small bunch of pixels called a "pointer" on a screen elsewhere, switching that pointer between "point" and "manipulate" modes — how? On a mouse/trackpad, you click. On an iPad, this differentiation does not (and cannot) exist.

While of course there is plenty of overlap where the two systems seem to work similarly (obviously, a lot of shared usage scenarios there), simply thinking about what iOS' multi-touch makes possible should give you a clue:

How would you play multiple notes on a keyboard using the scenario you just described? Do you get multiple "position" pointers for each finger? How do I know what I'm pressing before actually putting the finger down?

This is just one usage scenario, but it is enough to demonstrate why your model is fundamentally broken: This kind of thing simply isn't possible.

So what we're left with is what we *already have*: external displays (via Airplay) displaying additional content, and all control and manipulation done directly, iOS-style, on the device itself.
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 06:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
I can see now where the sidetrack happened:

I wrote that "a desktop machine, by definition, would not run iOS." To which you responded, "After reading your comment, Apple just issued a world-wide recall of the Apple TV -- although based on iOS, people have not been carrying it on their person, but instead have been placing them on their TV cabinets."

In the context of my post, I interpreted that comment to imply that Apple TV runs iOS. In fact, it's hard to see it meaning anything else.

However, following your logic, if they used something BASED ON iOS and ported that to a desktop machine, then yes, that machine would be running some modified version of iOS.
However, CONTINUING that logic, iOS is BASED ON OS X, so in actual fact, that machine would be running on a modified OS derived from…OS X.

Which…um…it already is.

Which is why your point of argument strikes me as ridiculous: If you claim that things with the same foundation are the same, at which point the only differentiating factor between the OSen is the mode of interface (which is the reality, and why these systems have different names). But that inevitably means that if you change the mode of interface, you're actually turning it into a different OS.


So they reëngineer OS X into iOS by changing the mode of user interaction, and your proposal is to turn it back into OS X? Why on earth?
Despite what Jobs said, iOS is not based on OS X - it has the same Darwin kernel, which is what he was referring to, but keeping it simple for the masses to understand. Taking iOS as the basis for a new desktop variant that has a really nice and simple desktop interface like the forked Android-based Remix mini OS has one big that OS X doesn't have (other than simplifying the whole user experience to the bare minimum required to run apps) -- it would be able to run (like the iOS-based/derived Apple TV) iOS apps (modified to suit the proposed desktop interface that I have been speaking of.

This is where your argument that a desktop is suddenly OS X -- OS X does not support iOS-based apps.

What I have repeatedly trying to get through to you, is that OS X (or Windows, or Linux etc) is a far more complex an interface than what has been developed by the Remix mini team with its Android-based desktop variant. An Apple equivalent, based on iOS, not OS X, would offer the same type of simplicity this this offered by this iPad experience, with its desktop-class iOS apps. If this is enough for most people, as has been repeatedly argued by Apple and others, why not take the same combination of simplicity and power, adding a point and click front end (while preserving the touch capability, not supported by OS X) to the desktop?

Do most people, for example, running OS X MacBooks and iMacs etc, need Terminal, for example? Recreating the simplicity of an iOS-based desktop experience, called something else like 'deskOS,' but derived from iOS and supporting iOS-based apps, but which still support touch in addition to mouse and keyboard, would not be OS X, for the reasons outlined above.
Electronista Staff
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 06:53 PM
 
I will also add, @Spheric Harlot, that if as you say, iOS is in fact based on OS X, why does Apple fail to mention that in its own notes about tvOS? Apple says it is derived from iOS. It doesn't say that tvOS is derived from iOS, which is derived from OS X - why? Because it isn't.

Yes, tvOS has become its own OS, but is at its very core, a fork of iOS.

I'm proposing here that Apple forks iOS for the desktop, just as it forces iOS to support the new remote and, indeed, the same MFi controllers - funny that - tvOS supports MFi controllers...hmmm, I wonder what that means?
( Last edited by Sanjiv Sathiah; Nov 28, 2015 at 07:08 PM. )
Electronista Staff
     
Ham Sandwich
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 07:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by gnawbone315 View Post
How about making the iPad Pro run OS-X.
I think given the debate... you're looking for a keyboard-less, super thin Mac running OS X. I would support this motion, since keyboards/trackpads are disobedient PITAs and often I want my keyboard and trackpad detached from the rest of the computer, just in case. But I still want something that is iPad portable.

We could design a Mac like that. Let's call it... MacPad Pro...?

(It's not likely to happen. Keyboard-detached Macs are for desktop users as a convenience.)

Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Apple TV runs tvOS.
Which is 100% based on iOS.
Well this was an interesting debate.

So what defines the essence of WATCH OS? (Yes I know, WATCH is designed to be worn...wait until more wearables come out.)


But back to the first post, no, I don't see who would benefit from a desktop running iOS. Most desktop monitors are "out of the way." Imagine having to reach just to finger around on the monitor every minute. Your back would cramp too much.
     
BLAZE_MkIV
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 07:54 PM
 
The problem isn't how to make a touch desktop it's what I/O to replace the keyboard/mouse but still be able to get serious work done.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2015, 09:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
Despite what Jobs said, iOS is not based on OS X - it has the same Darwin kernel, which is what he was referring to, but keeping it simple for the masses to understand. Taking iOS as the basis for a new desktop variant that has a really nice and simple desktop interface like the forked Android-based Remix mini OS has one big that OS X doesn't have (other than simplifying the whole user experience to the bare minimum required to run apps) -- it would be able to run (like the iOS-based/derived Apple TV) iOS apps (modified to suit the proposed desktop interface that I have been speaking of.

This is where your argument that a desktop is suddenly OS X -- OS X does not support iOS-based apps.
Now you're just trying to cloud the issue by willy-nilly interchanging "iOS-based" and "iOS".

That iPhone OS was derived from OS X is not a matter of conjecture, or of debate. It is simple historical fact. OS X had been around for a long time, and the multitasking, media playback, WebKit, and display engines were adapted for use on a mobile device. End of story.

OS X does not run iOS apps. Of course it can run "iOS-based" apps: all that means is that somebody wrote the app for iOS FIRST and then ported the core onto OS X and redesigned the interface.

Apple TV does not run iOS apps, either: you could try to hack, say, Paper onto an Apple TV, and it wouldn't do you squat of good, because you simply could not operate it.

Again: Arguing whether something is "based on" something else is a meaningless exercise, because at this point, all of Apple's OSen are based on the same core. It is the interface that differentiates them.

Being able to run some apps in a sensible fashion, and utterly fail at others (see my earlier keyboard example) does not make an interface, and certainly doesn't make a viable OS.

Also, Terminal is just an app. There is absolutely nothing technical stopping Apple from adding a Terminal to iOS - it would be completely trivial. The UNIX is exactly the same.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 29, 2015, 01:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
A desktop machine, by definition, would not run iOS.
Or you could think of an iPad Pro as a desktop — a computing device that will primarily be used at a desk. So if you stick to that meaning, Apple has already made an iOS-based desktop. I expect that Apple will add larger screen sizes as time goes on. But right now given the limitations of iOS and GPUs, I reckon it is fine where they are now.
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
tvOS is based on iOS, and has been since generation 2. This has never been communicated in Apple advertising copy, nor anywhere in the interface, because it is a completely separate OS. Also, Apple TV does NOT run standard iOS apps. That's just outright WRONG.
Regarding terminology, I think it's easier to think of platforms rather than operating systems: each of Apple's product categories are split amongst user interface paradigms, and the APIs that come with it. Apple uses the term OS just like you do in your posts: each platform has its own OS. The term “operating system” could legitimately be interpreted differently from they way Apple does so that in the end iOS and tvOS could be seen as two versions of the “same” OS. To me the word “platform” is more appropriate than “operating system” as it emphasizes the thing that counts, the interface paradigm and not the lower layers of the OS. And in fact, many technologies are shared across different platforms (e. g. QuickTime X and Metal), so that the different operating systems stay closely related as time goes on.
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
Despite what Jobs said, iOS is not based on OS X - it has the same Darwin kernel, which is what he was referring to, but keeping it simple for the masses to understand.
Sorry, but I don't get your argument: we know the origin story of what is now known as iOS, it started as a pared down version of OS X. If that isn't a fork, I don't know what is. Not just the kernel are shared but many of the other, higher-level layers of the OS such as the Objective C runtime, Quartz, Cocoa and WebKit came from the Mac to the iPhone OS. So yes, iOS was forked off of OS X.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Sanjiv Sathiah
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 29, 2015, 01:27 AM
 
@OreoCookie

Then let's take the iOS fork of OS X (which was later forked into tvOS and watchOS) and fork it again into a pared down desktop OS. Which is the point of this piece.

We are at a point where ARM-based hardware is crossing over into desktop power, so let's take the absolute simplicity of that experience back to the desktop. It won't be for everyone, just as Apple's iOS-powered devices aren't everything for everyone, but it will plenty for most.
Electronista Staff
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 29, 2015, 04:02 AM
 
That is exactly what Apple is doing. They are slowly giving iOS devices the power of the desktop. Hello, iPad Pro.

What they are NOT doing is giving them the INTERFACE of the desktop, because that is the complete opposite of the simplicity you ask for.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 29, 2015, 08:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Sanjiv Sathiah View Post
@OreoCookie
We are at a point where ARM-based hardware is crossing over into desktop power, so let's take the absolute simplicity of that experience back to the desktop. It won't be for everyone, just as Apple's iOS-powered devices aren't everything for everyone, but it will plenty for most.
To my mind, Apple is doing that just now with iOS by adding functionality over the course of many years. Side-by-side multitasking was years in the making (e. g. by adding Auto Layout and Size Classes). While I can understand that the future can't come early enough, I'd rather have good implementations with fewer bugs and full developer support.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 29, 2015, 03:51 PM
 
Just today I loaded Windows 10 on an 8", 1920x1200 tablet. Windows 8.1 was not great on it but Windows 10 works very well on the tablet in touch mode--just about as well as my iPads and iPhones--at least for the stuff I like to do on them. But the other nice thing is that, with a mouse attached, the OS responds immediately to whether you are doing touch or mouse. The second you start to move the mouse the pointer appears and everything is mouse driven. The second you touch the screen the pointer disappears and everything is touch driven. This says to me that an OS doesn't have to be designed from the ground up for touch to be successful--indeed that line of thinking doesn't make sense, both because any OS can be redone into any other form and because human ingenuity can always come up with another, clever, way to do anything. This all again says to me that Sanjiv's computer can be easily done and be a very satisfying experience for a broad range of users.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:39 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,