Where is Mac OSX heading?

If you don't feel like a long speculative discussion don't bother going any further

Otherwise read on...

There have been conflicting rumors about where Apple's Mac OSX is headed. One line is that Mac OSX is going to wind up in a tablet, a new soon to be released Apple iPad Pro. The newly released Mac OSX Lion does look like it was designed with touchscreen in mind. The other line is Apple's MacBooks will move from from Intel's x86-32 and x86-64 to the ARM architecture. The third is that touchscreen will be coming to the MacBook.

Apple could build tablet with keyboards, like traditional Windows Tablets which are useful to certain degrees, and could become popular if Apple can find a way to cut down on the weight. Or it could simply be bringing touchscreen functionality to laptops and desktops. Typing this on my laptop, I am not sure I would rather use a touchscreen to navigate rather than the touch-pad. Touchscreen laptops and desktop, is possible, but it wont be a game changer.

The other possibility Apple makes a Mac OSX tablet. Mac OSX to a tablet is not the hardest part, but the interface of software designed to run on Mac OSX would have to be redesigned. Creating new ecosystems for new hardware is something that Apple has done successfully twice, first with the iPhone than the iPad.

The other possibility, is that Mac OSX could be approaching end-of-life. Moving the MacBook line-up to iOS and ARM is possible, as ARM processors are getting more and more powerful by the year. With iOS running instead of Mac OSX, ARM processors should be more sufficient and more efficient in terms of power. This would mean having to expand the iOS app ecosystem to include devices with keyboards. The main advantage the Windows has over Mac OSX is available software. Expanding the iOS ecosystem may be easier than convincing Windows software providers to make Mac OSX version of their software. This would also move MacBooks into their walled garden. This would be a real game changer. I am betting on the third.

 

I'm hoping for an "iPad Pro" which is a convertible tablet. A removable iPad connected to a Macbook Pro base (or MBA base). Just like the Asus eee Pad Transformer but higher quality.

just some fun wishing

 

I'm betting Apple is slowly headed in the direction of something like the Acer Iconia (a notebook with no keyboard or trackpad, but instead a touchscreen on the top half and a touchscreen on the bottom half, the latter of which often but doesn't always display a keyboard), only with first-rate build quality, ultra-slim case designs across the board, and an operating system that will grow closer and closer to iOS.

Not what I'm into, but I could see some people just gobbling it up (and paying hideous amounts of money to own one).

 

IMO, I find that hard to believe. I think having a physical keyboard allows one to type much faster and with better accuracy because it's more tactile than using a touchscreen. Plus, having two touchscreens makes it highly susceptible to damage. If the bottom touchscreen somehow breaks, would you still be able to type? I am fine with the iPad screen estate but imagine having two screens that size. I would not use such a device because I feel like it would somehow destroy one or both screens.

However, I will agree that Mac OS X is nearing the end of its time and will soon integrate with iOS. I hope Apple does release a tablet version of their laptops similar to a Thinkpad X tablet series.

Finally, I would welcome introduction of ARM processors into laptops for mainstream especially if they help with battery life. While I've used Intel processors my whole life, if ARM processors can provide similar power capabilities while increasing battery life, I'm all for it.

 

One advantage I think would be passive cooling. No wasting power on a fan.

 

I think iOS and Mac OS X are going to remain two separate environments for a long, long time. They might share features (just as Windows 8 is going to share features with Windows Mobile 7) here and there but they will still be two distinct entities. I also doubt that Apple is going to release a tablet running full blown OS X simply because that is what the iPad is for. Apple criticized other manufactorers for taking a notebook, allowing for touch/stylus input, and then running a desktop OS. I don't think Apple is going to become a hypocrite here by turning around and doing the same thing.

Plus OS X is still being used to power web servers, servers for buildings, the iMac (which is still rather successful), and Mac Pro. Ditching the x86-64 (Apple has already done away with Intels x86-32 platform as Lion only supports 64-bit Intel chips on AMD's x86-64) and going completely mobile with one singular OS would mean that people running Mac desktops would be left in the dust.

If anything, I see iOS becoming more robust in the next years while still staying away from replacing OS X. Apple has stated numerous times that iOS is its portable OS while OS X is for a desktop computing environment and I think things will stay that way for many, many years (keeping in mind that any hypothetical switch to ARM won't happen until at least 2015).

OS X is going to be driven with a traditional keyboard and mouse for a while now and any "portable" experience is going to be done on iOS through the iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch.

 

Yes, Apple can keep iOS and OSX distinct, and provide a common looking interface for both, which should give users a good familiar experience while moving from one device to another.

 

That's what I would say about a touchpad with two discrete buttons instead of a multitouch touchpad...or a Blackberry instead of a touchscreen iPhone

Very good question. One faced by tablet owners everywhere. Despite this, Apple has lead the way in the market moving away from netbooks and toward tablets.

I'm a big fan of physical buttons/keys for just about everything (one big reason I bought a Kindle over a Nook, for example), but I think it's hard to disagree that Apple nowadays is primarily oriented toward multitouch touch-based inputs instead of discrete buttons/keys. I think an Acer Iconia-esque setup is the natural conclusion of that trend.

 

ral, your thought process is right on the money.

The possibilities are still pretty open. I don't think the progression is set in stone yet.

Hardware prediction:
----
The question is: will apple ditch intel for arm in something like 2015? I think they very well may do just that. Just looking at the companies, I think apple is going to prefer arm over intel in the long run. Intel causes problems for apple because intel demands control over basically the entire computing hardware platform, whereas arm is willing to license technology out and let apple control the specifics of the hardware. I think that arm has a better product and a better philosophy, and in the end they will end up on top. However, that whole prediction is closed. It really has no bearing on where the software will go. Apple can port both OS X and iOS to different processors if they wish to do so. It's not a small job, but they aren't a small company either. I think it basically depends on whether or not arm has a better offering than intel in 2015. I think they will, but it really doesn't matter for the end users. Either way, the processors are going to be much faster and much nicer on the battery.
----

Software Prediction:
----
The other question is- what is going to happen to iOS and OS X? In the short term, OS X isn't going anywhere. Apple has all it's developer tools set for OS X at the moment. It's not realistic to build applications on any other platform. OS X will probably continue to get more iOS features, but for the time being they are going to remain distinct.

Past 5 years out, who's to say?

 

... Or Apple could bankrupt again like it is 1997 !

 

I kind of doubt that. When the U.S. markets closed on Wednesday, Apple took over Exxon as being the most valuable company in the U.S. That is leaps and bounds above where they were at even right before Steve Jobs left Apple. It would take a mighty force to topple Apple's economic trends over the past ~10 years. Something really, really, really bad would need to happen in order for Apple to declare bankruptcy and start all over again like they did in 1997 and 1998.

 

There is a big difference in typing up a document, and clicking a mouse button...

This would signify the death of the Mac. The Mac would turn into the higher end iOS device... it would not longer be compatible with running Windows or Windows software... no Bootcamp, no virtualization, no Wine... They would lose Massive PC marketshare. They still might do this just to kill off the Mac though if they want to dump it but keeping using the name. I love OSX, and I think iOS is great for its purpose... even love developing on them, but I'd dump all my Macs that day and keep using Apple only the way they'd really want people to use them... iPads and iPhones. I really do not see them doing this unless they can get a major share first so loyal customers will stick them out. Going x86 -> ARM is not even close to the same as PPC -> x86. ARM will bring them serious compatibility disadvantages, opposite of the last conversion.... not to mention a lot lower raw power.

 

I know you really like wine, but most OS X users and developers aren't using it. Bootcamp may still exist. I think windows is likely to adopt arm support before os x. It certainly would not kill OS X. If 90% of mac users aren't using boot camp today, it may not make a significant difference 5 years out, with Apple's current software strategy. If they can get developers to adopt the mac app store in the next few years, they can do pretty much whatever they want.

I think 5 years out windows and mainstream linux will support arm (ubuntu!), arm will have high performance devices with large core counts, but it's just what I suspect. Obviously I wouldn't be surprised if basically "nothing" happens, and intel sticks with high performance and arm sticks with iOS devices.

 

Its not just Wine, its just general compatibility with the Windows ecosystem. Wineskin is a hobby project... if I end up quitting it because of changes Apple makes.. then its gone, it was fun while it lasted. I'm not beholden to Apple... I might try to make a similar system to use on Linux if I feel like it. SOme do use Wine and Cider though... EA only ports using Cider (which is a fork off Wine). Virtualization techs for running x86 Windows will not work on an ARM OS and CPU either.... it will have to go back to good old fashioned full emulation, which has tons of problems.

ARM Windows via bootcamp? ouch... just cuz its "Windows" doesn't mean it runs all Windows software. ARM Windows will only run ARM Windows programs.

I don't see hardly anyone wanting a ARM based Mac unless they are just as happy running an iPad and can do everything on one and just want something slightly faster or in a laptop form. If they want to make ARM based iOS devices that are like full laptops... all the power to them, I just hope they don't mess up the Mac to do it. If I have to go back to Linux, I'll be sad, but its not impossible.

 

It's not about what makes sense today. This is speculation for years down the line. Many years. At least 5. Some time in the future, probably more than 5 years out, Apple may not be concerned about compatibility with old EA Cider ports. I'm thinking that there will be a large library of software that either already runs on arm and/or will be easily ported to arm if it is Obj-C compatible source.

I'm imagining a future where the mac app store has pretty much taken over and most software on that store is built using Apple's toolset.

If that doesn't pan out, Apple may very well be restricted to Intel for compatibility.

The point is, 5 years is forever in technology time. Devices may change, operating systems may change, anything can change. Certainly a processor architecture can change. In 5+ years, there may not be a need for x86 virtualization. We very well may use emulators for running our obsolete software.

Most people today wouldn't want an arm mac. I agree. I don't think there is an arm mac coming today, either. Tada! Hah. Seriously, issue resolved. I'm not even making a valuation statement about whether I want an arm laptop in the future.

But, can you seriously say you would be shocked if in 2016-2019 we aren't using x86-64 compatible processors anymore? Go back to the year 2000 and look at what type of technology we had in terms of handheld devices, compared to the iPhone 2007. Go back to 2005 and look at what we had in comparison to today. We may be using fundamentally different devices 5-8 years out. Who knows?

 

Windows 8 is going to work on ARM devices but the real kicker comes from manufacturer driver support along with actual software to run under an ARM Windows 8 environment. That will likely take a long, long time since the majority (ie 99.99999999999%) of Windows 8 users will be using x86-64 or x86-32 processors. MS had a similar issue back when Windows NT 4.0 (I think it was 4.0) supported PPC. Windows installed just fine on certain PPC models but nobody could download the necessary drivers and software companies weren't porting their titles over from Intel. So the whole thing kind of fell through but it may come back up again especially if tablet companies (mainly Asus and Acer) come out with ARM dual-core and quad-core systems running full blown Windows 8 while still providing good performance, great battery life, etc.

As for Apple, I can understand the benefits of switching to ARM and that isn't going to happen for a long time but that would mark the fourth time they switched computing platforms. The first was from Motorola's CPU to PPC, PPC to x86-32, and now x86-32 to x86-64. That last one is questionable since all Apple did was stop supporting 32-bit processors but I lumped it in there anyway because it is still a transition. I am sure people are tired of it by now. Granted, a long amount of time passes between each transition (except for the first one, I believe that one happened within a few years) but you get the idea. If there is one thing that MS has done right, it is in their support of older hardware. I can install Windows 7 on my old Pentium 4 desktop from 2002 yet a MacBook Pro from 2006 won't run Lion. I am not trying to dig into a dead horse debate, I just wanted to point some thing about.

 

Here's another way to look at it. Apple has been around for only 30-35 years. How often has there been a huge shift in the computing industry, such that software compatibility could not be maintained (without emulation).

Even if you only count 2 major changes, you're looking at about once every 10 years on average that you get a massive compatibility break due to a new computing philosophy and OS.

One more time, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with some type of unified OS many years out that offers software compatibility between handheld portables vs. workstation devices like laptops and desktops. I imagine such an OS would run on arm processors, but it wouldn't necessarily need to. We could just have multiple binaries like we had for PPC / Intel.

However, if mac apps take over and windows compatibility and non apple-pipelined (xcode tool chain) x86 compatibility becomes less important, I could imagine Apple ditching intel in the future, partly for performance reasons and partly for control reasons.

 

I think this is one good motivating factor for Apple to want to go to ARM. Differentiation is something Apple likes to do.

Software compatibility is what has kept Windows ahead of Apple for a long time. Apple had 300,000+ iPhone App's and 100,000+ iPad apps. The are lightweight compared to PC software, but this year iPhone and iPad apps will be built to take advantage of the dual core processors. Next year the apps will go up another level, to take advantage of quad core technology.

I think the point may come, when there is no reason for a "Mac" user to use Windows software.

There are a small number that do. I belong to that category of user where my laptop is really just a platform for a word processor, spreadsheet creator, PDF reader, photo editor and a web browser. In short, I am not a power user. How much processing power do I really need?

As for software compatibility, I have used Linux for a total of 4 years now (2002-2005 and 2010-2011), and I have never even took a look at WINE. I found enough native Linux software to do what I needed the computer to do.

If Apple (or someone else for that matter) came out with a less powerful ARM powered laptop, with the benefit of lighter weight and longer battery life I would probably migrate to that platform.

I do not see the MacBook disappearing overnight overnight, but maybe a transitional product coming between the iPad and the MacBook Air. I think a quad core ARM would provide enough power for serious use. How powerful ARM processors will be in 2013?

 

ASUS EEEpad Transformer?? fun little toy actually since its a tablet and a laptop
Motherinlaw picked up one since they are under $500CDN with the docking unit.

 

That's why I also included the example of the Blackberry versus the iPhone (which really pioneered the touchscreen-oriented smartphone revolution, if I recall correctly). Try typing an email on each. On one, you're typing on discrete letter keys. On the other, you're typing on glass.

Or how about writing an email on an iPad versus writing an email on a netbook's keyboard? When most companies were focusing on netbooks for inexpensive, highly-portable situations, Apple went a completely different direction and offered a touchscreen-only tablet.

The buttonless touchpad was NOT the only example I had of Apple moving more and more to touchscreen input.

 

Gave it a look, but I need a bigger keyboard for me to feel comfortable. Tried a 10.1-inch netbook, never got used to the keyboard.

 

Apple recently applied for a touchscreen design keyboard patent. Your vision of an inferior typing surface sprouts from the assumption that the keyboard will be simple glass. It could use Gorilla glass for all we know (very durable), and it may be more tactile than you assume it would be.

Apple patent application takes the hard keys out of the keyboard, promises a flat surface solution -- Engadget

 

I am getting use to the virtual keyboard on my phone, with haptic feedback and all, amd thanks to excellent word prediction from SwiftKey... but for typing stuff, a good old BlackBerry is still better. I mean, it is nice to actually press down which actually moves. But lets wait and see.

 

there are already units on the market where they look like 2 tablets stuck together and one can be turned into a virtual keyboard or a second display. MS was also going to build one but discontinued it before release.

 

Also, Apple's application for a patent doesn't really mean much especially since they file for new patents about once every week yet we rarely see them in actual products. Apple is simply banking patents much like MS or any other big company. They research an idea, come up with a solution, patent it, and then let that sit dormant. MS, Apple, Dell, HP, etc. all file patents on a monthly basis but that doesn't mean that actual products are coming out featuring those patents.

As for the whole virtual keyboard argument, I am used to it on my iPad and Droid X. I admit that there was some getting used to when the iPad 1 launched but it only took a week or two. Now, with my iPad 2, I can type a lot faster and more accurately simply because I am so used to having a virtual keyboard. I can even palm my iPad 2 and use my thumbs to type and hammer out word after word. I am also pretty fast on my Droid X with Swype and the default Android 2.3 multi-touch QWERTY keyboard. I don't miss having a physical keyboard on devices like that. I had one of those almost-smartphone cellphones that was built around texting back in the day. It pretty much looked like a traditional Blackberry but it wasn't a smartphone (though it could browse the web and check e-mail, it just couldn't work with apps). I hated the idea of switching to a virtual keyboard from that but I got used to it with my LG Chocolate Touch. I would still want to use a standard physical keyboard on a notebook but I am fine with a virtual keyboard on anything 10" and smaller.

What I would really like is for companies to start using palm rests better. Put two multi-touch displays in the palm rests that I can turn off when I am typing and turn back on so I can access my programs, check my e-mail, and do other very simple tasks all without having to multi-task on the main notebook display.

 

I referred to this out of speculation. I am aware that there are current products out on the market with dual touch screens. I am also aware of the banking of patents. This reference was linked in order to point out where OSX may be heading in the future.

I am in favor of your palm rest idea.

 

It already exists? ARM powered netbooks are actually called "smartbooks," and you can apparently get one for $199, preloaded with Ubuntu.

 

Might be better actually, since you do not have to cram in all the keys in a small space.

Yes and no.

Wikipedia has a nice description of the smartbook: A class of mobile device that combined certain features of both a smartphone and netbook computer, promoted in 2009 and 2010. Smartbooks were advertised with features such as always on, all-day battery life, 3G, or Wi-Fi connectivity and GPS (all typically found in smartphones) in a laptop or tablet-style body with a screen size of 5 to 10 inches and a physical or soft touchscreen keyboard.

I think the one you are referring to is the the Winstron N900 are a good showcase of what is possible. Excellent battery life and low cost. But it's 5-10-inch size makes it a netbook alternative, which I think will be (or actually is) the domain of the tablet.

Now convert the Smartbook to a 11.6 to 13.3-inch device, up the battery to 6000mAh, put a Quad Core ARM, in 2GB or RAM and 128GB of internal storage, backed by someone who will build a strong ecosystem around the device and now you really have something there.

 

Anything that doesn't have a return spring is an "inferior typing surface" in my opinion. The key rebounding and helping lift your finger after each keystroke is an essential part of fast-and-accurate touch-typing.

 

that depends on the person and how they've trained themselves and practiced. I'm sure even with a flat glass touch keyboard there are many people who could learnt o type just as fast if not faster than a traditional keyboard.

 

Maybe it does just need some getting used to but I still think that a physical keyboard is the way to go. Maybe it's because I haven't really typed much on a tablet like the iPad2 or Xoom. I don't mind typing on a virtual keyboard on my phone; in fact, I prefer it more than a physical keyboard like the OG Droid or any Blackberry with a keyboard (Do all of them have a physical keyboard?).

 

I could be wrong on this, but it doesn't seem to me to be merely an issue of personal preference. On one side, you've got someone typing on keys that yield, with finger rebound mechanically assisted. On the other hand, you've got someone striking an unyielding surface (albeit lightly) tens of thousands of times per day, with no mechanical assist for rebound. I see two issues.

First, I don't see how typing would ever be as fast without mechanical rebound, just as a basketball player could never jump as high barefooted as he could in basketball shoes, regardless of what he was used to.

Second, I'm curious what the long-term health effect of typing on unyielding glass could be for people who type all day every day. Doesn't seem like it'd be that great for fingertips and finger joints.

 

You don't see how typing on a glass display could be faster because it is not something that you are used to. "Kids" these days can hammer out an e-mail on their smartphone with a glass display (and no physical keyboard) faster than most people can type on the computer. It really is a personal preference as some people just don't need that physical feedback they get from a real keyboard in order to type fast. I can type almost just as fast on my MBP as I can on my iPad 2. I can also type just as fast on my Droid X compared to my older cellphone that had a full physical QWERTY keyboard. I don't need that physical feedback because I am pushing down without the end goal of having my fingers fly through the air. So the basketball player analogy doesn't really apply since their end goal is to jump 6 ft in the air.

Longer term health affects won't be known for a while but I am sure they won't be any different from typing on a physical keyboard. I learned to type on an old Apple IIe in the 6th grade and that thing had a keyboard that was hard as Hell. My fingertips would hurt after typing on it for a while but, much like sewing by hand, I grew used to it. I am typing on Apple's bluetooth wireless keyboard now and my fingers have a little more cushion than typing on my iPad 2 but the keys are just as hard as the iPad's glass display. I tend to mash the keys in a little more on a physical keyboard and lightly tap the keys on a virtual one so my fingertips do not hurt.

Either way, this really is a personal preference debate as people can learn to type fast on glass, a hard wood desk cover, a manual typewriter, a soft keyboard, or a more rigid one. Some people prefer soft mushy keys, others want stiff keys that don't have a lot of feedback. Some are fine with a 10" glass display while some people hate that. It is a lot like the great mouse debate. Is a two button scroll mouse better, how about a trackpad, the little nub that I absolutely can't stand, a large glass trackpad, or an old fashioned large roller ball?

 

It would be tough to convince people to get a mac if it was basically a giant iOS running device. I could see MBP getting a touch screen though, that would be nice. However a desktop/laptop should be more powerful then a laptop. Also without windows support I would not have gotten a mac. I have some Windows only programs like Matlab/Altium that I have to run. If I can't run those on a computer I can't get that computer.

 

I can average 100wpm on a tactile keyboard. I've never in my entire life seen someone do that on a "smartphone" keyboard. I don't think its physically possible. I probably type most things at around 60 wpm on a computer, like type out an essay. I don't think you can comfortably average 60 wpm on a tablet.

 

You do know that texting couple of lines and writing a paragraph / paper is different, right...?


And don't even get started on those kids when they end up typing that way online. Serious cases of dyslexia!

 

free online touch typing speed test - wpm words per minute

I tried twice. Typing on my belly with the laptop on the floor (i.e., terrible ergonomics), I got 84 WPM. Typing at a desk with good ergonomics on my MBP, I got 96. These were not the best numbers after dozens of tries, but the first try with each ergonomic setup. On the other hand, I was trying to type as fast as possible instead of just typing casually. EDIT: I tried two more times, and scored 84 wpm with an iLap angling the keyboard, and an 89 wpm under the same conditions as the second run (laptop flat on a desk).

What can you score with your iPad? On an iPhone? Nobody I know can type that speed or faster rapidly on a glass screen, but I'm open to the fact that there may be people out there who can do that.

 

The keyboard isn't going anywhere. even if touch devices take over the world, they will still have dedicated keyboards available for people who need to type lengthy documents.

I think there would be a serious ergonomic issue with typing a paper on a touchscreen held vertically like an iPad.

It would be less of an issue but still a serious issue with a touchscreen keyboard (horizontal), but I could imagine typing out a few paragraphs.

If this ends up happening, we will simply use external keyboards in the instances where they are needed...

.... until we get awesome nanotechnology where we can have a physical keyboard that can rearrange itself.

 

Width

Aside from the mechanical rebound, there is a "correct" width for a keyboard. Given that we type with two hands, a physical or virtual keyboard which is too narrow, will force you to pull your shoulders in too much to be comfortable. When I got my first netbook in 2008, it seemed okay when I tried it in the store. But I never really got use to it. It a few months later I got a newer model with larger keys. That did not do it either. I realize later I need the keys to be spaced further apart.

I do not see how I can feel comfortable typing with a tablet with their 9.7 (4:3) to 10.1 (HD) inch screen. They simply are not wide enough whether paired with a physical which does not exceed the width of the device or virtual keyboard.

Apple has a keyboard for its iPad, but it did not bother to try to integrate it laptop like like what Asus did with the transformer. I have not seen this keyboard, but from a picture here it does seem wider than a netbook keyboard. Maybe Apple recognizes that there is a minimum width for a keyboard to be comfortable.

Touch typing

I type from memory. I do not look at the keys when I type, except some of the function keys, and I could do that with my old phone with a physical QWERTY. I do not think I will learn to touch from memory with a virtual keyboard. On my phone, it is no big deal. The longest I type there is a paragraph of two for an email.

Angle

I think it is better to have the screen angle to accommodate what position is comfortable for you. I have seen cases that allow you to angle tablets to so that you can use it like a laptop, but I have a feeling you will bend your back forward more to accommodate this.

 

From another thread found here.