Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses News

Roundtable on Apple's Future 187

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the nothing-like-wholesale-speculation-and-rumor dept.
John Murrell writes "Given the insatiable appetite for Apple rumors, analysis and speculation, SiliconValley.com has opened a week long roundtable discussion on the company's post-Intel future. Among those on the panel are Andy Hertzfeld, Tim Bray, Brent Simmons, John Gruber, Keven Krewell, Mark Gonzales and Leander Kahney."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Roundtable on Apple's Future More

Roundtable on Apple's Future

Comments Filter:

  • Post-Intel? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WillerZ ( 814133 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:06AM (#13545875) Homepage
    Surely should be post-PPC, unless they've ditched Intel already.

    • Re:Post-Intel? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by XxtraLarGe ( 551297 )
      I think they meant post-intel switch...

    • Re:Post-Intel? (Score:4, Funny)

      by tabkey12 ( 851759 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:11AM (#13545907) Homepage
      And so another Apple rumour [misterbg.org] begins...
    • Surely should be post-PPC, unless they've ditched Intel already.

      Jobs announced that Apple will be switching over to the PortalPlayer processors. He also stated that due to the overwhelming success of the iPod line, that all Macintosh's will ship with only a clickwheel for input (eliminating the now outdated keyboard and mouse). He was widely expected to announce a totally revamped OSX (to be called OSXI) that, in a radical shift in user interfaces) eliminated the gui altogether and replaces it with a

    • Re:Post-Intel? (Score:5, Funny)

      by daniil ( 775990 ) <evilbj8rn@hotmail.com> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @08:32AM (#13546468) Journal
      If one monkey on a keyboard can make so many mistakes in such a short blurb, then million monkeys on typewriters will never be able to reproduce "Hamlet" -- they'll invariably end up producing "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead" instead. Even the laws of probability will fail there.

  • My prediction for the predictions (Score:5, Funny)

    by Deadguy2322 ( 761832 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:07AM (#13545882)
    Somebody willpredict great success, somebody will predict total failure, and many slashdot assholes will bitch about the iPod throughout this thread.
    • The iPod will lead Job's into the oval office!!
      The iPod will solve world hunger!!
      The iPod will bring peace to the middle east!!
      The iPod will make airline food taste good!!
      The iPod will ensure she swallows!!
      The iPod will give us nuclear fusion, environmently friendly cars and help the Iraqis form a peaceful democratic society!!
      The iPod will make first contact possible!!
      The iPod will cure cancer!!
      The iPod will get rid of viruses, even on windows!!

  • Oval table (Score:5, Funny)

    by LittleGuernica ( 736577 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:07AM (#13545886) Homepage
    Rumors are that the table is not round, but oval. Is the thinnest table on the market (thin as a pencil) and has a color surface. Some talk of video capabilities in future table models. Apple bought massive amounts of table legs from a undisclosed south korean company at great discounts. Introducing this tabel was a bold move, since it's highly succesful Apple footstool was introduced last year and is now the best selling piece of furniture in the world..

  • POST-INTEL???? (Score:3, Funny)

    by spectrokid ( 660550 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:07AM (#13545889) Homepage
    on the company's post-Intel future...
    You mean they are already moving away from Intel again? Help, I can't keep up anymore!
    • using chips from the Atom Chip Corporation

      http://atomchip.com/_wsn/page4.html [atomchip.com]

      I am sure Dianetics is involved here somewhere.

    • a post-Intel future where each application is a CPU-affine process, and each widget has its own independent thread with asynchronous communication. Reportedly, the system will have 4 primary chips, each a consumer-level descendent of Sun's upcoming Niagara series processors. Each of the new chips will have 64 discrete processing units on-die (256 sets of registers per physical chip for thread execution, for a total of 1024 actively running threads on the machine). The chips will use an optical interconn

  • Simple Concecpt. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:11AM (#13545910)
    You can buy a fancy computer that is relatively well built that runs OS X. But if you don't like OS X then you can put Windows or Linux on it. Most older PPC applications should work, Newer Applications have Fat binaries so both platforms work for a while. The OS has been tested on x86 in duel Development from day 1. All this ends are the annoying xPlatform is faster then yPlatform debates. Sure PPC may have its strong points but not much, this is probably a good move for Apple. While I am sure hacks for OS X that will make it run on any PC will be out most people are not going to try to hack there system to run OS X, or bother looking for it, when OS X says I can't install on my platform, most people don't have the time to make a hack for the OS. So not much will change, with the exception of some compiler flags that are different in some applications.
    • Yes but can you do the opposite? Why the fuck should you have to buy an Apple branded computer just to run BSD with a better Windowing System?

      I hope they at least release OS X Live CD's for normal people to try OS X on their CURRENT x86 machines.
      • Because it's more than just BSD with a better windowing system.

        OS X Live CDs? Uh, sure. *rolls eyes*

        Some people just want OS X for generic x86 so they can pirate it to death like they have with Windows XP. Nothing more. I don't get the whiney sense of entitlement, but hey. I'm also used to reliable computer hardware with an operating system that just freaking works.
      • Why the fuck should you have to buy an Apple branded computer just to run BSD with a better Windowing System?

        Yeah, kde and gnome suck in comparison, don't they. well then you better tell those bsd and linux guys to get cracking (heh.. no pun intended).
      • If you don't want to buy Apple hardware, you are, of course, still free to write your own Better Windowing System for your non-Apple x86 BSD machine. The rest of us realize that Apple hardware is worth the small premium we pay for it, and that for 99.9% of the computer using population, processor architecture is largely irrelevant.

  • So what happens after the move to Intel? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ReformedExCon ( 897248 ) <reformed.excon@gmail.com> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:11AM (#13545914)
    First, the move to Intel will not impact their sales negatively. It will irritate some current Mac owners because of the loss of compatibility. Eventually those faithful will stop fighting the tide and buy into Intel/Apple.

    Apple's operating system will come full of DRM. The industry is moving in that direction, and Intel is incorporating it in their designs, so Apple would have been left out in the cold (and not where the content providers are) if they didn't make the switch. Now that they will make it, DRM will be a big part of their next OS.

    Apple will continue to move into areas where they have little expertise but seem to be a good fit. Cell phones, (more) portable music players, and other gadgets which can help spread the Apple brand. They will stay away from the medical industry, auto industry (though they may seek partnerships to get iPod technology into cars), and overseas shipping (for the time being).

    Apple's future is bright, but they need to focus on keeping their products tightly controlled. They can't start branding everything they see and expect to keep a good focus and positive revenue stream. They will continue to focus on music, but probably start looking into video as well.

    Their OS will remain a non-commodity item. You will be able to buy the OS off the shelf, but it will only run on Apple-branded computers. Hardware selection will be limited as well, but for the user experience, such a scheme will benefit the end users.
    • DRM != x86

      DRM is just as easy to incorporate into a MIPS based machine as a intel one.

      IBM is a big player in the DRM world, a founding member of trusted computing etc etc apple did not need to switch to intel CPUs to get DRM.
    • I actually don't eitnrely agree...

      I have a strange feeling the main reason, besides low power consumption laptop chips, that apple is doing this will be seen in the next 1.4 years. All of a sudden, "windows" only software will start running with no hitches in mac.

      And I seriously doubt the x86 version of mac will only run on branded hardware. I don't think apple wants it to only run on branded hardware.

      This will get them market share of the desktop OS arena, and for all the right reasons. While at the same
    • Now that they will make it, DRM will be a big part of their next OS.

      What does that mean? DRM to prevent you from putting OS X on a non-Apple hardware x86? Or does that mean you can't play non-DRM MP3s on OS X or does prevent installation any app that circumvents this?

      I'm assuming the former, but the way its put is very vague.
    • First, the move to Intel will not impact their sales negatively. It will irritate some current Mac owners because of the loss of compatibility. Eventually those faithful will stop fighting the tide and buy into Intel/Apple.

      Apple has a history of abandoning platforms. II family to Mac, 680x0 to PPC, 9 to X... It's always irritating when you're on the tail end of an Apple epoch, but the change has always been net-positive(aside from the IIgs, which I am still bitter about). Point being that Apple fans a

  • A forum on the future of Objective-C. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CyricZ ( 887944 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:25AM (#13545984)
    As a developer, I'm far more interested in a forum on the future of Objective-C. While a totally fantastic language, it still is lacking some amenities one expects from modern languages. Automated garbage collection is one such example. There are rumors (as recently as April) that Apple is/was working on a garbage collection system for Objective-C.

    • Re:A forum on the future of Objective-C. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Pius II. ( 525191 ) <lees_biology_0p.icloud@com> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:37AM (#13546072)
      Rumors? Just look at the documentation, specifically at the finalize method in NSObject.
      May I quote:
      "Called by the garbage collector when the receiver is not referenced by other objects.

      Note: Garbage collection is not available for use in Mac OS X v10.4, nor in earlier versions.

      The garbage collector invokes this method on the receiver before disposing of the memory it uses. When garbage collection is enabled, this method is invoked instead of dealloc."

      There's already build options for turning garbage collection on in your own projects; however, it doesn't work yet. But you can be damn sure Apple is working on it (most of Foundation's objects already implement the finalize method, as do the more recent frameworks such as CoreData or CoreImage).

    • Re:A forum on the future of Objective-C. (Score:5, Informative)

      by OmniVector ( 569062 ) <see my homepage> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:38AM (#13546075) Homepage
      They're not rumors pal, they said it loud and clear at last year's WWDC. Garbage collection is coming.

    • Re:A forum on the future of Objective-C. (Score:5, Informative)

      by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:46AM (#13546120) Journal
      There are rumors (as recently as April) that Apple is/was working on a garbage collection system for Objective-C.

      Hardly rumours. Garbage collection was added to the Objective-C runtime with Tiger. The GNU Objective-C runtime has supported the Boehm GC for some time, and Apple recently introduced their own GC.

      GNUstep has been used with GC (using a Smalltalk bridge), where the GC simply called the release methods on objects when it detected that references had gone away. This works for Foundation, but not for AppKit. The problem with AppKit is that, in a lot of cases, no one retains references to AppKit objects. Combining AppKit and GC requires AppKit to be hacked a bit so references to components are kept.

      The problem with Objective-C is that when you start trying to improve it you end up re-inventing Smalltalk. The GNUstep project is currently looking at using C for very low-level things, Objective-C for libraries and Smalltalk for applications. Since Objective-C and Smalltalk share an object model, it is very easy to interface the two.

    • I think Objective-c++ which is part of gcc 4.0 will have many more modern features (I doubt it will have garbage collection though )and will make porting c++ apps to macosx easier. ... this does assume that Apple develops aqua bindings and official support for objectivec++ in the next release. God I hope they do.

  • Aah, I see we've moved on. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Benanov ( 583592 ) <brian,kemp&member,fsf,org> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:27AM (#13546003) Journal
    I wonder if this is to counter FUD or if it's just another step in the Apple Product Cycle: http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/ [misterbg.org]

    Upcoming Events: What features would you like in the of the MacIntel?
  • Apple already controls the music market, has excellent MIDI stuff, and seems to have the sound side covered. Intel's website points to significant research in the text-to-speech/voice recognition/continuous voice processing areas. As a result, if I were to speculate 5 years ahead (a long time) then I'd offer speech/language processing to be a likely avenue of exploration for the new Apple/Intel matchup.

  • They need to take Sun into account, too. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CyricZ ( 887944 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:35AM (#13546057)
    It is important for them to take the actions of Sun into account while discussing the future of Apple. Indeed, these days were are seeing an effort by Sun to reattract some of the more technical users they have lost.

    Sun is now putting out powerful, relatively inexpensive Opteron-based workstations that run Solaris 10. They could, in theory, provide what Apple is providing for developers, but with some added benefits.

    Since they're not as gung-ho with the media industries as Apple is, they should not feel the need to incorporate DRM into their systems. That alone will be a major purchasing factor in many technical users' eyes.

    If they're able to get their act together and provide a very fast, very efficient desktop Java implementation, then they could lure developers away from Apple.

    Sun has the potential to regain their late-1980's, mid-1990's reputation as the supreme workstation vendor. While there were some doubts as to their direction the past few years, it appears as though they are on-track and soon to be very successful.

    • OS X on a Solaris kernel would be something close to my ideal OS. It's a real shame that Sun abandoned OpenStep - if they'd kept up with it then I would have switched to Sun rather than Apple. If you've ever developed with OpenStep (or Cocoa) then you will realise that Java is not going to lure developers away from the platform.
      • I'm in complete agreement with you...I went *from* Java to ObjC and Cocoa. To me, cross-platform compatibility isn't essential, and besides, I've just never ever gottan a Java app to run with that...crispness...that a C/C++/ObjC program has.

        Of course, it helps that my target audience are Mac folks already, but XCode + ObjC/Cocoa has proven so good that I'd happily develop for any platform that could run that combo.

        It's sad to think that I had access to a NeXT machine back-in-the-day and apart from firing up
    • Now, go back in time and imagine :
      "Running Mac OS on a Sun workstation powered by an x86 CPU"

      almost as weird as NT for Sparc ...
    • You've got the wrong take on DRM.

      How DRM works is that content will be released that requires DRM hardware for playback. No one in the computer industry is proposing technologies that would prevent non-DRM'ed media files from playing back! And if that was going to happen, it wouldn't be using Intel's DRM technology.

      A DRM-free system will keep on working like today's systems - it just won't be able to play future DRM'ed content. While DRM can be very frustrating, a system lacking it will be perceived by end
    • Think about this one for a minute.

      Sun and Apple's development efforts seem to be luring them into the same general direction (towards high-end workstations), but coming from different value adds: Solaris has a firm footing in the high-end server market, one which Apple is just beginning to crack with its computing clusters. Meanwhile, Apple has the sexiest cachet of any technology company in the world, and has what most agree to be the best designed operating system for the end-user anywhere. Why aren't

  • MP3's (Score:5, Funny)

    by carbon116 ( 792624 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:42AM (#13546100)
    I think Apple should make an MP3 player. I hear youngsters use these quite a lot nowadays so there might be a market for it.
  • And therefore computing will become less important over time as other media lines become more important. Expect that AppleTel to become yet another commodity line. Expect AppleWinTel to develop more media oriented hardware-software.
  • Here's my prediction for what "the next big thing" from Apple will be: an Apple "Intelligent TV", or "iTV". They almost made that step with the integrated iMac, except it left out the tuner and video digitizer. I believe they will be able to make an iTV using the Intel chips that they couldn't with PowerPC, and with DRM support built-in, they'll be able to sell the idea to the networks as well as the movie companies.

    They would need to provide something that works like a remote control, probably a Bluetoot
    • They already made one of those.

      In the 90s.

      It never got out of prototyping. Combination Quadra 605/610 based motherboard and MPEG decoder hardware. I have a small stack of the things - the 605s are chunky and ugly, the 610s look like actual cable boxes.

      Think TIVO a few years before the technology was reasonably viable.

      The iPod's the first thing from Apple since the Second Coming Of Jobs that either Apple or NeXT hasn't already done at least once before (think ADC/Applevision, OS X/AUX, etc).
    • Okay, now feel free to call me ten kinds of idiot! :-)

      Sorry, but your idiocy goes all the way up to 11. ;-)

  • Yellow box comment from TFA (Score:4, Interesting)

    by foniksonik ( 573572 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @09:33AM (#13547105) Homepage Journal
    I thought the comment regarding the yellow box implementation (sic Rhapsody era) was very interesting and plausible.

    This idea is that with the switch to Intel, Apple will be porting (has already ported) and developers will be porting all their apps to Intel compile to run native... has to happen...

    to continue...

    iTunes on Windows has already introduced a significant amount of OS X AppKit codebase to Windows (on Intel of course)...

    which means that anyone with iTunes on Windows is ready to run many of these soon to be available intel compiled OS X Apps
    inside Windows, ala Yellow Box (basically an OS X runtime space on Windows).

    SO..... we will end up seeing all of the Apple consumer / free apps for OS X also running on Windows inside the YellowBox space at native speeds (cause they're built for intel) and an increasing number of developers using XCode to compile apps that run perfectly on both OS X and Windows/YellowBox and decreasing number of developers not doing so as there will be no performance hit or added overhead and thr upside is you hit two OS's for the price of one. Which also means consumers can pay for one license while being able to install their purchased software on both Windows and Mac.

    Over time people start thinking "I really only use the free Apple Apps and all my installed and paid for apps will run on Macs, so why not buy a Mac?"

    This could take less than 5 years but at least 2 years... just long enough for Game developers to start the process.

    IMHO

  • 1. OSX intergrating Wine or VMWare. This is a big jump but if you could run those programs that you have to run under windows on OS/X then using OS/X becomes a lot less painful. You could see Apple moving into corporate settings using this tactic.
    2. Apple Cell phone. Could we see an iPhone? What about a PDA? This one is a big question mark. Can Apple make better hardware than Palm with the Treo? When those new 32G sdcards are out then a Treo can store as much music as an iPod.
    3. iTV this seems like a no bra
    • 1. OSX intergrating Wine or VMWare.

      I think you're prediccting the present. Integrating? No. Selling or sopporting/promoting? They already do that with SoftWindows, so I imagine they'll continue to do so with that or some similar product in the future. I doubt it would be included by default... i see no advantage for Apple in that.
  • Post-Intel Fruedian Slip is most apt phrasing for the re-vived Apple.

    4) integration:: iPhone-> OSX5.0 2006
    4) Diversification:: WebObjects Inc. IPO 2007
    5) newProducts:: Apple/*automfg'r styling/branding
    6) newIndustry:: AppleFARES direct book'g 2010
    7) oldParadigm:: AppleTel terminals
    9) retroModel:: LisaConcierge in-car .Mac svcs
    10)theSteve:: CorpBusLogix service 2020
  • That all the Sony and Microsoft and IBM and Sun and SGI and HP fanboys just shut up and take it, while Every. Single. Fucking. Educated Stupid [timecube.com]. Mac User spouts off APPLE SHOULD _____________!!!!!!!! like they have even the ghost of a clue?

    I've heard some of the STUPIDEST shit pour out of otherwise intelligent mouths - people who obviously have no grasp of what Apple's interested in, where the market is going, or even what good / viable business practices are.

    Yet the "brand" attracts this verbal ejaculate li
    • APPLE SHOULD invest in the Time Cube! Are you ignorant?
  • iTunes on Windows has already introduced a significant amount of OS X AppKit codebase to Windows (on Intel of course)...

    iTunes and QuickTime (both ported to Windows) are Carbon based, they are not Cocoa based nor do they use Objective-C (at least not in any main stream way that I know of).

    So no AppKit came about as a result of iTunes being ported. Of course AppKit was ported to Windows (and other environments) back in the OpenStep days but likely the port hasn't been maintained much with the newer UI paradi

  • Why have a roundtable if you can ask John Dvorak? (Score:3, Funny)

    by haaz ( 3346 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @01:37PM (#13549465) Homepage
    Clearly, as has been the case for years now, Apple will be out of business in two weeks, if not a year. You can bet on it. If you're a damn fool...

    While the pundits have been saying this for so long that people might think it's just got to come true some day, even the end of the world as we know it won't stop them. Recall the novel "War Day" by Whitley Streiber and James Kunetka. It's about a fictional journey around the U.S. after a limited nuclear war. California was somehow un-nuked, and apparently out of the paths of much of the fallout. And Apple Computer still exists, with their latest desktop computer appearing on someone's desk. If a fictitious limited nuclear war couldn't stop Apple, what will?

Slashdot Top Deals

"The Computer made me do it."

Close