iPhone Not Running OS X 476
rochlin writes "We know that Steve Jobs has said the iPhone won't accept third-party apps. The iPhone looks to be running on a Samsung provided ARM core processor. That means it's not running on an Intel (or PPC) core. That means it's not running OS X in any meaningful sense (Apple can brand toilet paper as running OS X if they like). Darwin, the BSD based operating system that underlies what Apple has previously been calling OS X, does not run on ARM processors. The Darwin / Apple Public Source licensing agreement says the source would have to be made available if it is modified and sold (paraphrased; read it yourself). A Cingular rep has said the iPhone version of the OS source will not be made available. It will be closed, like the iPod OS and not like Darwin. So if it ain't Darwin, it ain't OS X (in any meaningful way). An InfoWorld article on an FBR Research report breaks down iPhone component providers and lists Samsung as the chip maker for the main application / video cpu. So, that leaves the question... What OS is this phone really running? Not Linux or the source would need to be open."
I can exclusively reveal (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I can exclusively reveal (Score:5, Insightful)
How does it mean it's not running OS X in any meaningful sense? I'd say having Cocoa/AppKit (and therefore an Objective-C runtime), Core Animation, and other OS X technologies constitutes being OS X.
Again, what is with this "meaningful" crap? Objective-C, Cocoa, AppKit, and the like are OS X. OS X is the NextStep-derived stuff running on top of Darwin. It can most certainly be OS X without Darwin. In fact, it might be Apple's first steps toward moving off of Mach sometime in the future.
Re:I can exclusively reveal (Score:5, Interesting)
The keynote very specifically listed:
Syncing, Networking, Multi-tasking, Low power, Security, Video, Cocoa, Core Animation, Graphics, and Audio...
Some of the above is very "duh", but having Cocoa, and Core Animation are two things that I would consider to be part of OS X... so even if the thing doesn't run the Darwin kernel, if it's compatible at the application layer I'd consider it OS X enough.
Seems like people are splitting hairs here...
Maybe Apple is misleading us, maybe not... Hard to say with a closed platform.
Re:I can exclusively reveal (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I can exclusively reveal (Score:4, Informative)
- i486
- SPARC
- Motorola 68K
- PA-RISC
After Apple bought it, they ported it to PowerPC. It hardly seems a strech to expect that they could port it to a fifth platform, especially one they designed themselves. And, as you mentioned, they have no more obligation to release the source than they did for OPENSTEP; it's their code, they can do with it what they wish. The license agreement is a binding agreement between the copyright holders and people who want the code, not between the copyright holder and themselves.Re:I can exclusively reveal (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Perhaps you are confusing CMU Mach with GNU Mach, which is licensed under the GPL.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Note that the FSF does the same thing with its various official GNU projects. If you want to contribute code to, say, GCC, you must give up your copyright to the FSF, together with a signed sheet of paper that says you do in fact own the copyright of the stuff you are contributing. This is non-negociable and meant to avoid SCO-like l
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I remember when various new versions of AmigaOS were being proposed over the last decade - strangely in those situations, everyone on Slashdot was screaming about how "It's not an Amig
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Optimised OS X sits on 'versatile' flash (Score:5, Informative)
The iPhone is running an optimised but full version of OS X that weighs in at "considerably less" than half a GB, according to Apple vice president of worldwide iPod marketing Greg Joswiak.
Joswiak confirmed that the operating system sits in the flash memory of the device and that Apple will "provide updates to the operating system like we do today."
Joswiak claimed that the reduced size of the operating system was a result of expertise of the team at Apple, rather than cutting out functionality or removing core technologies. "Remember that OS X on a Mac features a lot of applications that we don't have to ship on the iPhone," he added.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipod-itunes/news/index.
That guys name does my head in (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
One more thing ... now you can store backups of your brain and personality on your iPod*, and share it with other users.
*Requires BrainSlug Express accessory.
Re:That guys name does my head in (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Optimised OS X sits on 'versatile' flash (Score:5, Informative)
size is easy, but speed (Score:3, Interesting)
And after that its easy to trim things down.
Getting it fast is another story, though it was decent on 600mhz PPCs, being a smaller screen it should be easy, especially with 99% of
services not running/installed like printer/ samba / sshd etc.
FreeBSD, ARM and the rest of the components (Score:5, Insightful)
- Samsung Electronics for the CPU/Video processing
- Marvell for the 802.11 chipset
- Infineon Technologies for baseband communications
- Broadcomm Corp. for the touch screen controllers
- Cambridge Silicon Radio for the Bluetooth chipset
2. Darwin is an open source core based on FreeBSD according to Apple, Inc. [apple.com].
3. Here is freebsd on ARM processors (intel-based). ARM FreeBSD [freebsd.org].
4. Why is it tough to believe that Apple would simply recompile necessary components of Darwin on the ARM processors and then include and compile the necessary (and only the necessary!) mid level libraries? Many existing apps would work with only minor modifications (to take into account the new control scheme) and a recompile.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1. OSX is a derivative of NeXTstep, originally written for the Motorola 68000 line of processors. It was ported to the PowerPC architecture and the x86 architectures. Why's it so hard to believe they couldn't port it to ARM? Yeah, binaries from "real" OSX won't work, but since the plan is to only have Apple binaries running on the thing, they can just recompile for the new platform. Porting userland is trivial.
2. OSX is an operating system built on a microkernal derivative of UNIX.
sigh (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Doesn't Apple hold the copyright? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Doesn't Apple hold the copyright? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Doesn't Apple hold the copyright? (Score:4, Interesting)
Non sequiturs abound. (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, if it's "OS X" on PPC, and "OS X" on Intel, why wouldn't it be "OS X" on ARM? It could well come from the very same code base, simply an unreleased branch.
Re:Non sequiturs abound. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Non sequiturs abound. (Score:5, Informative)
I really don't think its quite a stretch to have OSX on an ARM9 chip. GCC will compile BSD for ARM9.
What I wont buy is the full set of Cocoa, Aqua and other graphic-heavy API in its full glory on the iPhone. The device probably uses Darwin compiled for ARM9 with mobile-Cocoa and mobile-Aqua (and others).
Re:Non sequiturs abound. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Non sequiturs abound. (Score:4, Informative)
Mach is not a complete kernel. It's a superset of microkernel functions for the BSD 4 kernels. FreeBSD was used as the new base-kernel so that Apple wouldn't have to use the (rather ancient) BSD 4.3/4.4 code base.
Re: (Score:2)
Going on a tangent here, but I've been extremely frustrated by the failure of Java to provide a write-once-run-anywhere environment for PDAs. Turns out J2ME doesn't even support AWT, you must use a completely separate GUI API (MIDP), which is a pathetic piece of junk. Imagine a widget set without buttons!
Smartphones and PDAs are so frustrating, a
Re: (Score:2)
You do have buttons. On your phone!
On a more serious sidenote, MIDP was designed at a time when mobile devices were still pretty low level, and future development in user interfaces wasn't exactly planned in.
Re:Non sequiturs abound. (Score:5, Informative)
True. And whatever code in OS X that isn't theirs is, if I am not mistaken, BSD-licensed, so that is no problem either.
Why would Apple create a new OS from scratch? This is probably a port of OS X to ARM (or whatever processer is used), designed for a small memory footprint and so forth.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I have to say, after the announcement that the phones will be locked down and prohibit third party apps, all stories about the iPhone ceased to be 'News for Nerds' or 'Stuff that matters.' At least until the story about how to hack around the locks appears...
Too bad we can't moderate the stories offtopic.
Re:Non sequiturs abound. (Score:5, Insightful)
"source would have to be made available" ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
--
*Art
Re:"source would have to be made available" ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"source would have to be made available" ? (Score:5, Insightful)
BSD does not require that modified source code be released. AFAIK, there is no GNU software in the mainline distribution of OS X. The only significant piece of GNU software that I'm aware of is the optional GCC compiler. Since Apple is unlikely to ship GCC on their iPhone, they're almost certainly free and clear.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, if I'm not mistaken, OSX is based largely on FreeBSD. The BSD license doesn't require the source code to be released. In fact, I could grab the FreeB
Re: (Score:2)
Why isn't it smart? Presuming you can add some value it's always smart to profit from free labor.
IIRC they also took the advertising clause away so you don't even have to tell anybody about it.
Re:"source would have to be made available" ? (Score:4, Funny)
so what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. As long as it's not Windows Mobile, s'all good...
-b.
Re:so what? (Score:4, Informative)
I've been seeing these kinds of comments a lot lately. Why is it hard for some people to accept that this is a mobile version of OS X?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When Jobs refers to OS X, I assume he is talking about the system that they built on top of Darwin. To me, Darwin will be j
Should be obvious it's not (Score:2, Insightful)
Second, the interface is obviously significantly different.
Third, it's hard to believe a handheld would have the resources to run OSX.
Finally, if it was really OSX, then any OSX app would run on it (in theory).
I suspect it's "OS X" like my PDA runs "Windows".
Re:Should be obvious it's not (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Answers (Score:2)
> It would just run.
But it wouldn't be integrated into the phone functionality, which was what Jobs demonstrated at the keynote.
> Second, the interface is obviously significantly different.
Yes.
> Third, it's hard to believe a handheld would have the resources to run OSX.
The handheld is more powerful than the desktops that ran NeXTStep with no problem in its time.
> Finally, if it was really OSX, then any O
Re:Should be obvious it's not (Score:4, Insightful)
It's OS X. Deal with it, people.
Re:Should be obvious it's not (Score:4, Informative)
The analogy with Linux falls apart because we routinely use "Linux" to refer to both to the set of userland operating systems ("distros") and the Linux kernel itself. Such is not the case with OS X. The term "OS X" does not refer to the XNU kernel, which can be ported to different platforms and appear vastly different in different implementations as you suggest. OS X is instead a userland operating system with a certain interface and recognizable features. It's more of a marketing and branding issue; the deep-down guts aren't that important. In that sense, even if the iPhone does turn out to share code with the "real" OS X, I think the Windows : WinCE
Re:Should be obvious it's not (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows 3.1 ran in 4MB back then, so I guess I can run Vista in 16MB.
Well, considering... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Regarding the question of "Can it really be OSX running on the iPhone?", it seems pretty obvious to me. If the iPhone is indeed an ARM chip, then I would *assume* Apple has ported Darwin to th
What ?? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well what makes you think that???? seriously just a job posting on apple.com [apple.com] is not enough to say that.
OSX != Mac OSX (Score:5, Insightful)
Whether is's based off Darwin or not is hard to say. At a certain level that does not matter. What would matter if Apple decide to open up to third part developers is the APIs that are available. There may be a small subset that want POSIX on their phone but for actual application development Cocoa with some custom PhoneKit is probably all that is important.
Re: (Score:2)
This is clearly running "OSX" to just about the same extent that PocketPCs are running "Windows" - except that Microsoft never pretended that they were running the "full desktop OS" - it was always well known that they were based on WinCE (which was the actual brand used for several years before being renamed to Windows Mobile).
Jobs clearly implied that t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? (Score:5, Informative)
2) Mac OS X is portable. It already runs on x86, x86-64, ppc, and ppc64. It looks like Apple has it running on ARM ISA (not sure exactly which) given statements by Apple.
Exactly which aspects of XNU, IOKit, BSD layer, user-land frameworks, etc. that make up "OS X" are running on the iPhone is unknown (Cocoa has been stated to exist by Apple, which implies a handful of other frameworks also exist). It is also possible that something other then XNU is being used... but I doubt that... much more likely it is has been slimmed down to exactly what the iPhone needs.
Don't forget SPARC and Motorola 68xxx and HP ... (Score:2)
And its base (NeXTStep) ran on Motorola 68xxx to start with, and IIRC, SPARC and whatever HP had inside its old HP-UX workstations.
OS X appears to be quite demonstrably portable... not much short of NetBSD appears to be more portable.
Re: (Score:2)
The kernel is not the operating system... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's PowerPC on a Samsung! Google it. (Score:3, Informative)
Google for: Samsung IBM PowerPC
Here:
http://www.pennwellblogs.com/sst/eds_threads/2006
"Last year, Samsung announced that it had licensed the PowerPC-core IP from IBM for inclusion in SoC designs." (last year=2005)
Here is stuff showing that Samsung would have experience building it:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/07/ibm_outso
no, it's an ARM: Cortex-A8 (Score:3, Informative)
Surprised? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, I guess that, other than the user interface, it could be done. Mac OS X (at least Panther) has been known to run on 400 MHz G3s with 128 MB RAM, and take up a few GB of disk space. I imagine that kind of performance is available in mobile phones now. With the modified UI, it's probably less CPU and memory hungry, and I guess a lot of apps have been removed, too, cutting the disk spac
Re: (Score:2)
When Jobs said 'it runs OSX' every programmer in the world went 'Ooooh'. When it was announced that their apps would never be allowed to run on it, it was like he spit on each and every one of us. If it turns out that it's NOT OSX at all, not even a 'lite' version like MS did with Wince, Jobs might as well have kicked us in the nads.
It's a personal insult to programmers. That's why the outrage.
As for 'sure no-one expected'
Re: (Score:2)
Because Linux is just the kernel, and this is one situation where that really makes all the difference in the world. Mac OS X is a package consisting of a few GB worth of apps. Linux is just the kernel, and, in a wider sense _any_ operating system built on that. That includes Debian with all 15 CDs of packages, but also LOAF, which fits on a single diskette. There really isn't a single "Linux operating system". There are Linu
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody expects the phone to be able to run every Mac OSX app exactly as a desktop would. Yes, I expect it will have Carbon, but some less-cpu/gpu-intensive version that is suited to the weaker processor. I expect it to be just like the desktop version, but not as graphically advanced and lacking many of the apps you expect on a desktop. I don't expect a full word processor, spreadsheet, or other such apps, as they are not nearly as useful on a phone and
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it is OS X (Score:5, Informative)
They can do whatever THEY like to it and never release the source, just like any GPL code author is free (under the terms of the GPL, even) to relicense their code for any party they see fit (BSD, APSL, whatever). It is up to the author and the copyright holder, if they are even in fact different people. Apple are both!
So OS X doesn't run on ARM? Why not? Because OpenDarwin doesn't? This whole article is horseshit speculation and a completely random nonsense of misunderstanding how software licensing works, who wrote and owns Darwin (Apple!) and the technical aspects involved (they've been working on the iPhone for the better part of a year and a half.. that's plenty of time to do a port to a new processor, especially given how abstracted the Darwin kernel is, XNU Apple additions and so on)
What? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A little premature? (Score:5, Insightful)
Any chance we could, like, wait for the iPhone to be, you know, actually released before we make definitive statements on what OS it is or isn't running? Right now, the only people who have any idea what OS is really running on the iPhone are the people who worked on it; I'm taking a wild guess here that you're not one of them.
Sure, I understand it's going to be a long six months with nothing but speculation to keep us warm at night. But let's keep in mind that, until we get our hands on the iPhone, it's speculation only, not knowledge.
It's Mac OS X: MACH - I/O Kit engeneers wanted (Score:5, Interesting)
Bluetooth/Wifi SW Engineer - iPhone
[...]
MacOS X / IOKit driver development experience
Mach IPC and/or Mach Server design experience
[...]
Solid understanding of embedded hardware platforms (ARM processors, SDIO, UARTs, etc
(http://jobs.apple.com/index.ajs?BID=1&method=mEx
Stripped down OS X (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Stripped down OS X (Score:5, Interesting)
From http://jobs.apple.com/index.ajs?BID=1&method=mExt [apple.com] ernal.showJob&RID=4241&CurrentPage=1:
Bluetooth/Wifi SW Engineer - iPhone
[...]
- MacOS X / IOKit driver development experience
- Mach IPC and/or Mach Server design experience
[...]
- Solid understanding of embedded hardware platforms (ARM processors, SDIO, UARTs, etc)
Windows CE is not Windows (Score:5, Funny)
We know that Windows CE does not use the NT kernel. This means that it is not using the same kernel as Windows XP and Windows Server. That means that WIndows CE is not Windows in any any meaningful sense. (Microsoft could brand toilet paper as running Windows if they like.) The NT kernel, the Mach-like microkernel that underlies what Microsoft has been calling Windows since the end of DOS, does not run on mobile phones or PocketPCs. The Microsoft Windows EULA is totally proprietary, and its source is carefully controlled. A Verizon Wireless rep said he had no idea what I was talking about. The WinCE source code is closed, like that of the Zune or XBox, and not like Linux. Now, Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! So, obviously, the iPhone is not running Windows CE, and must therefore be running Mac OS X 10.7 "Sabretooth."
What Steve Jobs actually said about 3rd Party Apps (Score:3, Insightful)
"These are devices that need to work, and you can't do that if you load any software on them," he said. "That doesn't mean there's not going to be software to buy that you can load on them coming from us. It doesn't mean we have to write it all, but it means it has to be more of a controlled environment."
So he's saying that Apple and possibly others might write software for the iPhone. From what Jobs said
you can see that the emphasis will be on control to ensure that all Apps are very robust so that the phone
works reliably.
lost the plot (Score:2)
The original comments are badly researched by someone with no historical perspective on MacOSX/OPENSTEP/NeXTSTEP/BSD
At least parts of OS X (Score:3, Interesting)
As an interesting note is how Jobs described the OS the phone uses. He said "OS X." Normally Apple refers to their desktop operating system as "Mac OS X." That tells us a few things about what's really going on inside the phone.
My educated would be: the phone does run the Mach part of XNU, likely runs at least parts of the BSD subsystem and the I/O Kit device driver interface. Apple has also said that the iPhone supports PDF. This leads me to guess that parts of WindowServer and CoreGraphics are there. The references to Widgets support this as well. Widgets also tell us something else: WebKit is available. Calling the browser Safari supports this.
So, it's not the Mac OS X that runs on this laptop, but it would appear that enough of the existing OS X technology is there to call it OS X. Though, all of this is total speculation the product isn't on sale so it really can't be analyzed.
Finely, I'm still not entirely sure the no third-party apps bit is a forever thing. We don't know anything but what they've said, but I'll wait until Apple's World Wide Developer Conference (which interestingly is usually just about the time the iPhone ships) before I'll pass judgement on that.
It's Darwin/MACH/I(O Kit (Score:2, Interesting)
The iPhone team is seeking a highly motivated Embedded SW Engineer to develop
middleware and low-level drivers for Bluetooth and Wifi enabled products
Just funny (Score:5, Insightful)
It may be a striped version of OSX but it obviously is a version of OSX since it has some very OSX features like Core Animation which doesn't even show until Leopard. Even things like Widgets are OSX. They've been working on the phone for years so I'd assume they adapted the OS to the chip they are using. Using even a notebook processor would be silly. The power requirements would limit you to one five minute phone call per charge.
What really seems to be pissing everyone off is it's a computer under the hood and Apple isn't open sourcing it. Apple has always been big on protecting their hardware and I'm guessing that's why they aren't providing the code. It's meant to be a phone at this stage and they don't want to deal with all the hassles of people screwing up their phones trying to get Pong to run on it. Also that has to be the crown jewel for virus writers so why help them? I'm sure they'll open it up to development eventually but it's likely to be years and only when it starts crossing the line into becoming a full on portable computer. It's a staggering smart phone, deal with it.
OSX,doesnt matter.It is a black box, closed system (Score:3, Insightful)
what difference would that make? It is still a closed development model of a black box system.
They are trying to sell a very high end phone that is completely closed to add-on apps.
That worked for the mp3 player, but the functionality of an mp3 player is expected to be limited.
Apple has chosen to live and die with a closed box model.
All wrong... (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been waiting for clue to finally disappear from
Why can't we mod down a story? (Score:5, Insightful)
I suppose that might be an argument IF... (Score:3, Informative)
I suppose that might be an argument IF Apple were currently selling the iPhone. But they are not. So assuming that the iPhone runs a version of OS X as Apple has said (and there is no reason to doubt it), Apple still has several months to meet the terms of the agreement.
As with most embedded versions of standard OS's (Score:3, Insightful)
I call Bullshit (Score:3, Interesting)
APSL applies to everyone but Apple (Score:3, Informative)
2. Apple is free to modify their own code to run on ARM and not release the source.
3. You
I was wrong! Maybe it does run OS X (Score:3, Informative)
Re:FreeBSD? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A magic compiler (Score:5, Insightful)
This article just doesn't make any sense. I don't know if the Slashdot editors were looking for an anti-Apple article so as to appear to be giving "equal time," but this is pretty idiotic. There are better criticisms of Apple in general, and of the iPhone in particular, than this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cue mobile version of Vista.