Top Bananas | Author Archives

The Next Platform Shift

Posted on August 4, 2020 by admin Posted in Business, Hardware Leave a comment

What it is: Apple Silicon represents the next platform shift in the computing world.

Back int he early days of computers, the first popular operating system was CP/M-80, running on Z80 processors made by a company called Zilog. For several years, the business computing world settled on CP/M-80 running on Z80 processors using software like WordStar and VisiCalc.

Z80 processors were technically known as 8-bit processors, which were just fine until Intel came along with the 8088 processor, which was a 16-bit processor that offered more power.

IBM adopted the 8088 processor for their IBM PC and paired it with two operating systems: CP/M-86 and PC-DOS. The expectation was that CP/M-86 would naturally be the successor to CP/M-80, but the cost of CP/M-86 was higher than PC-DOS, so PC-DOS became the new standard operating system for personal computing.

PC-DOS was actually designed as a CP/M-80 clone that Microsoft bought from an individual for $50,000. Then they turned this CP/M-80 clone into PC-DOS for IBM.

Intel eventually shifted to 32-bit processors with the 80386 processor. This provided more power that allowed PC-DOS to become MS-DOS, which eventually became Windows.

Originally, Windows needed MS-DOS to run but eventually Windows became its own operating system. Windows and Intel processors dominated the personal computing market for decades that everyone referred to this synergy as Wintel (Windows and Intel).

However, just as the world shifted from Z80 processors to Intel processors, so is the world now shifting from Intel processors to ARM-based processors. The basic idea behind ARM processors is that they far less power than Intel processors. However for the longest time, ARM processors could not compete in power with Intel processors. That’s why ARM processors were mostly used in mobile computers like smartphones and tablets that needed long battery life but didn’t need massive processing power.

That’s changing with Apple Silicon. Apple licenses ARM processors to create their own processors and Apple Silicon not only uses less energy than Intel processors, but also offers more power as well. With this combination of more power and less energy consumption, ARM processors are poised to take over the next wave of computing.

Apple is shifting the Macintosh to Apple Silicon, which will reportedly allow laptops to offer 15-20 hours of battery life compared to 10-12 hours of battery life for Intel processors. Given the choice between less power and less battery life (Intel) or more power and more battery life (ARM), it’s easy to see where the future is heading.

When the world shifted from Z80 processors to 8088 Intel processors, it also shifted operating systems. Now as the world shifts from Intel processors to ARM processors, it’s going to shift once more to a new operating system.

That new operating system may be macOS, iOS, or Android, but it won’t be Windows. Windows is still tied to Intel processors although Microsoft does offer a version fo Windows that runs on ARM processors. However, this version of Windows on ARM processors has not attracted third-party support and lacks compatibility with current Windows applications.

Apple can move away from Intel easily, but Microsoft cannot. That means each passing year will see Apple Silicon far surpassing Intel processors while macOS and iOS far surpass Windows in ease of use.

The future is mobile and wearable computing and the future is ARM. If you want a bright future, just follow the trends and the money.

Apple Silicon vs. Intel

Posted on July 15, 2020 by admin Posted in Hardware, Software Leave a comment

What it is: Apple announced the Macintosh is shifting away from Intel processors to Apple’s own processors dubbed Apple Silicon.

At one time, the Macintosh used a PowerPC processor (or even earlier, a Motorola 68000 processor) while the PC world used Intel processors (or even earlier, Z80 processors).

So while the PC market shifted from CP/M-80 and Z80 processors to MS-DOS and Intel processors, the Macintosh shifted from Motorola 68000 processors to PowerPC processors to Intel processors.

Once PCs and the Macintosh used the same Intel processors, it was easier to compare their features. In general, PCs cost less but the software on the Macintosh tended to be easier to use.

Now Apple has announced the Macintosh is making yet another transition away from Intel processors to Apple’s own processors based on energy-efficient ARM processors. Apple’s own ARM processors (dubbed A-series chips) already outperform most Intel processors, so switching to Appel Silicon will allow the Macintosh to be more energy efficient and powerful than Intel processors.

Once the Macintosh starts pulling away in features that PCs can’t match (much like how old iPhones still outperform the latest Android smartphones), the Macintosh will offer a clear advantage over PCs.

At one time, Microsoft and Intel were known as Wintel because Windows ran on Intel processors. Now with the mobile computing market abandoning Intel processors for ARM processors, the Macintosh is following the lead of iOS and Android in embracing ARM processors. That means ARM processors represent the future of computing and Intel processors represent the past like PowerPC or Z80 processors.

This will create a dichotomy in the computing world. All the current work will rely on Intel processors while all the latest advancements will appear on ARM processors. Eventually mobile computing running ARM processors will likely dominate int he same way that more people use smartphones than PCs these days.

That means the Wintel monopoly is over. Windows is no longer the dominant operating system (iOS and Android are the dominant operating system) and Intel processors are no longer the dominant hardware (ARM processors are).

As the Macintosh accelerates each year under Apple Silicon, it will only pull further away from traditional Windows PCs on Intel processors. That means the world will continue its shift to mobile computing. Toss in the future of wearable computers (none of which will use Intel processors) and you can see the future of Intel processors is far less promising than the future of ARM processors.

Expect more Linux distractions to support this move to ARM processors and expect the world to lose software developers too closely wedded to Intel processors.

Intel is dead and ARM is dominant. That’s not a prediction but a statement of fact right now, and this gap between Intel and ARM will only continue to grow with both mobile computing and the Macintosh relying on Apple Silicon in the future.

The future is clear. It’s ARM and specifically Apple Silicon.

To learn whether you should buy an Intel Macintosh or wait for an Apple Silicon Macintosh, click here.

Killing Third-Party Development Tools

Posted on June 23, 2020 by admin Posted in Programming, Software Leave a comment

What it is: Apple announced that the Macintosh will shift from Intel processors to Apple’s own processors.

Apple once relied on Motorola 68000 processors before shifting to PowerPC processors. Then Apple shifted from PowerPC processors to Intel processors. Now Apple is shifting once more from Intel processors to their own ARM-based processors.

While this shift is necessary for Apple to continue innovating the Macintosh, it’s going to rip the guts out of third-party development tools. Right now, Apple has plans to support the transition from Intel-based Macs to Apple’s own processor-based Macs. That means all of Apple’s own software needs to run on both Intel and ARM processors.

The primary development tool for creating iOS apps is Apple’s own Xcode, which will be capable of running on both Intel and ARM processors. Xcode will also be able to create universal binaries so you can write a program once and it will be capable of running on both Intel and ARM-based Macs.

So Xcode will be able to run on the new ARM-based Macs and create apps for ARM-based Macs. That means every third-party development tool is in trouble.

There’s along list of third-party development tools that offer different advantages over Xcode. Xamarin lets you use C#, which is Microsoft’s official language. By using Xamarin, you can create iOS apps on a Windows PC.

There’s also Xojo, which is a Visual Basic clone along with Livecode, which is HyperCard clone. Of course there are a host of other third-party development tools as well, but the problem is that each development tool will need to run on Intel and ARM-based Macs, and they’ll need to create both Intel and ARM-based binaries.

Guess what? Most of these third-party development tools won’t be able to do it, at least not initially. That means Xcode will be the only option. That also means there’s little reason to rely on third-party development tools since they’ll be late to the transition and they won’t offer all the features you need to create apps for the Macintosh.

The third-party development tool market is now in serious trouble because why would you bother working with a tool that won’t run on ARM-based Macs and won’t let you create Intel and ARM binaries?

Xamarin might survive since Microsoft can likely get their tool to run on ARM-based Macs, but smaller third-party development tools like Xojo and Livecode probably won’t make the shift. That means they’ll likely fade away over time.

So if you’re looking to develop apps, your only choice really is Xcode. Nothing else will offer the features that Xcode will offer from day one, which means Xcode should be the only development tool worth learning.

Apple’s shift to ARM-based Macs is exciting because it means the Macintosh will gain a tremendous amount of features along with longer battery life and lower cost. While the future of the Macintosh is bright, the future of other development tools is not.

Look for the demise of many third-party development tools that fail to make the transition from Intel to ARM-based Macs. It happened before and it will happen again. The Macintosh will survive. Third-party development tools probably will not so abandon now and start learning Xcode today.

Your programming future just might depend on it.

Why Apple Glasses Might Succeed

Posted on May 24, 2020 by admin Posted in Business, Hardware, User Interface Leave a comment

What it is: Apple Glasses is rumored to appear in 2020.

Why does Apple get all the credit for selling products that other companies have sold years or even decades before Apple did? The answer is simple. Apple doesn’t invent or innovate entirely new products out of thin air. What Apple does best is look at existing products and refine them so they’re more acceptable to the public.

When Google released Google Glass, they were one of the first wearable computers. Unfortunately, Google failed in several ways. First, Google Glasses looked odd with tiny square box on one side of the eye glasses.

Second, Google Glass contained a video camera that allowed a wearer to record others in public, which immediately earned users the nickname of “Glassholes.”

Third, Google Glass failed to solve a specific problem. Why would anyone pay $1,500 for Google Glass? Even if Google Glass only cost $25, why would anyone even pay that amount? Google Glass served no purpose.

For Apple Glass to succeed, Apple needs to make their wearable computer no different than wearing ordinary eyeglasses. Think of how Apple Watch mimicked the appearance of an ordinary wristwatch, making it acceptable tot he general public.

Second, Apple Glass must avoid a video camera to avoid the label of “Glassholes” all over again.

Third, Apple Glass must solve a specific purpose. Watch Apple’s success products in the past on how they solved specific problems.

When Apple introduced the original Macintosh, they wowed everybody by demonstrating the graphical capabilities of the operating system that let people display fonts on screen and draw pictures using a mouse. That was revolutionary at the time of MS-DOS command line interfaces that PCs were using at the time.

When Apple introduced the iPhone, it essentially put a PC in your pocket. Previously mobile phones were clumsy to use beyond making and receiving phone calls. The iPhone made it practical to browse the Internet on a mobile device.

So what can Apple Glasses offer? Beyond looking stylish and acceptable so people will want to wear them along with a reasonable cost, rumored at $499, Apple Glasses will need to solve a problem that current technology cannot solve right now. If Apple can succeed at that, they’ll have a whole new market all to themselves like they have with smart watches.

Solving problems is the purpose of technology. Endless amounts of technical specifications with RAM and storage space means nothing if all those technical specifications fail to do anything useful.

To learn more about the potential of Apple Glass, click here.

The Demise of Magic Leap

Posted on April 29, 2020 by admin Posted in Business, Hardware, User Interface Leave a comment

What it is: Magic Leap announced massive layoffs as one of the early augmented reality pioneers.

For the past few years, Magic Leap has been gobbling up billions of dollars to produce an augmented reality headset. Not surprisingly, Magic Leap recently announced massive layoffs and a shift away from the consumer market. So what went wrong?

Visit Magic Leap’s web site (https://www.magicleap.com/en-us) and you’ll notice a startling omission. What crucial problem does Magic Leap solve?

Ask yourself what problem a supermarket or an auto repair shop solves and you can find a straightforward answer. Ask yourself what problem Magic Leap’s headset solves and you have no clear idea. Not surprisingly, without the ability to solve a clear, pressing problem, few people bothered to buy a Magic Leap headset. With few customers, Magic Leap wound up churning through investment money with nothing to show for it and no future whatsoever.

The bottom line is that if your product can’t solve a specific problem, you literally don’t have a business.

The real key to augmented reality isn’t just to play games with technology but to solve problems. Solve a pressing problem and people will buy your product.

Just look at mobile phones before the iPhone. They were clumsy to use and limited in capability. Then the iPhone arrived and essentially gave you a computer in your pocket that could also take pictures and track your location to give directions while playing music like an MP3 player.

The iPhone solved multiple problems and literally wiped out the mobile phone market (Nokia and Blackberry), the MP3 player market (the iPod), GPS standalone devices, and standalone digital cameras. People were unhappy with the current products on the market so they flocked to the iPhone.

Now ask yourself again, what pressing problem does a Magic Leap headset solve? The answer is nothing. Not surprisingly, Magic Leap’s sales were close to nothing.

The future of augmented reality lies in solving a pressing problem and that will likely occur with smart glasses that solve a person’s vision problems. Eliminate the physical grinding of custom lenses and allow computational photography to provide lenses to correct vision problems and you immediately solve a pressing need. Anything else is extra.

The future of augmented reality won’t be on smartphones or tablets but in smart glasses (wearable computers). We’re not quite there yet but that’s the future. Companies that fail to identify a problem to solve, like Magic Leap, simply represent the path towards failure.

To learn more about Magic Leap, click here.

Xcode Coming to iOS

Posted on April 20, 2020 by admin Posted in Programming, Software Leave a comment

What it is: The latest rumor suggests Xcode will be able to run on iOS soon.

Apple has been trying to convince everyone that the iPad can be a replacement for a computer. In many cases it can, but one area where it cannot is in software development.

Right now you need to run Xcode on a Macintosh to create iOS apps. That causes a problem since that also means you must test your iOS apps on a separate iOS device or inside the (buggy) iOS simulator program that comes with Xcode.

Now the latest rumor is that Apple will bring Xcode to iOS, which only makes sense so this rumor is just a matter of time. With Xcode able to run on iOS, people will be able to develop iOS apps directly on an iPad. That will go a long way towards creating more iOS apps since you no longer will need both an iOS device and a Macintosh.

Here are two ways Apple could port Xcode to iOS. First, they could do a straight port of Xcode, which would mean Xcode on iOS would be able to use Swift or Objective-C and be able to create Macintosh programs just like Xcode on the Mac.

This makes little sense so it’s far more likely that Apple will strip Xcode on iOS of its ability to create Macintosh programs and/or use Objective-C. This will create a leaner version of Xcode that’s not saddled with old NextStep frameworks for Objective-C and Macintosh development.

So if you want to take advantage of Xcode for iOS, you’ll need the latest iPad model (preferably an iPad Pro) and an external keyboard. Then focus solely on Swift and iOS development.

Most likely Apple will keep Xcode on the Macintosh to let you create Macintosh, iOS, tvOS, and watchOS and let Xcode on iOs focus solely on iOS development initially.

The Macintosh will eventually switch to the ARM processor (which powers iOS devices) so it’s only a matter of time before Xcode on iOS will run on ARM-powered Macintosh computers.

The future is ARM processors and iOS, not Intel processors in the Macintosh. If you’re serious about iOS development, be ready to jump on Xcode on iOS as early as this summer.

To learn more about the potential of Xcode on iOS, click here.