Top Bananas

Tag Archives: iOS

The Future of iOS

Posted on by Posted in Software, User Interface Leave a comment

What it is: Apple will likely release iOS 11 at their June developer’s conference, but has iOS grown too big for the iPhone and iPad?

When Apple first created the iPhone, the operating system was designed solely for the iPhone and called iPhone OS. When Apple introduced the iPad, they used the same operating system so apps could easily run on the iPhone and iPad. Then they renamed the operating system iOS.

However, one problem is starting to emerge. The iPhone and iPad are distinctly different devices. They may be similar, but their form factors require different features. Federico Vittici has created a series of mock images for iPad-only features he’d like to see in iOS 11. While it’s unlikely the features highlighted in these mock images will be exactly the same as those introduced in the upcoming iOS 11, it does point out a problem.

iOS is no longer a perfect match for both the iPhone and iPad.

The iPad needs to take advantage of a larger screen. The iPhone needs to focus more on touch interaction because that’s the way most people will use an iPhone. The iPad can use an optional keyboard to turn it into a pseudo-laptop. Most people will never use a keyboard with their iPhone. So it doesn’t take much to imagine that Apple will need to fork iOS to better meet the needs of iPhone and iPad users.

The key is compatibility. Right now, you can run any iPhone app on an iPad. It may not look good but it will work. If Apple retained this compatibility but still allowed iPad-only features, then developers could write optimized iPad apps and scale them back for the iPhone if necessary. Then again, some iPad apps won’t run on the smaller screen of the iPhone.

There’s no longer a need to get apps on the iPad by letting them run iPhone apps. The iPad is becoming its own produce and needs its own operating system. Just like watchOS and tvOS, an iPad OS would still be similar to the iPhone, but just offer features unique to that device. For example, watchOS offers touch interfaces so the Apple Watch can tap the user on the wrist for feedback. That feature is pointless in an iPhone or iPad.

Just as Microsoft is running into problems trying to optimize Windows for PC, tablet, and smartphone use, so is Apple now running into problems trying to cram iOS into both the iPhone and iPad. One day they’ll need to break these two apart and optimize the operating system for each device. That someday may be soon because an optimized iPad operating system could do nothing but help sales of the iPad by offering features people have been clamoring for.

The iPad may have grown out of the iPhone, but it’s all grown up now. It’s time for Apple to let it loose with its own operating system.

To read more about the possible concept of iPad-only features in an operating system, click here.

 

 

Visual Studio for the Mac

Posted on by Posted in Programming Leave a comment

What it is: Microsoft acquired Xamarin and released their cross-platform development tool as Visual Studio for the Mac.

Xamarin once developed a compiler that would let you use Microsoft’s C# programming language to develop Android and iOS apps. Xamarin proved so popular that Microsoft acquired them and rebranded Xamarin as Visual Studio for the Mac. Now Macintosh programmers can use C# to create Windows, Android, and iOS programs.

While this is great for C# programmers, it does highlight one huge issue. There’s no Visual Basic support. When Microsoft first created their .NET programming initiative, they insisted that C# and Visual Basic would be equally supported. Most programmers didn’t believe this and gravitated towards C# as Microsoft’s unofficial, official programming language.

Over time, Microsoft gradually lost interest in Visual Basic, which was no surprise because Visual Basic.NET was essentially C# with BASIC syntax so it made little sense to learn Visual Basic when you could just learn C# instead. By not supporting Visual Basic (which most programmers didn’t care about anyway), Visual Studio for the Mac simply confirms Visual Basic’s second class status. If you’re going to learn any programming language, the choices really boil down to C# or Swift.

C# is Microsoft’s real official language and now Visual Studio for the Mac lets you use C# to create macOS and iOS apps as well as Android and Windows programs. For maximum flexibility, you’ll probably want to learn C#.

The main reason to learn Swift is because it’s Apple’s official language. Just as Microsoft gradually lost interest in Visual Basic, you can expect Apple to gradually lose interest in Objective-C, their previous official language. Swift has been made open source so it’s gravitated towards Windows and Linux as well and will likely be ported to create Android apps eventually.

The big difference between C# and Swift is that C# is currently cross-platform while Swift is not quite there yet. If you already know C#, Visual Studio for the Mac is Microsoft’s way to keep you using C#. If you don’t know any programming language, then the choice between C# and Swift is a bit harder. For anyone who wants to focus exclusively on Apple products, Swift makes sense since Apple will always provide the latest features for Swift. If you want to create cross-platform apps, then C# and Visual Studio for the Mac is currently the better choice.

The ultimate goal of every cross-platform programming language is to let you write a program once and run it on multiple platforms. The reality is that this never works (think of Java). Instead, you have to tweak each program for a particular platform, but this is still far easier than rewriting an entire program from scratch.

Swift isn’t quite a cross-platform language yet, but its open source nature means somebody will create a similar program like Xamarin. Until then, C# gives Windows programmers a chance to tap into the lucrative Android, iOS, and macOS market without learning a new language like Swift.

Unless you have a really good reason to learn something else, C# and Swift are the two languages to focus on for iOS and macOS development. Don’t waste your time learning Visual Basic. Even Microsoft no longer cares about Visual Basic any longer so why should you?

To learn more about Visual Studio for the Mac, click here.

 

Google’s New Operating System

Posted on by Posted in Software, User Interface Leave a comment

What it is: Fuchsia is Google’s latest operating system designed for smartphones and personal computers.

Operating systems form the heart of any hardware. Microsoft is clinging to keep Windows relevant in the mobile computer market while Google has both Android and ChromeOS. Meanwhile Apple has macOS for personal computers and iOS for mobile computers. While Windows continues to dominate the personal computer market, it’s being challenged by ChromeOS. While Android dominates the mobile market, it was originally a Blackberry clone that was quickly redesigned to look like an iOS clone. The end result is that Android wasn’t designed from scratch for smartphones and personal computers.

That’s why Google is developing Fuchsia, a new operating system that avoids using Linux as its kernel. The main reason for this is to get greater control over the operating system. The big question is what will Google hope Fuchsia will do for them?

Since Fuchsia is designed for both smartphones and personal computers, it immediately competes with Google’s own Android and ChromeOS. The advantages of Fuchsia is that Google can start from scratch and design an optimized operating system capable of using a minimal amount of resources while scaling up. The huge disadvantages is that there’s little reason for anyone to suddenly dump Android and ChromeOS to suddenly switch to Fuchsia.

If Fuchsia offers an Android compatibility layer, that immediately destroys any benefits of optimized software. Users have no reason to switch form Android to Fuchsia and developers have no reason to switch until the market is flooded with Fuchsia users. Of course, users won’t buy Fuchsia devices until there are plenty of apps available for it, so the idea of starting a new operating system might make sense from a technical standpoint but from a practical point of view, there’s little reason for users to switch.

Consider a company making a new desktop operating system to compete against Windows, Linux, and macOS. If a startup tried to raise funding by claiming they were going to target the desktop operating system market, they would never get a penny because there’s little reason for people to switch form Windows, Linux, or macOS to use an entirely new operating system with little software to go along with it.

Likewise, there’s little reason for any Android or iOS user to switch to Fuchsia and almost no reason for Windows, Linux, or macOS users to switch to Fuchsia either. For a new operating system like Fuchsia to succeed, it needs to target a new market, not try to take over an existing one.

Most people use Windows because so many companies use Windows. Linux is arguably faster, more secure, and more reliable (while being free), yet even these crucial differences can’t make people switch en masse. How will Fuchsia attract users?

The idea of creating a new operating system makes sense form a technical point of view, but technology never advances solely for technical reasons. Technology only advances due to public acceptance. If the public finds a reason to adopt a particular technology, then they will. If they don’t have a reason, then the greatest technology in the world will lie unused in a dusty corner despite its great technological achievements. It took over a century for people to adopt fax machines and people still haven’t adopted the Segway to the extent that its inventors had hoped.

Unless Google plans to use Fuchsia has a science experiment or the basis of a new product, Fuchsia’s chances of displacing Android, ChromeOS, Windows, and iOS remain dim at best. Most likely Fuchsia can help improve Android rather than replace it altogether. Google will likely get stuck supporting Android and ChromeOS for a long time just like Microsoft keeps supporting Windows and Apple keeps supporting macOS. In the current computing world, there’s little room for a new operating system like Fuchsia. Fuchsia needs to take on a new market, and then that will force Google to support Android, ChromeOS, and Fuchsia.

Fuchsia isn’t going to conquer the operating system market, but it might still be interesting to see how it evolves anyway.

To read more about Fuchsia, click here.

 

Apple’s New File System

Posted on by Posted in Software Leave a comment

What it is: Apple has developed a new file system called Apple File System — or APFS.

One huge problem with computers is that legacy software tends to linger long after it’s no longer the optimum solution. The biggest example of this is with the file system of Apple’s operating systems, macOS and iOS. Apple’s current file system, Apple’s HFS+, was developed 30 years ago so it’s not optimized for solid state drives that didn’t even exist 30 years ago. So it’s no surprise that HFS+ isn’t the optimum solution for today’s operating systems that are moving from mechanical hard drives to solid state drives instead.

What’s remarkable about APFS is that it’s not only optimized for solid state drives and today’s equipment, but it’s also optimized for minimizing storage space and supporting encryption. If you recently updated an iOS device to iOS 10.3, chances are good the update switched the file system on your iPhone or iPad to APFS without you even knowing it. If you check the storage space of your iOS device before updating to iOS 10.3, and then check after, you should see that APFS in iOS 10.3 gives you more storage space such as an extra 1 Gb or more.

Remarkably, switching file systems when updating iOS 10.3 hasn’t caused any type of widespread incompatibilities. For most people, they’re not even aware that the update switched file systems, which is like changing out the ending of an airplane in mid-flight. If Apple could make the update to APFS seamless on iOS devices, there’s hope that Apple can do the same when the next version of macOS switched over to APFS as well.

This switch to a new file system means little to end users since they’ll still continue using their devices just like before. The huge difference is that APFS provides a foundation for supporting the future. That means more storage space, stronger encryption to protect your privacy, and more efficient use of solid state drives.

Just in case you’re wondering, Apple isn’t the only company updating its file system to keep up with the future. Microsoft’s Windows 10 currently uses an older file system called NTFS, which dates back to the 90’s. Eventually, Microsoft hopes to switch to Resilient File System (ReFS) because no file system can be optimized for future devices that didn’t exist when it was created.

When Apple switches macOS to APFS, that will mean a unified file system for all of Apple’s products. That will simplify development on all platforms and insure compatibility with data sharing among all platforms. APFS is the future, but it’s a future you’ll likely never realize is happening. Probably the only way you’ll realize your computer is using a new file system is if it fails catastrophically. If that doesn’t happen, then you may be using Apple’s new file system with your iPhone or iPad right now and not even know it.

To read more about Apple’s newest file system, click here.

 

Why Apple Wants to Make Its Own Graphics Processor

Posted on by Posted in Business, Hardware Leave a comment

What it is: Apple recently announced they will no longer rely on graphics processors from Imagination Technologies.

There are several reasons why Apple no longer wants to rely on third-party processors. Back in the old days, Apple used ARM processors, which any rival could buy. That meant a rival could buy the exact same parts as Apple, sell their product for a lower price, and claim superiority based on the lower price alone. To combat this, Apple now only licenses the basic ARM architecture but custom designs their own ARM processors. That means Apple can optimize their ARM processor (dubbed the A series such as the A10) to run iOS. Unlike Android device manufacturers, Apple’s iPhone is optimized to run as efficiently as possible while Android devices use off-the-shelf components that are not optimized to work together.

The end result is that Android devices often need faster processors and more RAM just to meet the same performance as an iPhone using a slower processor and less RAM. Now Apple is focusing on the graphics processor market.

Previously, Apple relied on Imagination Technologies’ graphics processors, but then Imagination Technologies could turn around and sell those exact same graphics processors to anyone else. Since Imagination Technologies was earning half of their revenue from Apple, Apple was essentially paying for Imagination Technologies’s research that rivals would ultimately benefit form as well. By cutting out Imagination Technologies and developing their own graphics processors, Apple no longer needs to support a company that will help its rivals.

More importantly, Apple wants greater optimization with graphics processors for two reasons: augmented reality and artificial intelligence.

Augmented reality is going to be the next major major mobile computing market and Apple wants dedicated graphics processors that rivals can’t use. Rivals will already be caught flat-footed when Apple releases their version of augmented reality so by denying them the same graphics processors, Apple will force rivals to use less efficient graphics processors to go along with their rushed augmented reality software frameworks. The result will likely be a sloppy mess that works, but won’t work as well as Apple’s solution that is optimized for hardware and has long been planned and designed ahead of time for efficiency and expandability.

Apple has the luxury of taking its time developing augmented reality because they have no deadlines. Once Apple releases augmented reality for the iPhone and iPad, rivals will have to rush their augmented reality solutions to Android and they won’t have the luxury of time to develop and optimize their solution.

A second reason Apple wants its own graphics processors is because graphics processors are used for artificial intelligence (AI). AI is used for everything from self-driving cars to voice recognition assistants like Siri. By optimizing their own graphics processor for dedicated tasks like machine learning, Apple can create sharper graphics for their devices and advance their AI efforts in ways that rivals can’t match using off-the-shelf components.

Apple simply wants to control as much of their parts as possible and reduce dependence on any third-party who could easily support Apple’s rivals. Augmented reality and artificial intelligence are two major developments that will only grow in importance. By limiting rivals’ access to technology that Apple relies on, Apple can create a performance advantage that rivals can never match. Because rivals sell lower-cost items at razor thin margins, they can’t afford to spend as much in research to match Apple’s efforts in graphics processors. This will only widen the gap between Apple and its rivals.

Apple didn’t announce they’re dropping Imagination Technologies’ graphics processors in two years because they’re starting their own graphics processor from scratch today. Most likely, Apple has been quietly researching its own graphics processor and now its own graphics processor is ready so Apple can start switching to their own graphics processor as soon as possible.

Expect Apple introduce its own graphics processors in its products as soon as this year. Unlike other companies that have a short-term focus, Apple has a much longer vision for the future, and that vision likely doesn’t include cutting themselves off from a supplier unless they already know with certainty that they can get along just fine without that supplier.

Imagination Technologies can sell their graphics processors to other companies, but Apple’s graphics processor is likely ready to go and offers superior performance to Imagination Technologies’ graphics processors, or else why would Apple bother switching to an inferior, in-house solution?

Imagination Technologies is sunk without Apple, but Apple is fine without Imagination Technologies. Just as Apple’s A series processors blow away rival ARM chips like Qualcomm’s SnapDragon, expect Apple’s graphics processor to blow away anything Imagination Technologies can offer.

The future is hardware control optimized for Apple’s software, and that’s a combination no rival will ever be able to meet, let alone exceed.

To read more about Apple’s decision to drop Imagination Technologies’ graphics processors, click here.

Apple Dumping Imagination Technologies

Posted on by Posted in Business, Hardware Leave a comment

What it is: Imagination Technologies makes graphics processors for iOS devices, but Apple announced they will no longer use their technology within two years.

Imagination Technologies makes the bulk of their revenue from Apple as a graphics processor supplier. Yet just as Apple moved from off-the-shelf processors for iOS devices, so has Apple decided tome to their own in-house graphics processors. How they’ll do that without violating any of Imagination Technologies’ patents remains to be seen, but the fact remains that Apple wants more control over the parts that make up their products.

That means other companies can freely buy and use Imagination Technologies graphics processors, which gives rivals the same features as Apple products. By moving their graphics processor designs in-house, Apple can not only create custom graphics processors for iOS, but optimize it for iOS and their own ARM processors as well. Such optimization will be far beyond the capabilities of rivals, further distancing Apple from the competition.

Now it’s possible for Apple to acquire Imagination Technologies and this might be a way to negotiate by knocking down the company price. One key note about Imagination Technologies is that they announced a new graphics processor called PowerVR Furian, which is designed for virtual and augmented reality applications. Since Apple is already moving towards virtual and augmented reality, it’s a big sign that Apple may want to create an optimized graphics processor specifically for virtual and augmented reality.

Such an optimized graphics processor could offer better performance than the PowerVR Furian processor and prevent rivals from using identical processors. After all, if Imagination Technologies remains a separate company, Samsung and anyone else could buy the exact same PowerVR Furian processors and offer near identical features as Apple products. By moving virtual and augmented reality graphics processors in-house, Apple further protects their lead and extends it in ways rivals can’t touch.

So the future lies with graphics processors and Apple likely wants to control more of this crucial component. Apple already designs their ARM processors for iOS devices so it’s logical for them to branch out and control their graphics processors as well. Of course, if Apple designs their own graphics processors, they could use that same graphics processor for the Macintosh and further optimize the Macintosh for graphics.

Ultimately, Apple wants to control everything about their products and remain at the mercy of no one. Meanwhile, rivals will continue relying on off-the-shelf components that aren’t optimized for any particular purpose and provide identical performance as rivals. When you have no advantage, you have to compete on price, and that’s a losing game in the long run. Just ask the PC manufacturers how thin their profit margins are trying to sell PCs.

Apple has the engineering talent to design their own ARM processors so designing their own graphics processors is the next logical step. They might still rely on Imagination Technologies for their patents by acquiring them after knocking their share price down. Whatever happens, Apple is taking greater control over their own products and destiny.

To read more about Imagination Technologies, click here.

 

HTML Snippets Powered By : XYZScripts.com