Apple Internet Computer next year

B

brutfood II

Registered
Given that Larry Ellison is pushing the forthcoming Oracle 8i database as the server for an Internet Operating System. Well, Larry is best buddies with Steve Jobs, and he made lots of noise about Apple's involvement in Internet Computers back around the ousting of Gil Amelio. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Apple branded consumer oriented Internet Computer next year.

Apple have also been positioning themselves more as a vendor of consumer (entertainment) devices to address a different kind of market. The digital hub, quicktime enhancements, the iPod.

I have actually started a forum to discuss IOS issues.

http://www.i2genius.com/forum

We want the discussions on this forum to extend over a variety of viewpoints, and a spectrum of approaches and disciplines. From extremely detailed technical discussions, through to user interface considerations, applications, benefits to the community, and even sociological impact of an IOS.

I expect that mac users will be interested in this, as the IC is our best last hope to defeat Micro$oft and the satan of seattle.

By the way, my own humble IOS demonstrator can be found at http://i2genius.com/ecard.html

Please join my forum. Even if you just join and post a thread to introduce yourself. I want to get this going.
 
Hmm... Larry Ellison actually was behind the Mac NC (Network Computer) which turned out as the iMac. A harddrive was added before release, though. I guess Apple was _not_ so sure of this thing. Apple also sees the Mac as the center of the digital hub. I don't see pure network clients, be they internet or LAN...
 
not sure if i like your advertising scheme... please read the rules of the forum, although you did introduce a rumour first you still used the space to advertise for yourself.... please keep in mind that this, is simply, not allowed.
 
Internet Computers have never had success. Dell tried one. Compaq tried one. Unless Apple does something radically different, then it will just be another flop.
 
In fact, they've been tried repeatedly over the past 10-15 years in various fashions. Sun and NCD had some success with thin clients, but otherwise no one's been able to build a box with a clear technological or financial advantage.

Is this purely speculation, or do you actually have some facts behind this (i.e. you've heard that someone is actually looking into this, etc)?
 
As a programmer, I've been interested in writing applications that run through the browser, and the IOS for some time. It's just so neat to be able to write stuff that is so portable and accessible.

Yes, I know about these previous attempts. And I don't think the time was right. This doesn't mean that its not a neat idea and the the boxes can't be made cheaper, combined with entertainment capabilities, marketed more as a consumer device than a computer (hence my comments about the way Apple is shifting it's market perception).

Have I heard about somone looking into this? Well I mentioned Oracle's press release? Apple are unlikely to comment. What did you want? We'll all have to wait and see afterall.

I certainly don't subscribe to the "It was a flop before, so the time will never be right in the future" argument. That's silly.

Rumour #2. The X-box is actually an Internet Computer in disguise. (That one is pure speculation ;)
 
I didn't say that they would never be wanted in the future, I just hinted that if they don't do something different, the market hasn't changed enough for them to succeed today.
 
Sincere apologies jhawk28. I was getting too defensive perhaps.

A few things have changed. More people are on broadband. Broadband itself is sometimes marketed together with entertainment/TV services. More people own digital cameras, MP3 players and other things that can be regarded as Internet peripherals. And Apple sells music on its web site.

fryke - you made an interesting distinction that I don't understand? Between a digital hub connected to the internet, and a thin-client digital hub. Can you elloborate?

I don't expect the IC to be marketed primarily as an IC, more of an entertainment console with added value IC capabilities, and connectivity and applications for those 'internet peripherals' I mentioned.

Ok, speculating again - so get your flame guns out. I think this is one of the good reasons why Apple was trying to forge alliances with Sony. Not only were their technologies/focus converging, but Micro$oft is the competitor in both camps.

But I'll probably shut up now.
 
brutford...

have you ever seen the anime series "Lain" and the Copland Enterprise OS they run on the Navi?

I think if an internet computer is going to be successful they need to make it something similar to that. But we might have to wait till there is more accurate voice recognition involved in our operating system.

If Sony and Apple were partners I'd guarantee we'd have one cool gaming console and maybe shut up pc gamers.
 
Originally posted by brutfood II
fryke - you made an interesting distinction that I don't understand? Between a digital hub connected to the internet, and a thin-client digital hub. Can you elloborate?
Click to expand...

Well, I think you don't understand the word 'hub', then. Apple sees their computers as the CENTER with digital devices connected to the Mac. Like a digital camera, an iPod, a PDA, a phone etc.

A network computer or internet computer would be nothing per se. It would only work when connected to some server. This is not how Apple sees the Mac right now.

I can imagine Apple producing a tablet style device that acts as a thin client to your desktop Mac. I.e.: You have, say, a PowerMac G5 and such an 'iTablet'. It doesn't have a harddrive on its own... But that wouldn't be looked at as a 'real' Mac either...
 
The NC (network computer) is bound to happen. You cant stop it, within the next 5 yrs it will be a major part of computing.

Every major software and hardware company is positioning themselves for it. What do you think .NET is about? What do you think all this wireless Centrino stuff is for? What is JAVA about?
The huge broadband take up is another indicator.

Ultimately they all point to the fact that software in the future will be rented rather than bought. Just like cable tv programming. It eliminates piracy and allows for zero maintenance. Two of the biggest costs in the sofware industry.

The big companies (Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, Apple etc..) have realised that the internet (html, XML, ASP etc..) is the new OS. No ones gonna give a damn whether they are running windows/OS X or Linux in the future. We already see that most software from big companies (Adobe et al) are just ports and are excactly the same on both OS X and XP. What difference does the OS make? None! .NET is microsofts attempt to stay relevant in this new NC dominated world. Thats why they droped JAVA. Java is a threat because SUN is also using JAVA to compete in this world. This is THE major software battle over the next 10 yrs. Whoever loses, will probably lose everything.

I know of corporate software companies that run beureau systems where all the software is piped in realtinme from big servers and is basically rented by clients per transaction. Just imagine all the money companies are gonna make when no one can download a crack for kazaa, and no bod in hong kong can rip their software. Just imagine when companies NEVER have to release copies of their code from there servers to the public. No one can reverse engineer anybodys code cos you wont be able to get at it!!

Trust me, It's bound to happen sooner or later. The NC WILL take over.
 
I think Internet Computers will take off if and when they stop calling it as such. Take the Xbox, for example. This is basically a Gaming Computer, which runs on a modified Windows kernel, but Microsoft doesn't market it as such. They call it a gaming console, leave out much mention of how it works except for the tech specs, and price it at $299. For IC's to take off, they will have to be called Internet consoles, run every web technology natively, transparently, and stably, and run for $200-400. Otherwise, people will just consider them another computer and not even bother.

And wireless Internet would be quite a plus.
 
So threesixty: You want to offer _basic_ services for rent through slow internet connections (lower than 2 Mbit for most people, anyway) on a low-end computer device? Why should people buy into that? They could as well buy a low-end computer that comes with MS Works or sumthin'. Much better experience. Btw.: OpenOffice is a free download.
And if you've ever had to work on BIG photoshop files you quite certainly will never want the app served through a slow connection.
 
Sounds like mainframes and termianls to me ... which were substituted by the Internet: information distribution, instead of aggregation.
With your idea we would go back a step towards aggregation.
 
The fact that for some people this new way of delivering software may be slow etc.. is irrelevant. The software companies wont care about such a small detail. Just like Apple didn’t care that OS X was generally a bad experience for most people for 2 years. Apple thought that in the long run, they had to force people over to OS X to cut their support/development costs down and get on with life. They dragged people kicking and screaming knowing full well that a 500mhz ibook was nowhere near good enough for OS X. Only now are the G5’s and high end dual 1.42 macs really appropriate for OS X. But Apple didn’t care, and neither will Microsoft care when you can only “rent” Word and Excel.

Even if the connections are slow for some users Microsoft will be content with the fact that technology will catch up and the lowest broadband speed for any user will be 1 mgs. The fact that some users will be frustrated by the experience will not compare with the amount of money zero piracy and zero maintenance will make them.

Microsoft are pushing web services for .NET in a major way. The first step to this new world is that programs you buy will not operate without being connected to the net for certain features. This will be intermittent, and wont stop you using the whole program. Eventually more and more code will be on the server and users will think its better to have there machines permanently connected. They’ll get used to the fact that their software works better whilst connected to the net. Eventually MS will just ship skeleton ultra thin client apps to users. 80% of the core program will be on servers. At that point you have defeated piracy. You cant run your software without being locked onto a Microsoft server. Game over. Your computer is effectively a dumb terminal or NC.

Citrix and remote desktop are other ways in which this thing works. There not as efficient, but people like Larry Ellison/Jobs have known for years that this is where its going. The big thing that’s been stopping it from happening overnight is the government regulations for telecommunication companies. If broadband had rolled out when it was supposed to there would never have been a dot com crash. A lot of companies thought broadband was gonna roll out earlier than it did. That’s why a lot of dot com websites where so processor intensive, and couldn’t really run on 56k modems. They weren’t supposed to! The market crashed then but now BT, AT&T etc.. have got there act together and a really pushing broadband. This will (and is) changing everything and bringing network computing closer and closer.
 
“Sounds like mainframes and termianls to me ... which were substituted by the Internet: information distribution, instead of aggregation.

It is!!

The difference is we are in 2003 and technology is so powerful now that the old concept actually makes sense.

Have u noticed that while desktop machine sales have been slowing down laptops have become much more popular. That’s because processor speed is becoming less of a factor to upgrade. Most jobs you want to do can be done on very average processors. The average consumer isn’t a speed freak anymore. They want quality with convenience (hence the laptop).

The concept of having super fast machines with the majority of code residing on client machines (to make it faster) isn’t the priority anymore. Consumers have reached a level of performance that is acceptable and don’t really care about more speed. Therefore the stage is set for network computing because the technology is available now for the user to have a very good experience with it (nearly as good as conventional computing).

The process wont happen over night, but it's inevitable because it makes sense for everyone.
 
80% of the core program will be on servers. At that point you have defeated piracy.
Click to expand...
Sounds like an accident waiting to happen to me ... hack one server and BOOM! How about security? Spreading things across the net was a security issue at first. Concentrating things in "mainframe" servers is a Bad Thing IMHO.
What about sensitive data and encryption? That slows things down on the client side, since the client has to do decryption on the fly in real time.

The Good Thing about laptops and gizmo's like smartphones, PDA and the iPod is that you have your very own files and data with you. When they are stored remotely, I don't think these devices will have the same appeal anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top