Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
mondaynote.com
Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
1–10 of 166 posts
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#2Does anyone find the use of the word "fork" outside of open-source projects a bit annoying? BMW forked their 3-series coupe and called it 4-series. Ugh...
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#3Does anyone find the use of the word "fork" outside of open-source projects a bit annoying? BMW forked their 3-series coupe and called it 4-series. Ugh...
[deleted]
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#4I don’t think the argument holds very well. Apple has made three processor architectural changes including one on the current OS. “Too complicated” doesn’t really align with the execution history Apple has. The fat binary support Apple has is a huge tool and the ability to add instructions and optimizations to their chips to help with x86 emulation is a big deal.
I don’t know if Apple will ever actually do this, but it seems odd to suggest it’s not feasible given past performance and their current technology holdings.
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#5It doesn't make much sense. The processor architecture should be an implementation detail to a user. This has very little to do with product lines.
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#6Does anyone find the use of the word "fork" outside of open-source projects a bit annoying? BMW forked their 3-series coupe and called it 4-series. Ugh...
I just ate dinner with the in-laws and can attest to the fact that most Americans refer to the utensil with prongs at the end: a fork.
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#7I see a lot of Surface Pro in the iPad[1]. That isn't a bad thing, it is great to have two design studios trying to out do each other. If you agree that these devices should work better on ARM chips rather than x86 chips, then the iPad has an advantage with an already ARM based ecosystem. Of course the Surface R/T tried that too, and stumbled. But I wonder if Apple saw that as a hint of where Microsoft might go.
I find it particularly interesting that at both companies these are the products that have a license to kill sacred cows[2]. The Surface R/T was "Windows on NOT Intel", the iPad has "stylus improved UI". Both of these were antithetic to Gates and Jobs way of thinking.
Both products (and I've got several different generations of both) feel to me like the "post PC" product. An application focused, battery operated, network aware device. I am a bit surprised that Surface hasn't embraced cellular connectivity as strongly as the iPad has, that is a key feature of "on the go" computing.[3]
[1] And chuckled when the new ones had the pen attach with magnets.
[2] The colloquialism, "that is a sacred cow." meaning a feature or rule that cannot be broken.
[3] Yeah, I know the 'tether it to your phone' mantra, I get that a lot, but it simpler (lower friction) to have it built in.
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#8Does anyone find the use of the word "fork" outside of open-source projects a bit annoying? BMW forked their 3-series coupe and called it 4-series. Ugh...
Will you also complain about Yogi Bera's "When You Come to a Fork in the Road, Take It! Inspiration and Wisdom from One of Baseball's Greatest Heroes", published in 2001?
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#9My prediction is an A-series Mac won’t start from the bottom up it’ll start top down - beginning with a Mac Pro addin card.
Re: Apple: No Macintosh Forks. But the iPad...
#10Does anyone find the use of the word "fork" outside of open-source projects a bit annoying? BMW forked their 3-series coupe and called it 4-series. Ugh...
The word fork has been used for various things in computing long before Github was around. I agree it's a bit overused in this article, but you have the Unix fork command, which creates a copy of the current process and effectively forks the execution. Older Macs of the 80's and 90's used a filesystem that allowed files to have both a data fork and a resource fork; they worked like independent streams to separate program data and embedded resources like images, sounds, etc.