WWDC 2009 Reality Check 2.0: iPhone 3G vs. 3G S

@Shark Way to take all the fun out of it! Besides, I have tried to leave name calling out of it all. Can't speak for the rest of these folks. Mike's a smart guy, knows a lot of stuff. I'm sure he is so obstinate as a way to keep things riled up. I just can't believe an intelligent person is actually that dense. In the end, on my side of the fence, I'm right and I always win, same for Mike and his side of the fence.

"I just can't believe an intelligent person is actually that dense." He's a West Coast liberal. What else do you expect? I'm kidding, but it might at least change the topic, unless Paul deletes this comment. :)

"She does not qualify until 7-25, and she currently has a razor." Maybe mikey would like to borrow it if he ever decides to shave his manly beard. Mikey is confusing a presentation slide—which is there for backup and eye candy, designed to support the speaker—with what the speaker actually said, which was, "To show you that I need to change the scale of the graph a bit. (Keynote: magic move) And this is what happened with iPhone, with iPod Touch—we have tripled the number of active users of OS X ACROSS THESE PRODUCTS." (emphasis mine) "These Products", in this case, are the iPhone and iPod Touch devices using a variant of OS X referred to as the "iPhone OS". To a DEVELOPER (you know, mikey, the target audience), this is significant. because the underlying programming tools are largely the same. And, mikey, this IS a DEVELOPER show. I know you know this, but in the absence of anything substantive to criticize, you're focusing in like a laser beam on a relatively insignificant semantic point in order to back up your oft-repeated claim that Apple is (pick one: incompetent, irrelevant, evil, insignificant, etc). In the end, you're the one that winds up looking like the pathetic WinJihadist that you are. Some "evangelist". Guy Kawasaki would slap you upside the head for the ridiculous way you've behaved in this thread today.

Keep in mind that conversely to sharky's comment, if the rest of you are liars, so is mikegalos. --tayme

Finally! I found some 'Proof" that MikeGalos will surely shoot down..but come on! http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~mark/multithreading.html If, according to MikeGalos, threads were created by MS and IBM in 1987, how could there have been hardware multithreading even being considered in the 60s? Give it up Mike...Maybe you meant to say, "MS and IBM created multiple threads for OS2, which DOS didn't have at the time", but that's a HUGE difference compared to giving MS credit for CREATING threads. ok now, go ahead and show why ANOTHER source is no good...meanwhile, you haven't give me a SINGLE LINK to follow that supports your claims.

"Why don't you show us the Apple web page where it shows that iPhone OS 3.0 is Mac OS X 10.something." Actually, mike, let me get the YouTube video where they lied and called iPhone OS: "OS X".... Since Windows has compatibility layers built into it that date back to Windows 95, we can call Windows Mobile: "Windows 95" as well, since it adopted a lot of code from Windows 95 (it's origins stem from Windows CE which was borrowed from early Windows 3.1/95 transitional code and heavily modified to fit the embedded market - as well, it was made to run on non-x86 hardware). Windows Mobile is nowhere close to its origins anymore though. Apple only calls iPhone OS X when it suits them. If it doesn't run OS X applications, it isn't OS X. Apple should quit lying about it. "OS X" is a very specific term: it's the OS for Apple Mac computers, which is the 10th version of Mac OS. It is never called OS "ex". OS X isn't just the Mach kernel either. It is the complete desktop OS package, of which, the iPhone OS is not. By comparison, "Windows" is a general term. Windows Mobile isn't called "Windows XP Mobile" or "Windows Vista Mobile". They have embedded versions that ARE direct copies of Windows XP, etc., for that, and THEY ARE called "Windows XP Embedded", etc.

"As for true pre-emptive multitasking, well... it's a niche feature for a 3.5" screened mobile device. I can't think or many instances where I wished for background tasks that the much-delayed push notification won't address." Downloading OTA RSS feeds (with video and audio attachments - those are what you call "podcasts"), while reading and responding to email, and listening to music over stereo A2DP Bluetooth. I've been doing that for the last 2+ years - first on my Moto Q, now on my Touch Diamond.

"Not in the Apple Store where I live. I was recently in there and their "Genius" appointment booking and sales were done on either an iPhone or iPod...not sure which it was. Maybe you are referring to the backend system....which very well may be Windows powered, I am not sure." They use Windows Mobile powered Symbol handheld scanners for tracking and inventory management. Anybody who's seen them knows they look like a PDA on a gun handle.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/04/10/apple_stores_to_ditch_wind...

"This is a chart of OS X users in the first five full years of Mac OS X, 2002 to 2007. Great steady growth, adoption. Mac OS X. This isn't shipments but actual active users. Up to 25 million, but something incredible has happened over the last two years. To show you that I need to change the scale of the graph a bit. (Keynote: magic move) And this is what happened with iPhone, with iPod Touch we have tripled the number of active users of OS X across these products." Wasn't OS X a significant change from OS 9 where they basically scrapped what they had and started with a UNIX based OS with NeXTSTEP technology and it is this new OS basis that they decided to use for the iPhone - that's why they call it OS X. And wasn't it the point that they were talking to developers to tell them that thanks to the addition of the iPhone/iPod touch OS X platform that those developers now have a total of 75 million customers for whom they can develop software? What is the controversy?

Panache, Again feel free to show what's wrong in the below (rather than just saying "admit you're wrong" when I'm not) iPhone OS 3.0 is not Mac OS X (True or False? I'd say this is true. Do you agree or disagree?) The keynote yesterday showed a growth chart described as actual users of Mac OS X (True or False? Again, I'd say this is true and showed the actual quote from the keynote - provided by a Mac advocate - that backs me up. Do you agree or disagree?) Since iPhone OS is not Mac OS X then including its users in a count of Mac OS X users is deceptive. (I'd agree - if you disagree please explain why)

"In any event, the iPhone remains the best smart phone choice for Windows users." While it is innovative, I wouldn't say it's the best. That mostly depends on your requirements. It is not the best phone for me. In fact, no smartphone would be the best phone for me. I want my phone to be able to make calls and have a good battery life. A free phone is more than enough for me. There's no such thing as "one size fits all".

ddecker "Mike refuses to acknowledge the distinction between "Mac OS X" a desktop operating system and "OS X" a collection of operating system foundation technologies that is at the core of "Mac OS X" and "iPhone OS X/iPhone OS 2.0-3.0" and "Darwin", the open source derivative." Nope. You've got it wrong: Mac OS X - an operating system product based on the Apple OS X architecture iPhone - a device operating system product based on the Apple OS X architecture OS X - the core Apple OS architecture based on Unix Darwin - a group of core OS components released to a variant of Open Source by Apple as part of the requirements for them to use them There is no such thing as iPhone OS X. The chart shown yesterday showed the total of all OS X family operating systems combined (Mac OS X and iPhone OS) but was presented NOT as the total for the family of operating systems (which would have been true but less impressive) but the users of "Mac OS X" which is NOT the case but made for a great chart and a cute "we have to change the scale" comment that was NOT true of Mac OS X usage. So, yeah, I know what I'm talking about and, yeah, the chart was deceptive.

threedaysdwn Bingo. Exactly right. Now imagine the disaster Apple saw a couple of years ago when it became obvious even to them that massive numbers of cores and massive multithreading were going to take over for the collapse of ever increasing processor speeds. With their really bad thread processing, they were in a world of hurt unless they bit the bullet and rewrote key parts of their low level OS. Which, to give them credit for at least recognizing the problem at all, they did. (Assuming Grand Central Dispatch works in this first release.) But, of course, taking a full OS rev cycle to do architecture clean up means they lost a couple of years in everything else so I'd expect 10.8 to be a very significant product revision in terms of user level features and UI that got put on hold while the kernel people owned the feature list.

I think the reason Snow Leopard is such a minor update is that Apple has a hard time focusing on more than one thing at a time. iPhone is now their focus, so OS X gets neglected. It's probably manned by a skeleton crew other than the pieces which overlap with the iPhone OS. That's why they were able to do some core improvements (since they'll likely translate to benefits for future iPhone / iPod like devices), but the user-facing feature changes are minimal. And where they do happen, they're implemented poorly (see: really clumsy attempt to copy Win7 UI)

SPiotr You left out a key part of Schiller describing the chart: "Great steady growth, adoption. Mac OS X. This isn't shipments but actual active users. " Note he refers to the chart as showing the growth and adoption of not the OS X family but of Mac OS X. Typical Apple deceptive presentation with, I'm sure, plausible deniablity of "Well, I didn't mean to say that - when I said 'Mac OS X' I really meant 'the whole OS X family' even if we never refer to iPhone OS as being part of OS X anymore" if he gets caught fudging the numbers. (As people here keep implying) Meant or not, what he said the chart showed and what was actually shown on the chart did NOT agree with each other. Why do you choose to defend that?

@mikegalosagain Dang, you've gone and done it again! "The chart shown yesterday showed the total of all OS X family operating systems combined (snip) but was presented NOT as the total for the family of operating systems (snip) but the users of "Mac OS X"" No. And again No. Not once does Schiller refer to "Mac OS X users" He mentions "Mac OS X" the product a couple of times, but the users are always described as OS X users. I know it's just semantics but you have already derailed this whole thread by your simple mistake about a petty irrelevant detail. Why don't you just view steam? http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/keynote/

@ mike "The chart shown yesterday showed the total of all OS X family operating systems combined (Mac OS X and iPhone OS) but was presented NOT as the total for the family of operating systems (which would have been true but less impressive) but the users of "Mac OS X" which is NOT the case but made for a great chart and a cute "we have to change the scale" comment that was NOT true of Mac OS X usage." Okay, so we all agree that a charted labeled "OS X Active Users" showed the combined OS X family of products. If I understand Mike correctly he is saying that the misleading part is that Schiller says: "Mac OS X. This isn't shipments but actual active users." an therefore attributes the iPhone and iPod numbers to the Mac OS X count. This would be correct except for it leaves out two things. First is what was said before that sentence. That sentence is proceeded by: "This is a chart of OS X users in the first five full years of Mac OS X, 2002 to 2007." So, clearly he says it is a chart of OS X active users of which Mac OS X would be counted in. The second thing is the numbers shown for that date range only included Mac OS X as that was the only OS X based product at the time. When he says "Mac OS X. This isn't shipments but actual active users." he is pointing out that Mac OS X is the only OS X based product being show on the graph and that that number is 25 million. He then goes to the next slide which includes the the two years that include the iPhone and iPod touch and says "And this is what happened with iPhone, with iPod Touch we have tripled the number of active users of OS X across these products." So, he never claims either the iPhone nor the iPod Touch are based on Mac OS X. He does make a point of pointing out what is being included in the math of total number of OS X devices across two slides. Both slides are labeled "OS X Active Users" not Mac OS X Active users. If you want to still insist that the claim was there are 75 million users of Mac OS X knock yourself out, but you are doing so based on a sentence taken out of the context as he clearly says not once but twice that the graphs represent OS X users and that would be OS X the family of products not Mac OS X.

"While it is innovative, I wouldn't say it's the best. " MS Voice Command has been around on Windows Mobile since 2003. 3 Megapixel cameras in cellphones exist since 2005. Copy and Paste has been on Windows Mobile since 2002. Tehthering has been there on Windows Mobile just as long. Touchscreen Phones exist since 1992.

I just watched the first few minutes of the keynote. This is Mac marketing nonsense. First they say it's "OS X users" @ 25 million. Then they add iPod touch and iPhone users into the mix "over the past 2 years" to the figure to make it 75 million. It's between 3:00 and ~4:15. It's misleading to shareholders. It isn't OS X. It doesn't run OS X applications. Nobody can misunderstand that, although their RDF is in full overdrive anyway. Macbook Pro 15"? No quad-core? Hello???! *YAWN* There goes Grand Central Dispatch in the sh1tter. Just so Windows users know: There is NO possibility of running GeForce Boost on the Mac systems with 9400M chipsets. The reason? GeForce 9600 GPU's don't support it. They only support Hybrid Power, which switches power load back to the in-built GPU when tasks allow. It's pointless though, since the 9600 discrete graphics consume about the same amount of power as the 9400m when running light tasks. Instead, it adds extra cost for the NVIDIA core logic over Intel. An Intel PM45 chipset with a discrete 9600GT will cost less. Firewire 800? No eSATA? LOL!! *YAWN* I can't even FIND a laptop that sells with a 160GB hard drive, unless it's a sub-$400US netbook too. That's just sad. The MacBook Air is the closest thing that Apple has to a netbook, except you'd have to be an airhead to pay that kind of money for that piece of garbage. "Leopard is the most successful product [Apple] has ever sold" WRONG! I should go on to quote all the Mackies that Apple isn't a software company - they give it away with new computers.... Microsoft Office for Mac is the #1 software package that Apple sells - and they do that right on their own page. I like when Craig Federighi shows up all his common windows, and on top of them all is a page from the NY Times with 2 big Bing banners. :) They even talk about complexity in Windows, and yet they have this "wall of icons" and talk about 1000's of projects. Mmmmhhm....and I've got a bridge for you to buy, buddy! The talk about 64-bit mode being 2x faster is also a laugh. Any Intel engineer will tell you that. It's clear that Mac's and OS X are just an afterthought for Apple. ~60% of the keynote was a PR campaign and giant ad for the iPhone.

The number of apps in the stores can be misleading, due to duplicate or those so close in function that there is almost no difference. I don't no much about the target for marketing, but it seems as if MS and RIM targeted business, while the iPhone targeted ordinary consumers. mAke no mistake that the boatload of WinMo apps are probably closer to the diversity, nonduplicate iPhone apps. In fact, there are many more things that WinMo can do more than the iPhone. I have posted about the medical stuff, so I won't bore you all again, but WinMo developers have been great form my business. Perhaps a more consumer oriented targeting is needed for RIM and WinMo, or it already has begun. The iPhone lead was overtaken by RIM last quarter, so it's anybodies game, and WinMo 7 hasn't even begun yet. With Win 7 and/or Xbox integration, it could be a game changer. Like someone already posted, perhaps Snow Leopard's pricing is related to fear of Win 7. It's never time to sit on their laurels.

FYI: Rogers is offering MMS at launch. LOL@ teh americanos ;)

@sharky - Now you are making sense...I have been saying that for some time now!!! --tayme

"That actually makes it look like Apple's business is in repeat customers, not in switchers." Just to be clear, I should point out that "repeat customers" actually means mostly upgraders that are replacing systems, not people that buy additional ones - at least that's what the numbers show....that is, unless there are people that are (*shudder the thought*) moving away from OS X....

"perhaps Snow Leopard's pricing is related to fear of Win 7. It's never time to sit on their laurels." I'll wait for OS XI, thanks.