Apple Creating Cloud-Based Mac? 204
hostedftp writes "In speculation news making the rounds — Apple's recent activities in the Cloud has been leading to conclusions of the what the innovative giant plans to unleash in 2011. The most recent news of Apple applying and securing a patent for a network-boosted OS has made speculators believe Apple is going to launch a Cloud-based operating system for the Mac."
more like cloud boot iCrap (Score:3, Insightful)
idevices are 2/3 of apple's revenue. Mac's are like the bastard step kids that no one cares about anymore
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, how about you give up a third of your income? How does that feel?
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. How much of my workload can I drop?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Clouds Have Feelings, Too by Kandi
The evening starts out quiet
As quiet as ever could be
But suddenly a stormy night
Becomes a reality
The clouds dump out tons of rain
And it falls so very fast
Then suddenly its clear again
And you see the moon at last
Theres so much mystery about the sky
About its ever changing moods
But most people dont realize
Maybe clouds have feelings, too.
When theyre sad, they cry,
And it falls on us as rain
When theyre happy, theyre white
And the tears stay away
So next time you look outside
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.amazon.com/Nimby-Extraordinary-Cloud-Remarkable-Friend/dp/1595834281 [amazon.com]
Re:Icon (Score:2)
Has anyone talked to Adrian Paul?
We're on our way to a Clan Cloud.
Re: (Score:2)
They need an ass puffing out that cloud too.
Not everything will be "better in the cloud". If you disagree, I respectfully challenge you to a game of fart-tag.
Re: (Score:2)
Android already has a basic cloud based dev tool [googlelabs.com]. I'm sure it's fairly limited right now, but that could change.
Tim Wu Was Right? (Score:4, Interesting)
Commentators believe the patent could allow Apple to create a subscription-based cloud OS that gives it more control over its users.
More control over its users.
On top of that, this whole cloud privacy relationship concept needs to be addressed -- especially when people see commercials [youtube.com] advocating it without fully explaining that your photo, data, computations, whatever are being moved to and performed on other machine external to yours. That single Microsoft commercial has further muddied up how people understand what the cloud is.
I applaud Apple for their foresight and innovation in this but I see it in line with Tim Wu's fears of Apple further controlling your data and information. I'd have the same fears with Chrome OS and Windows utilizing a cloud of computers just the same. This ideal of executing what you want on your hardware in your property seems to be dying. And with it, privacy or any desire thereof.
Expanding , not dying (Score:4, Interesting)
This ideal of executing what you want on your hardware in your property seems to be dying.
It's not dying, and will never die.
What is happening instead is that consumer choices are EXPANDING. Expanding to included choices where they really can have computers that are more secure and managed - as a side effect, they are also locked down. But it is a choice that I think is good for people to have, because most people simply cannot manage computers.
On the Mac, soon, you'll have a choice to get applications from anywhere - or to get them from a central source that is somewhat vetted, and furthermore ends the hodge-podge of software update mechanisms to one where you get updates when they arrive without fuss. That's a huge boon to most people.
Just Like Facebook: Act First, Ask Later (Score:4, Interesting)
What is happening instead is that consumer choices are EXPANDING.
I liken it to Facebook's many privacy debacles [slashdot.org]. First let me explain how Facebook -- and I really think this is all Zuckerberg -- works. They want to increase information flow on Facebook. Even private information. But they realize that if they give the user a choice nobody's going to 'take the plunge' and the feature will largely be left as opt-in but never used. So they make it automatic and they deal with the privacy issue after it's been activated across the board. They put on a show about how they hear the users and now you have an option to disable that but it's not disabled because people have been living with it for a couple weeks and by and large nothing seriously bad has happened -- yet. A good example is the news feed debacle [wikipedia.org] that caused users outrage and protests. But now everyone uses it. How did that happen? More importantly: could it have happened at all had not Zuckerberg stood up and made a decision for hundreds of millions of users? I think that answer is "no."
When I see the Windows commercial, I don't see an option. I see a feature. I see a feature like Facebook's News Feed. It's being marketed as a feature of Windows 7. The woman is using Windows 7 and then she says "To the cloud" real James Bond like and suddenly we're "in the cloud." And that's Windows 7. People then want that. There's no "I just need to upload my photo to Google's Picassa" or any sort of steps warning the user what exactly is happening in the background. No, it's all streamlined feature rich marketing crap. Are they explaining this can be disabled? No, we'll do that later. Where's my data? Who cares? You're in the cloud, you're sexy, you're hip -- privacy is old school for the squares!
On the Mac, soon, you'll have a choice to get applications from anywhere - or to get them from a central source that is somewhat vetted, and furthermore ends the hodge-podge of software update mechanisms to one where you get updates when they arrive without fuss. That's a huge boon to most people.
Okay but this isn't the cloud, this is just a really streamlined distribution service. Am I the only person that wants to have two columns for the Pros and Cons of using a cloud based service as the basis of your home operating system!?
Re: (Score:2)
I completely agree with you. People have been in the cloud for years now without realizing it. Facebook is part of it, Photobucket is part of it, etc...
Apps in the cloud have been provided as well. Google, Zoho, etc... have been providing that service for years. People haven't moved everything there yet because they're hesitant to give up control. Market it as flashy/shiny/hip though, and they'll start to.
Then one day they'll realize they can't get to their spreadsheet because they're not able to conne
Re: (Score:2)
When I see the Windows commercial, I don't see an option. I see a feature. I see a feature like Facebook's News Feed. It's being marketed as a feature of Windows 7. The woman is using Windows 7 and then she says "To the cloud" real James Bond like and suddenly we're "in the cloud." And that's Windows 7.
"Sell the sizzle, not the steak."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"Your" Hardware (Score:2)
If you ask Apple really nicely, they'll let you boot it up.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>More control over Mac users.
And of course MS also controls its users (via windows, office, etc). I miss the days when we had alternatives like Atari and Commodore to buy hardware.
>>>I applaud Apple for their foresight and innovation
Recycling an old idea from the 1980s (cloud software on a central server; lightweight terminals in front of the user) is innovative? No. Although I guess you could call it "green". ;-)
Re:Tim Wu Was Right? (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps that ideal is only really of interest to the subset of users who actually understand and enjoy tinkering with computers, and the vast majority of the market has been using general-purpose computers for some time that complicated & difficult to maintain, when they really *wanted* an appliance all along?
There will still be people who own, use, and tinker with general-purpose computers. They'll be the people who design, build, and program the appliances that the other 95% of the population uses.
What's funny to me is that everybody seems to be ringing the alarm over Apple, rather than Google, in this space. Apple creates the hardware, and uses the software (this supposed "cloud os") as a means to sell those devices. Google creates software (ChromeOS), and uses that software as a means for delivering ads to you - it doesn't make money from YOU, it makes money from *advertisers*. Who has more access, desire, and interest in being able to conveniently harvest all your data from the Cloud? Apple *could* move more into advertising than their foray into iAds, but their goal is first and foremost, to sell the devices. Google, on the other hand, exists to capture data about you & use that data to present you with ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the problem. Industry is more likely to cater to the 95% than to the 5%. So if you are in that 5%, this locked-down-device movement will deprive you of what you currently have easy access to. Heck, with economies of scale, it may only be a matter of time before only 5% of users can even afford the open-and-flexible computers. (And that subset of users may have little overlap with those that actually want said access. Just remember back when computer illiterate doctors/lawyers had the best PCs, a
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but this makes no sense. What were the computer-illiterate doctors and lawyers running on their "best PCs available" if no geeks had any computers to write software with?
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely. They need us to feed the masses fart apps. I'm being a bit silly, but the point is real. One of the hallmarks of these locked down devices is their inability to be used in writing and compiling their own software. Third party software is as much a feature of iPhone or Android as the part written by Apple or Google. Witness the incalculable number of "there's an app for that" commercials.
General purpose PCs will become less common in the coming decade I think, but they will remain a large mar
Re: (Score:2)
If it was the case that everyone had to run the same OS you might have a point, from a political or even an ethical perspective if not a technical one. However it isn't, so you don't.
You've got it wrong. The problem isn't when the market caters to the majority. It's when it only caters to the majority. It's when whoever has 95% of the market actively tries to suppress the other
Re: (Score:2)
Google creates software (ChromeOS), and uses that software as a means for delivering ads to you - it doesn't make money from YOU, it makes money from *advertisers*.
Well stated! It will forever confound me that Google gets such a pass from the otherwise intellectually stingy slashdot crowd.
Google sells ads. Apple sells hardware. I can opt out of the hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
It's pretty simple why Google gets a pass. Google makes Android. Android competes with iOS. iOS is made by Apple. Apple is evil, therefore Google is good.
Re: (Score:2)
Google MAY do evil in cases where they have little choice if they want to continue to exist. The level of this is debatable. Apple chooses to pioneer evil.
Re: (Score:2)
I rest my case.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking of intellectual dishonesty, have you read your own post?
"Google gives people what they want." By what metric? Millions of users? Okay, let's use that.
"Apple doesn't give people what they want." By what metric? If we use the same measure you're using to judge Google, Apple is also *fabulously* successful at giving people what they want: millions of iPods, iPads, iPhones, and Mac OS X systems sold, and growing their share of the computer market at a much faster rate than most (all?) of their co
Re: (Score:2)
Err, is could it just be you have a "OS image" on your own server (probably a flippin' Mac Mini given how Apple think) that you boot all your systems from? (Well assuming they have half-eaten fruit on them) Apple have been showing "NetBoot" for a while, actually the idea is quite nice, especially if you can "Time Machine" it. Everyone like to think Apple want to "control" users. I don't see this, Apple want to make users happy to buy more stuff from them. This isn't such a bad goal, and indeed they do prett
Re: (Score:2)
I don't actually know the answer to your question, but I have to say that part of me thinks that anyone storing data relevant to their potential criminal prosecution in the "cloud" kind of deserves what they get :-)
What does that even mean? (Score:2)
Since the blog talking about the cloud has seemingly dissipated, I have to wonder what a "Cloud Based OS" even would mean, if that's even a thing.
To put things in more practical and less obscure speech, I think what it means is that something very like Dropbox will be more integrated into the system - and that possibly Apple will offer something like network based backup of application data for iOS devices.
To me the "cloud" of any value, basically ends up being network storage of some flavor.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to wonder what a "Cloud Based OS" even would mean
Sounds like it boots up via PXE from some cloud storage.
Benefit? (Score:2)
For company use I can see some benefit.
For home consumer use, I can't see the return a user gets for relying on something like this. Especially not as people move to laptops which are not connected all the time. Sure you can cache for there's nothing more obnoxious than having MOST applications cached only to find the one you really wanted to use, was not cached just as you are getting into your international plane flight...
Re: (Score:2)
For buisness use, I'd love to eliminate the local hard drives of my users. They're one of the most common parts to fail, and the local OS gets corrupted all the time (only the cheap ass power supplies we use fail more). There should be an immutable network copy of the OS that they load at boot time. And installing applications should be as simple as copying an image onto your server and setting the licensing information. Actually, I'd run the same setup at home, too. My wife and kid trash their copy of
Re: (Score:2)
I am surprised to hear that your wife and kid tra
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point of this "cloud" thing is that nobody knows. It means precisely nothing. Microsoft's "cloud" commercial is a great example, because most of what she's doing has exactly nothing to do with "the cloud" at all.
The important thing is that making sure "cloud" appears in the ad at least five times provides Buzzword Compliance. In the case of this Apple whatever it is, "cloud" features even more prominently and thus provides more Buzzword Compliance.
Now if they can create a special iCloud(TM) inside
Re: (Score:3)
I have to wonder what a "Cloud Based OS" even would mean, if that's even a thing.
They already have a perfectly good cloud app for data and small amounts of media.. Probably means you download your apps off the network. Probably use your local hard drive as something of a cache.
In unix terms youd probably mount a FUSE file system as root, and every time you access anything it tries to check "/nfs/cloudy-with-a-chance-of-segfaults/whatever" to see if a new version exists, and if so, copies it into your cache. And probably tries to save a "backup" on both the local drive and the nfs moun
Re: (Score:2)
Appletalk was over in the 90s, dude. Apple's been using AFP for at least a decade now.
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome to the late 90s, when AppleTalk was obsolete. Apple fully supports NFS, but defaults to AFP for network sharing.
Re: (Score:3)
In addition to a Dropbox-like service, it seems reasonable for Apple to fully integrate MobileMe into the next version of OS X, and as you mentioned backup/sync for iOS seems obvious. They might even extend that service to the Mac App Store.
Considering the upload speed and reliability of typical residential broadband, I also don't see what the cloud offers end users at this point beyond limited storage and syncing. Anything else would raise privacy concerns, waste bandwidth, and—perhaps most importa
Re: (Score:2)
In addition to a Dropbox-like service, it seems reasonable for Apple to fully integrate MobileMe into the next version of OS X, and as you mentioned backup/sync for iOS seems obvious. They might even extend that service to the Mac App Store.
Well, if they integrate Dropbox, that would work. MobileMe not so much. But this is exactly what 'normal' people want. They DON'T want to think about backups, where the data is, WHAT the data is or much of anything else. Asked carefully, they might be able to make a distinction between data on their own computer and data on, for example, Flickr. They might.
It's all Fucking Magic to 'them'. Hell, I was talking to the nurse running the 120K brand new telemetry system last night (Hey, it runs Linux).
Not sure I understand your point (Score:2)
But they already have a Dropbox-like service - iDisk. It's not as good as Dropbox, but it's pretty Dropbox-like.
I'm not sure how much more integrated it could get. iDisks mount up just like local disks. MobileMe mail is integrated w/ Mail.app. Galleries goes hand-in-hand w/ iPhoto. Etc.
Re: (Score:2)
To me the "cloud" of any value, basically ends up being network storage of some flavor.
This looks to have a significant portion of it as remote processing. Thinking more like the dumb terminals we used to have at the university.
This could really have its up-sides. After you've made the initial investment at your end, getting the keyboard,mouse,printer,display, then if you want to upgrade later you can just spend a little money on an upgrade to your service. No need to physically replace the machine, and cheaper to boot. No outdated computer going to the landfill. No need to even install s
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it would be like an 80s net boot Unix but with all of the added fun of trying to do this over the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
My internet connection is faster than any of the network connections that were prevalent in the '80s.
The requirements for what would need to go over the wires has changed, but whatever... The fact remains that I can access a terminal over the internet now at much higher speeds than I could have done over local connections back then. I could actuall
Re: (Score:2)
That may be true, but despite the networks being faster, are they faster proportionally to what they were transferring? I don't know how fast 10-base-2 ethernet went back then, but as a soft science comparison, DOS 6.22 fit on three floppies. Ubuntu 10.10 fills a CD-R. Yes, I know the latter can (and likely would be) trimmed down, but the general point I'm making is that while networks have gotten faster, there's more data that will make use of those speeds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For a second, I thought you wrote, "nimbus".
What the heck does Harry Potter [wikia.com] have to do with this? ;-)
Uh, no. (Score:4, Insightful)
It reminds me of an old (and unintentionally hilarious) Crucial memory ad: "Your computer...at Internet speed!"
Re: (Score:2)
License fee for OS per Year? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And probably even allow XP users to keep using it indefinitely, or until the number of users gets to be small enough that it's not possible to continue support.
Of course there is the downside of n
Re: (Score:2)
Call me paranoid, but what I fear about having what amounts to a support contract become a required cost are the following two scenarios:
1.) $OS_COMPANY, be it Apple, MS, Red Hat, whoever, takes your money and DOESN'T provide support or patches.
2.) The cost steadily goes up, and as the applications that run on top of the OS are purchased, the question every month becomes whether to call it quits and cut your losses with the apps and data you have, or pay what can easily amount to charging more because they
the *real* question (Score:2)
Are we reaching Peak Cloud?
Slashdotted (Score:2)
Obviously, they need a bigger cloud.
First I have heard of this (Score:2)
Big Data Center??? (Score:2)
Hasn't everyone been trying to guess what the big data center they are building is for? Well, this could be the answer you're looking for... TFTP booting has been around since the days of Xterms, maybe even before then.
It makes perfect sense for user-recovery as well. Imagine this: You've dropped your macbook, and now it won't boot from the HD, but can automatically default to net-booting into a utility that will attempt to repair the HD. It will also allow you to boot into a stripped down OS that allows yo
Re: (Score:2)
Though there could be value in making cloud booting an option for emergency situation like GP describes. Imagine this:
You go buy your new iCloud. At "boot up" it asks for your .mac account information (really this would be more like a fancy BIOS than an actual OS boot, that would occur later). It then asks if this is a new iCloud or a replacement for your old one. If it's new the system boots with a clean image either stored in its flash memory or downloaded from the site for the first time and stored f
tenzig_112 (Score:2)
I'm starting to see a few user advantages to this approach- more or less. Theoretically, everything would be on-demand. So, every application would be instantly updatable, and trying new apps could be simpler, too. But it comes attached to a devil's bargain.
On the positive side, it would give developers a much better way to control their content and derive revenue from it. On the negative side, however, it would give developers a much better way to control their content and derive revenue from it. Since m
Introducing Mac Cloud. There Ya Go! (Score:2)
Mac Cloud. It don't take no guff.
.
Dupe ! (Score:3, Informative)
VDI on a Consumer Scale (Score:2)
This looks like it could be a move to allow people to purchase an appliance that would connect to an Virtual Desktop environment. Similar to what we're seeing in the enterprise space with Wyse, Citrix, VmWare etc... whereby the user has a 'dumb terminal' at their desk and their OS is actually running on a VM in the datacenter. This significantly cuts down the costs especially with those that don't need the mobility of a laptop or specialized hardware at the desktop (graphics designers come to mind). But i
WTF...Value anybody? (Score:2)
Apple: Charging even more, for even less, since 1984.
Pretty weird timing to be off-loading the OS (Score:2)
Who in their right mind would want to net-boot even a portion of the OS now that solid state drives are affordable?
For sure (Score:2)
It'll be one data store with your info, email, apps, documents, etc. The iPad will present one interface, the iPhone another, the laptop yet another. All the same "computer" data and settings.
Re:The Book of Jobs (Score:5, Insightful)
iCloudOS
Features include -
. Everything is rented. Why get fleeced once when you can get fleeced monthly. Yes its crazy but aren't fleeces warm and fluffy like how you feel buying Apple products. You get regular updates on all your software like before but now you're paying. You get go keep paying to access the media you used to own. And the best thing is that even if you dont upgrade your iAppliances regularly you still get to keep paying.
. iAppliance based. Run your iApp (be it movie player, image editor, skype or game) on any of your iPad/iPod/iPhone/iMac/iMini/iWhatever. Talk on your iPhone then when you get to work it shifts to your iMac. Play an iGame iApp on your iPad and when you get home shift it to your 42" iTV iAppliance.
. Safety. Our walled garden is totally secure. All your interactions are done through iApps.
. Legacy. If you really must access that dirty web with all its flash we route all your traffic through our content network. We filter it for all that bad stuff like porn, bittorrent and independent thought.
Admittedly the iAppliance bit is nice but mine is Ubuntu/Android based.
Re:The Book of Jobs (Score:5, Funny)
Now all restaurants are Taco Bell.
Re: (Score:2)
. Safety. Our walled garden is totally secure. All your interactions are done through iApps.
Huh? How can that be? Apple cannot possibly review and rigorously test every line of code to be vulnerability and malicious behaviour free. Considering it's rather trivial to hide malicious code in place sight, or introduce a deliberate coding mistake. They could only ever catch very obvious malicious behaviour and only if that emerges while in testing considering the logisitical impossiblity of Apple to thoroughly test the hundreds of thousands of App submissions, therefore it's safe to assume they've only
Re: (Score:2)
In the 80's and 90's, Xerox used to call that ubiquitous computing [wikipedia.org]. And, it's actually a cool idea if it ever happens.
It is a cool idea but I just dont agree with it being cloud based. I'd rather have my own hub at home so I get to control my media and data. I'd only use cloud for off-site backups.
Re: (Score:2)
And, really, only if it was heavily encrypted.
Under the Patriot act, they can basically force US owned companies to hand over anything they like. As a result, companies here in Canada often can't use something hosted in the US (or owned by a US company) as it basically violates our legal protections. Nothing from the Federal government can go there, and likely some kinds of business run risks.
If you put data into the cloud, you lose control over who has access to it
Re: (Score:2)
Same thing with the provinces. Microsoft keeps asking us to try their cloud stuff, and we can't find something that we can legally put there due to poor US laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Off-site cloud backups would be great for media, game scores & settings but obviously not anything private.
Cue the re-opening of SeaLand as an off-site data store until the next 'fire'.
Re: (Score:2)
Until the media companies decide that constitutes copyright infringement. :(
You know, no matter what the SeaLand people say, if they ever became pesky enough they would discover they have nowhere near the autonomy or legal protections they claim. It just doesn't work that way.
Absolutely no sovereign state recognizes them. If push came to shove, they're going to get stepped on like a
Re: (Score:2)
Until the media companies decide that constitutes copyright infringement. :(
As its only a backup I'm more than happy to run it through PGP/TrueCrypt a few times first. If they want to go through the trouble of trying to access my encrypted data I'd even help by telling them one character from one of the passwords.
I agree with you about SeaLand but it wont stop someone trying. I just hope a few companies will do it competently in a country that respects privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not practical for the way companies want you to use the cloud (ie as an essentially seamless piece of your work flow), but if you're just using the cloud as an off site backup it's pretty trivial to encrypt the data before it leave your system. You'd have to pull it back and decrypt it to actually use it, but while it's in the cloud it's just an encrypted blob. It'd be inconvenient as hell for actual work documents, but fine for a backup.
Personally I keep a number of files with no real private data o
Re: (Score:2)
Occasionally, wolves will get in.
rotfl. that has to be one of the most entertaining analogies I've read in quite awhile.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "why" is simple. Every software, data handling and network service provider knows that business depends on its data. At the moment, most business controls their own data. What they want is to take control of your data and then make you pay for the privilege.
The Federal Reserve scheme was presented to the US government several times before they finally bought into it... and now the government isn't in control of the money any longer. See how much better things are now that we can have a humongous fed
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure it will keep getting revived until we actually reach the point where we have it. It seems like a good idea and is probably inevitable to some extent. I take it you disagree?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft to steal this ?, they where earlier on cloud software, earlier with virtualization, and i advised them to use a online store with windows 98.
For years you have been able to buy 3th party software through their channels; but they never named it app store acka app shop.
The reason for this is there are many others who develop for Microsoft in fact everyone is free to create whatever they want; from porn games to autocad.
But those developers are never bound to Microosft alone they are free to run thei
Re:Lock In (Score:2)
Would 2013 finally be the Year of the Linux Desktop if that's the only version that doesn't go Subscription?
I think we'd be due also for an XP-User zombie rebellion if Windows 9 tried to go Cloud/Azure only.
Re: (Score:2)
We used to call them X-terminals.
Diskless, boots off the network and connects to a central machine. In this case, the "central" is "distributed", and it may or may not have a disk.
In short, the finest technology from the 80s is back. :-P
Re: (Score:2)
We used to call them X-terminals.
Diskless, boots off the network and connects to a central machine. In this case, the "central" is "distributed", and it may or may not have a disk.
In short, the finest technology from the 80s is back. :-P
We called them 3270 terminals. Connect to a local cluster controller(more or less a stat mux, not a heck of a lot more), then to a NCP, then via VTAM back to the mainframe, probably a system 370 series although memory fades with time. Oddly enough that is exactly the same config I had in the mid 90s except they emulated the 3270 on PCs, mostly.
In short, the finest technology from the 70s is back :-P
Re: (Score:2)
*laugh* Why, yes. Now someone will likely point out that back in the 60s they had this as well.
That, or that they didn't have terminals in the 60s, and they had to toggle in the boot sequence on the front of the machine before they could even begin to start feeding the punch cards. Up hill, both ways. In the dark. And they had to get their own firewood to fire up the tape drives. ;-)
Re:Finest (Score:2)
But look at the Graphics of Tron Legacy!
Oh - sorry - you meant Apple's equally slick graphics!
Just don't think too hard what it all means.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm assuming the core files for the OS would still be installed locally on your HDD to begin with. Then you just download updates, sync your data, and the rest of the bandwidth is comparable to a standard VNC session. Really, the bandwidth would be comparable to many current users.
This retains the advantages of a Chrome netbook (all your data is always magically online and available from all devices without having to worry about backups), and in theory would allow for the installation of proper apps. Add to
Re:ISP caps and slow down speeds will NOT work (Score:5, Insightful)
ISP caps and slow down speeds will NOT work this.
A 1920 x 1200 desktop at 32 bits a lot of data.
In some area all you can get is DSL any where from 1.5 to 6 meg max. maybe 6 meg will work ok but some people can only get 1.5 or 3 meg dsl.
Cable has higher download speeds but a full block on a Node trying to use this at the same time.
satellite broadband with the FAP does not kill this the lag will.
3G 5GB cap will led to big costs for data over 5GB. And ATT's 2GB then $10 per GB will may this cost so much people will get a PC.
And if you have 2-3 systems then you may need FIOS just make it work good. And Fios is not all over.
Always fun seeing the new guys complain it could never work, even when I was doing it in the 90s with xwindows / nfs / vnc over a 14.4 modem ... and liking it ...
Re: (Score:2)
You were not running a modern Mac OS X desktop with millions of colors @ 1200 x 800 (or larger) resolution and antialiasing, doing animated GUI transitions over a 14.4 kbps modem in the 90s.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ISP caps and slow down speeds will NOT work this.
A 1920 x 1200 desktop at 32 bits a lot of data.
So? I'd imagine that the local computer would still generate the data for that and send it to the monitor in a cloud-based OS, just like in, say, Google Chrome OS, another cloud-based OS.
Re: (Score:2)
An Apple computer for your TV. Only 99$USD.
Before anyone points to previous failed attempts, remember that televisions weren't the HD displays they are today.
And before anyone else points that HD TVs aren't anywhere near the resolution of current computer displays, they're still higher resolution than what we used to have and higher than the iPhone 4 or iPad.
Re: (Score:2)
How about if I point out that an iPhone 4 (or any equivalent smart phone... it's just quick and easy to look up the iPhone specs) has approximately half the resolution of an HDTV in approximately 1/10th to 1/15th the size. Therefore making the picture approximately 1/5th to 1/8th richer. Most computer monitors also have significantly higher pixels per inch that an HDTV even at similar resolutions (though not quite as exaggerated as a phone screen). Resolution in and of itself doesn't tell you how good y
Re: (Score:2)
Stop looking at the raw numbers and read my post again. Maybe you're too young to remember, but computers used to be 640x480 and even lower when people first started using windowed operating systems.
And if you see the pixels in your 52" display it's because you're sitting way too close to it. Ever seen the interface from the new AppleTV?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no, I'm quite old enough to remember. I also remember the headaches from trying to read long documents on those screens. Even back then we knew that the resolution and screen size weren't ideal to the task at hand, it was just the best we had or could afford. That's no longer the case. There's a reason it's taken this long for e-books to really take off. Until recently it's been phenomenally uncomfortable to read a book length work on a computer screen.
I can read stuff on my HDTV just fine and I don'
Re: (Score:2)
That data center is for a revamp of Mobileme(a product that should be free),
Why should a company provide something to you for free? I prefer paying and getting no ads to free-but-ad-inundated services.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why marijuana is bad for you. It allows people to come up with even more stupid thoughts than they can do on their own without the use of mind altering drugs.
You mean like a "cloud based OS"? That stupid thought comes from ignorance, not drugs. With marijuana you rarely get stupid engineering ideas, you usually get artistic or musical ideas.
Re: (Score:2)
I, for one, do NOT welcome our cloud-based overlords.
Don't worry. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Re: (Score:2)
I, for one, do NOT welcome our cloud-based overlords.
Don't worry. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Yeah. It used to be your silver. Now it belongs to them.