4 ms·

I'm hoping the next version of OS X will finally bring us true resolution independence, to correspond with some high DPI "Retina" MacBook displays. I also expe

I'm hoping the next version of OS X will finally bring us true resolution independence, to correspond with some high DPI "Retina" MacBook displays. I also expect they'll provide new ways for developers and/or users to leverage both iOS and OS X; perhaps that's where cloud computing will come into play. Other than that, I don't think we're going to see any more huge innovations in desktop computing, from Apple or anyone else. All the action is in mobile (and development tools).

j_baker 16y ago
I can't help but think of "640k should be enough for everybody" when I read this. Desktop computing isn't as sexy as mobile computing, but it isn't dead yet. There are plenty of innovations left to be made.
- jseliger 16y ago
  This is fair, but I also think about an essay I read (from Kevin Kelly? It might be in his new books, _What Technology Wants_), in which he points out that, basically, we've hit a plateau of about 60 MPH landspeed for most journeys. If you chart a graph of "how fast people get around on land" from 1715 to about 1950, you see a steady rise. After that, you just see... us being steady. Ditto for air flight: from the dawn of aviation to about 1960 or 1970, you see steadily increasing speeds. Today, most planes still fly at about ~500 MPH (I think), just like they used to. Although there are still lots of micro-innovations going on with cars, rail, and planes, they've basically hit a maximum airspeed. I suspect something similar might be going on with the current paradigm of desktop operating systems. Since around ~2005 (when Windows XP's service packs finally caught up to virus / worm writers and OS X Tiger brought stability and full text search), nothing in operating systems has made a tangible difference in my life. Compared to the jump from DOS to Windows 95, or from 95/98 to XP, or the late versions of Mac OS to the early versions of OS X... the current changes in operating systems just aren't that great. Which isn't to say "consumer OSes are dead"—but they've probably hit a spot where the major problems have been solved. The innovations are smaller than universal protected memory, fast, full-indexed search, and the like. The key words above are "for this paradigm." Mobile represents the next obvious computing paradigm, and that might be a good thing. For better or worse, Microsoft has "won" the desktop and will probably never lose it. The company appears to mostly be competing with itself these days (I say, writing from an iMac).
  - easp 16y ago
    Yeah, mobile is great and all (I say that as I type this on my iPad) but there is still much that can be done with larger form factors and more powerful devices. But then I'm the guy who still doesn't understand why no one even tried to come up with ways to use two mice. Imagine using one hand to grab and hold, and the other to manipulate. It's not like we haven't had USB for over a decade, and both Microsoft and Apple make and sell mice. You'd think that doubling e market would be attractive.
    - wtn 16y ago
      Because most people are not ambidextrous?
    - JonnieCache 16y ago
      Two mice means two cursors, this would require window managers and the UI libraries on on of them to be largely rewritten. As they have been, for the mobile space. Multitouch in desktop OSes has been tacked on as a layer over the traditional cursor-oriented APIs, which is why it feels that way when you use it.
      - derefr 16y ago
        > Two mice means two cursors Not necessarily. It could also mean one cursor that operates in four spacial dimensions.
    - zatara 16y ago
      You are probably not familiar with some niche markets in engineering and 3D design, where this is part of day-to-day operations. Check www.3dconnexion.com for more info.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - loewenskind 16y ago
    >After that, you just see... us being steady. It's interesting to see this stated now, right as Google is moving forward with automated cars. Once all highway traffic is automated we can push to much higher speeds safely (and drive much closer to each other).
jsz0 16y ago
The big problem with trying to reinvent the desktop are the billions of computer users around the world who rely on having a familiar experience. Even with Apple's tiny slice of the market we see Internet riots over things like the iTunes icon changing or the OSX menubar becoming transparent. It's hard to see a time in the future when people will have any appetite for radical changes. Maybe it could happen on a platform like Linux where you can easily switch desktop environments but there's not much hope for third party applications embracing change.
- yason 16y ago
  I think this is eventually going to change. The new UIs are touchscreen pads, netbook editions etc. that just don't scale to the traditional desktop user interface. The next thing is that people get used to more modal, one-at-a-time multitasking systems like Android and then some variant of a netbook UI really hits off, eventually on desktop as well.

j_baker 16y ago

I can't help but think of "640k should be enough for everybody" when I read this. Desktop computing isn't as sexy as mobile computing, but it isn't dead yet. There are plenty of innovations left to be made.

jseliger 16y ago
This is fair, but I also think about an essay I read (from Kevin Kelly? It might be in his new books, _What Technology Wants_), in which he points out that, basically, we've hit a plateau of about 60 MPH landspeed for most journeys. If you chart a graph of "how fast people get around on land" from 1715 to about 1950, you see a steady rise. After that, you just see... us being steady. Ditto for air flight: from the dawn of aviation to about 1960 or 1970, you see steadily increasing speeds. Today, most planes still fly at about ~500 MPH (I think), just like they used to. Although there are still lots of micro-innovations going on with cars, rail, and planes, they've basically hit a maximum airspeed. I suspect something similar might be going on with the current paradigm of desktop operating systems. Since around ~2005 (when Windows XP's service packs finally caught up to virus / worm writers and OS X Tiger brought stability and full text search), nothing in operating systems has made a tangible difference in my life. Compared to the jump from DOS to Windows 95, or from 95/98 to XP, or the late versions of Mac OS to the early versions of OS X... the current changes in operating systems just aren't that great. Which isn't to say "consumer OSes are dead"—but they've probably hit a spot where the major problems have been solved. The innovations are smaller than universal protected memory, fast, full-indexed search, and the like. The key words above are "for this paradigm." Mobile represents the next obvious computing paradigm, and that might be a good thing. For better or worse, Microsoft has "won" the desktop and will probably never lose it. The company appears to mostly be competing with itself these days (I say, writing from an iMac).
- easp 16y ago
  Yeah, mobile is great and all (I say that as I type this on my iPad) but there is still much that can be done with larger form factors and more powerful devices. But then I'm the guy who still doesn't understand why no one even tried to come up with ways to use two mice. Imagine using one hand to grab and hold, and the other to manipulate. It's not like we haven't had USB for over a decade, and both Microsoft and Apple make and sell mice. You'd think that doubling e market would be attractive.
  - wtn 16y ago
    Because most people are not ambidextrous?
  - JonnieCache 16y ago
    Two mice means two cursors, this would require window managers and the UI libraries on on of them to be largely rewritten. As they have been, for the mobile space. Multitouch in desktop OSes has been tacked on as a layer over the traditional cursor-oriented APIs, which is why it feels that way when you use it.
    - derefr 16y ago
      > Two mice means two cursors Not necessarily. It could also mean one cursor that operates in four spacial dimensions.
  - zatara 16y ago
    You are probably not familiar with some niche markets in engineering and 3D design, where this is part of day-to-day operations. Check www.3dconnexion.com for more info.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- loewenskind 16y ago
  >After that, you just see... us being steady. It's interesting to see this stated now, right as Google is moving forward with automated cars. Once all highway traffic is automated we can push to much higher speeds safely (and drive much closer to each other).

jsz0 16y ago

The big problem with trying to reinvent the desktop are the billions of computer users around the world who rely on having a familiar experience. Even with Apple's tiny slice of the market we see Internet riots over things like the iTunes icon changing or the OSX menubar becoming transparent. It's hard to see a time in the future when people will have any appetite for radical changes. Maybe it could happen on a platform like Linux where you can easily switch desktop environments but there's not much hope for third party applications embracing change.

yason 16y ago
I think this is eventually going to change. The new UIs are touchscreen pads, netbook editions etc. that just don't scale to the traditional desktop user interface. The next thing is that people get used to more modal, one-at-a-time multitasking systems like Android and then some variant of a netbook UI really hits off, eventually on desktop as well.