Gary Marshall: iAnywhere? iDoubt it - why Apple will not merge OS X with iOS

Get the latest on iPhone/iPad technology: Ipads Advisor

Here’s an odd one: according to an analyst at JP Morgan, Apple is working on a ‘converged Mac OS/iOS operating system that permits an iPhone or iPad to dock into a specially set up display to run as a computer system.’

The analysts have called it ‘iAnywhere’ and reckon we can see it in about a year’s time due to the fact that the ‘iPad has actually not stepped up to become the next growth chariot.’ You understand things are significant when terms such as ‘growth chariot’ are being bandied about.

Just think. It might be as huge as the Motorola Atrix, or Windows RT!

The concept of a converged OS is enjoyable, but it doesn’t make a large amount of sense. Exactly what problem would it resolve? We have currently seen what takes place when you try to incorporate desktop and mobile OSes for no great reason: you draw out Windows RT and everyone goes ‘huh?’


I am not hating on Windows below, however it does show exactly what occurs when you attempt to make an OS that’s desktop and mobile and touch and mouse: it irritates everybody due to the fact that it’s too mobile-y for the desktop users and too desktop-y for mobile.

Microsoft tried it, blew it, and has been backpedalling ever since. At the same time Apple’s decidedly non-hybrid Macs have actually continued to take a greater share of the COMPUTER market’s money.

OS X and iOS are growing better, but a merger appears unlikely. Right here’s why.

Different strokes for different folks

I reckon I am a fairly normal computer user. I’ve an effective, big-screened computer for work and for requiring tasks such as music manufacturing. I’ve a tablet for yelling at individuals on the web when I am on the couch. And I’ve a phone for yelling at people on the internet when I am on the bus.

Each device has different concerns. There’s some overlap, obviously, but normally speaking my computer is all about the power, my phone the portability, my tablet the capability to wage war from my sofa and chuck videos to my Apple TV.

You can take them out of their convenience areas, but that includes compromise: exactly what’s just excellent on a 27-inch display will not be much fun on a phone, and apps designed for mobile use lack the power you get out of ‘correct’ Computers. I ‘d no more compose a book on an iPhone than I ‘d use an iMac to Instagram my dinner.

The hardware lines might blur – the reported iPad Pro and 12-inch MacBook Pro, if they exist, will have generally similar specs: flash storage, retina displays, multi-core processors, long battery life – but the software application remains different: iOS on an iMac would dumb it down, and OS X on an iPad would’ve to do with as much enjoyable as Windows XP was on Tablet PCs.

If you wish to provide the best of both worlds you’ve three choices.

One, you can run two OSes, as an ATIV Q finishes with Windows and Android (or a Boot Camp-ing Mac does with OS X and Windows).

Two, you can make a dual-mode OS like Microsoft did.

Or 3, you can do exactly what Apple’s currently doing: share information and features, but keep the systems different. That seems to be working quite well up until now.

It’s crucial to take Apple’s declarations with a pinch of salt – when Apple states it will not do something, that often simply suggests it is not doing it today – however I think Phil Schiller was mentioning to the fact when he dismissed a merger of OS X and iOS.

‘You’ll see them be the exact same where that makes good sense,’ he said. ‘And you’ll see them be various in those things that are essential to their success.’

Apple, it seems, is still thinking different.