This Week's Sponsor:

1Blocker

A Cleaner, Faster, and More Private Web Experience

Posts in stories

The Case for an iOS Aperture

 

I’m not usually one for making baseless predictions about what Apple’s going to do next. There are plenty of people who already do that, and I’m generally more interested in their current affairs than in unconfirmed rumors. But there are exceptions to every “usually”, and today I want to try my hand at speculating.

Though we tend to forget about them after the fact, iPads have always debuted with iPad versions of some of Apple’s biggest apps. The original was released alongside iWork, to show that the iPad could do real work from day one (never mind how many people derided it as a consumption device for months). The iPad 2 brought an iPad-optimized version of iMovie and GarageBand, which expanded the boundaries of what everyone thought could be created with a touch screen.

Now Apple is on a photography kick in a big way. Not only have they been relentlessly improving the iPhone’s camera since the 3GS, they have also added important and useful features in iOS 5 in the form of basic photo edits, built-in HDR and composition grids, the ability to organize albums, and Photo Stream, which near everyone agrees is their favorite feature of iCloud.

Given all that, I think that the next big Apple app to make its iOS debut will be Aperture, alongside the iPad 3’s inevitable announcement. Our own Cody Fink has written about the possibility of Aperture for iOS before, but there are a number of reasons why the timing for it makes sense now.

Retina Display
The one thing everyone expects about the iPad 3 is that it will finally get its long-awaited Retina display. It’s also the feature that everyone is most looking forward to (and for good reason, seeing what a huge difference it made when we first saw it on the iPhone 4). Of course this display will be great for reading and writing text, but what better way to really show it off than with photography, where the crispness and clarity of the display will be readily apparent?

A6
Another all-but-certain feature everyone agrees the iPad 3 will have is a quad-core A6, the next evolution of Apple’s A-series mobile processors. Like the A5, this chip will surely include vastly improved CPU and graphics performance over its predecessor, and in addition to games a great way to demonstrate it would be an iOS version of Aperture that shows how fast and fluidly the iPad 3 can manage tons of photos and perform complex image edits.

Photo Stream
Given Apple’s current photography kick the iPad 3 is likely to have better cameras than the iPad 2, but even if they’re not as good as the ones on the 4S —which, given how poor the ones on the 2 are compared to even the iPhone 4, seems likely— the brilliant thing with Photo Stream is that they don’t have to be. With Photo Stream, every photo you take on your 4S, your iPad 3, or even on a DSLR (once it’s been imported into iPhoto or OS X Aperture) would be available on your iOS Aperture library without you having to lift a finger.

iCloud Metadata Sync
We know iCloud is a big part of Apple’s strategy, and is only going to get bigger as time goes on. I can see iCloud playing a big part in Aperture on both iOS and the Mac. Any photo tagged, edited, or organized in one version of Aperture could be automatically mirrored with those same changes on another. Naturally this won’t make sense for current large Aperture libraries, but perhaps there will be a special iCloud section on the Mac version (like how there’s already a section for Photo Stream) specifically for photos that have been edited in this way.

Another Desktop Need Eliminated
iOS 5 may have given us “true” post-PC devices that could finally be used independently of our old-fashioned mice and window-based systems, but many people still need traditional PCs to store and manage digital photo collections. Aperture for iOS (along with iCloud and higher-capacity iPads) could be the next natural step in the iPad’s evolution towards being the only computer that 90% of people need.

Like I said, I don’t usually care to make baseless predictions, and everything here is certainly that. I have no idea if Apple will do any of this or not; for all we know they could be readying iOS versions of Logic and Final Cut Pro instead. But when you consider what the combination of Aperture for iOS with a retina-enabled iPad 3 could do, I think we may very well be seeing this alongside its announcement.

One More Thing: Open photos in any iOS image editor
This is more of a wish than a guess, but just like Aperture on the Mac I would love to see Aperture on iOS have the ability to open any image in any of the great image editing apps that already exist for iOS (with the ability to roundtrip them back into Aperture, of course). I have even less of an idea as to whether Apple will do this than I do my above speculations. Perhaps we will have to wait for a future version of iOS that better lets us share data between apps. But when and whether it happens or not, I think it would be a great way to let Aperture for iOS coexist happily among the many photo apps that iOS users already know and enjoy.

On iPads and Personal Computers: A Post-PC Retrospective

There’s been a debate lately as to whether the iPad can fit into the so-called PC category. Following the release of several estimates and market research studies showing much different results when the iPad is included in the overall PC sales of the entire industry, a number of people have voiced once again their opinions on the matter, producing a variegate mix of diverging points. Our writer Graham Spencer chimed in as well, analyzing the reasons behind certain people’s assertion that the iPad can’t be a PC because it can’t fully replace a personal computer.

I, however, would like to take a different route and look at this issue from a broader perspective that includes data, Apple’s history, the current market’s situation, and the tech community’s change of direction on the “iPad as a PC” debate over the past two years.

The starting point, I believe, lies in the words Steve Jobs used to introduce the iPad back in 2010:

Everybody uses a laptop and a smartphone. And a question has arisen lately: is there room for a third category of device in the middle? Something that’s between a laptop and a smartphone. And of course we’ve pondered this question for years as well. The bar’s pretty high. In order to really create a new category of devices, those devices are going to have to be far better at doing some key tasks. Better than a laptop. Better than a smartphone. Now, some people have thought…that’s a netbook. The problem is, netbooks aren’t better at anything. They’re slow, they have low quality displays and they run clunky old PC software. So, they’re not better than a laptop at anything. They’re just cheaper. They’re just cheap laptops. We don’t think they’re a new category of device.

In the few minutes that led to the iPad’s introduction, Jobs carefully set the tone and Apple’s position for the upcoming discussions on the true nature of the device: the iPad is meant to be a “third category” that executes “key tasks” better than a laptop, and better than a smartphone. He didn’t compare the iPad to a PC, but he did mention that Apple wouldn’t follow the trend of releasing cheap “netbooks” that “aren’t better at anything”. Of course, Steve Jobs iterated on his statements regarding the nature of the iPad a few months later at D8 Conference. This is where Jobs famously compared PCs to trucks:

When we were an agrarian nation, all cars were trucks, because that’s what you needed on the farm,” Jobs said at D8 last month. “But as vehicles started to be used in the urban centers, cars got more popular. Innovations like automatic transmission and power steering and things that you didn’t care about in a truck as much started to become paramount in cars….PCs are going to be like trucks. They’re still going to be around, they’re still going to have a lot of value, but they’re going to be used by one out of x people.

As you can see, Jobs’ public definition and positioning of the iPad slightly changed in the months between January and June 2010. I believe the more intimate setting of D8 got Jobs into a talking mood which helped him express what he truly felt about the iPad and PCs; I also believe Apple itself was (is) still trying to understand what the iPad ultimately is, thus definitions and public statements might change and evolve over time. Tim Cook stated numerous times that, whilst excited about the opportunities opened by iPad, Apple still has to fully understand just how much market there is behind it. Furthermore, keep in mind how Apple initially touted the iPad as a productivity machine (2010 keynote), then an entertainment platform (iPad 2 keynote) and subsequently as an educational machine (January 2012). Apple still has to fully grasp the potential of the iPad, and is firing on all cylinders to gain as much share as possible before the market is too crowded. That’s not to say Apple doesn’t have a strategy; in fact, they have multiple ones and they are trying to optimize the proper sequence for the company to put them in place.

Strategies, typically, are based on patterns, and Apple wouldn’t have gotten to exceed $46 billion in revenue if these patterns hadn’t been associated with the numbers and data coming in after the launch of the original iPad. The numbers speak clearly for Apple: of all iOS devices, the iPad has the most rapid trajectory in every quarter since launch with an impressive growth from 3.27 million units (first quarter) to 15.43 million units sold (last quarter). Horace Dediu has put together a nice chart showing the penetration of the iPad in terms of shipments and growth.

Numbers help establishing patterns that define strategies and business models. Sure enough, the early success of the iPad has allowed Apple to turn a product that represents a good 20% of revenue into a category worth focusing on for the future. As I explained in this article, if the source is to be believed, Tim Cook hinting at the iPad being a better alternative than a possible ARM-based, iPad-like MacBook Air is interesting for a number of reasons. First off, it sort of implies that tasks that can be accomplished with an iPad-inspired MacBook Air (that is, regular PC tasks with instant-on and a slimmer form factor) could be easily, if not better executed by the iPad itself. Indeed, the same report goes on to note that Tim Cook believes the iPad “satisfies—or will soon satisfy—the needs of those who might have been interested in such a product”. More importantly, assuming an ARM-based MacBook Air has ever been in testing within Apple and that such a machine would be positioned as an ultra-portable, fast and durable low-end Mac, it means Apple sees the iPad as the portable and lightweight personal computer for the masses seeking a high-quality product in the low end. Read more

MacStories Reading List: January 29 – February 5

With quarterly earnings, education announcements and Macworld under its belt, this week the Apple community had time to think and reflect upon recent events. Much of the controversy surrounding the iBooks Author EULA is gone, thanks to a clarification from Apple with a software update and Zynga now taking the spot of most hated company on the planet. At least for this week. Independent writers and bloggers share their thoughts on what it means to attend Macworld besides getting to report on news and interview people, whilst Harry McCracken provides us with a fantastic piece against “Apple is like a cult” promoters. Meanwhile, Apple’s Q1 2012 results are still impressing a large part of the blogosphere.

It’s this week’s Reading List, so get comfortable, fire up your read-later application of choice, and enjoy. Read more

Focusing On iPads

The latest report from AppleInsider claims that, after a meeting with CEO Tim Cook and CFO Peter Oppenheimer, Citi analyst Richard Gardner left with the impression that Apple is focusing on iPads, leaving little or no possibility for an ARM-based MacBook Air, which was previously rumored.

Apple doesn’t refer to iPad as a PC, but as a “post-PC device,” leaving the ARM-based tablet distinct from the company’s Intel-based Macs. Gardner further indicated the meeting dispelled the notion that Apple might introduce ARM-based Macs, countering rumors that a new MacBook Air featuring an ARM processor might appear sometime soon.

Gardner cited Cook as alluding to “rapid innovation on the iOS platform” that will “significantly broaden the use case for tablets,” and stated he “walked away from this meeting with the impression that Apple feels iPad satisfies—or will soon satisfy—the needs of those who might have been interested in such a product” as an ARM-based MacBook Air.

The rumors of Apple switching from Intel to ARM-based architectures on Macs left many wondering when they first surfaced online. And whilst it wouldn’t be a surprise to know that Apple has at least tested A5-based MacBook Airs and other sorts of ARM CPUs for portables – of course a company like Apple wants to experiment with as many hardware alternatives as possible – many debated whether it would make sense for the company to switch in the near future, when quad-core ARM processors are seemingly ready for the next-generation of iOS devices.

That Apple doesn’t believe an ARM-based MacBook Air – or, as the competitors would call it, an ARM Ultrabook – would be needed on the market isn’t a surprise, either. Assuming there is a market for users who want a low-power, battery life efficient portable machine in the range of 11” and 13” – a machine that, in theory, should be used for tasks such as word processing, lightweight image editing, browsing, and email – Apple believes that market can be satisfied – or will be “soon” satisfied as AppleInsider writes – by the iPad.

From a user’s standpoint, I think Apple’s reasoning here is that, ultimately, someone who’s seeking an 11-inch or even 13-inch machine with the technological perks of the iPad would be better off with an iPad, which is lighter, more portable, and has a richer selection of apps (from Apple’s perspective in looking at simple App Store numbers). There are edge cases, such as people who would strongly argue against iOS’ virtual keyboard, but I believe what Tim Cook is saying here – again, at least according to AppleInsider – is that the hypothetical market for an ARM MacBook Air should just settle with an iPad, as it’s a versatile, innovative machine that will get more feature soon. I don’t always want to look much into reports about interviews out of their original context, but if that “soon” is to be believed, I wouldn’t mind seeing more productivity-oriented software from Apple at the next iPad event – apps such as Aperture and, who knows, maybe even a portable programming suite would be perfect to further showcase the iPad’s capabilities as a “real” PC.

More importantly, Gardner’s “impression” that Apple feels satisfied with the iPad is also backed up by the numbers: in the past quarter alone, Apple sold over 15 million iPads, and “only” 5.2 million Macs. In the amount of time that Apple should spend transitioning a Mac product (the MacBook Air) to a new CPU architecture and getting developers to begin supporting this new “hybrid” machine, the company could easily sell another 20 million iPads. That’s not to say Apple will never switch to ARM (never is a dangerous word) on the desktop and that they haven’t considered it, but I’ve never believed it could happen in a short period of time as some of the early rumors claimed.

Looking at the first quarters of iPad sales and reception, I’d say Tim Cook is right to be focusing on iPads.

Apple, China, and Doing The Right Thing

There is an assumption currently making the rounds that the workers laboring in Chinese factories under terrible conditions are a direct result of Apple’s actions. Some people almost seem to think that Apple is literally enslaving people to work on its products. Needless to say, this is not true.

The fact is that these workers have a choice, albeit a limited one, about where to work. And they are working at factories like Foxconn —which, I remind you, is a wholly separate entity from Apple— because they are better than the alternatives: no job at all, or a job that pays far worse with even harsher conditions.

Think about that. As bad as the stories that we’ve heard about working there are —and make no mistake, they are horrid and no one should have to work under such conditions— the fact that Foxconn has a six-month waiting list of people hoping to become employees seems to suggest that they are still much better than any other opportunity these workers have available.

Given all that, is Apple being ethical by working with a company like Foxconn? A company that, for all its problems, still provides a significantly better alternative to the people clamoring to be hired? I would argue yes.

If Apple were to abandon their involvement with Foxconn and other abusive Chinese suppliers like these boycotts are calling for, what would happen to these workers? The boycotters apparently believe that they would be set free to find safe, well-paid work elsewhere. But if working at Foxconn was already one of the best opportunities they had, that outcome seems unlikely at best.

In reality, they would likely be forced to take a job at another factory with even worse pay and worse conditions. Or perhaps have no choice but to perform peasant work for a fraction of the money they were earning before. Worst case, they may not even be able to find another job at all.

If the goal of a boycott is to assuage the guilt of first-world citizens for buying Apple products made under harsh conditions, Apple leaving China would certainly accomplish that. But if the goal is to make things better for the workers themselves, the only realistic option I can see is for Apple to continue what they’re doing: work with these companies, demand better conditions, conduct audits, and have the workers paid as well as possible for people in their position. 1

Yes, the conditions these workers labor under are terrible. They may have no better choices in their economy, but that doesn’t mean what’s happening there is okay. If first-world companies are going to continue to do business with China and Chinese companies, the only ethical thing for these companies to do is demand continual improvement. And we too should demand as much of those companies whose products we buy.

But the fact remains that as of now, these people will be exploited no matter what we do. Ceasing to provide them better employment opportunities will not help them. Quite the opposite: it will only leave them subject to even worse alternatives. Given that, I believe the best thing we can do is support companies that are taking responsibility for improving conditions and wages for the people that make their products. And right now, the company that is taking the most responsibility…is Apple.

  1. Unfortunately I’m not sure how legally or economically feasible it is for Apple to reduce their margins and pass along the profits to the workers directly even if they wanted to. But if it is, they should be doing so as much as possible.↩︎

To Be Or Not To Be, Is The iPad A PC?

A few hours ago I listened to the latest episode of Shawn Today (a daily podcast from Shawn Blanc available to members of his site), and in it he discussed the issue of whether the iPad is a Personal Computer.  This follows an article by Matthew Panzarino on The Next Web yesterday, titled “Look, tablets are PCs, get over it”. In fact I could point to quite a few articles and discussions about this question of whether tablets (specifically the iPad) are PCs. But Shawn’s episode and Matthew’s post have inspired me to also weigh in on the discussion today, with why I believe the iPad should legitimately be counted within the PC market.

I’ll just start with this question: what computer is more personal than an iPad? The tablet form factor and iOS software combine together to make using the iPad a far more personal computing device than a traditional PC desktop or laptop, where you have to interact with the software from an arm’s length away, using a mouse or trackpad and a keyboard.

So the iPad is personal device, but is it a fully functional computer? John Mello at PCWorld says no, because in his opinion people don’t use it for content creation. Matthew’s article on TNW does a great job at dismantling this oft-quoted “complaint” about the  iPad and I recommend reading his entire argument. When the iPad first came out I must admit I had the same thoughts about the device, but as time has gone on I have increasingly used it for content-creation — whether it be annotating PDFs for studying, writing, and even some (very average) efforts at using iMovie. Content-creation on the iPad will continue to become more common as people adjust to the device and as app developers continue to adapt to creating great software for the iPad – just look at how productivity apps have improved and advanced in the past year on the iPad.

Sure, some content-creation tasks may never be as easy to do on an iPad compared to a more traditional PC – things like advanced video editing or long stretches of writing. But by the same token, a small netbook isn’t good for those tasks either and yet it is counted as a PC. I know I would always choose an iPad over a netbook for virtually any task because in my opinion it is a far more capable personal computer. On the flip side, I think the iPad is actually a better computer for things like annotating PDFs with apps such as PDF Expert. Then for things like advanced video or audio editing it’s only inevitable for those apps to transition to iOS, in fact just today Avid Studio was released – it may be a distilled version of the advanced desktop version, but it will evolve and become increasingly powerful for most tasks that an average user and even “pro-sumer” will need. The iPad is personal and (in my opinion) it is also a functional computing device.

So if you are excluding the iPad from the personal computer category, does that mean there is some checklist of requirements for a device to be a PC? Does it need a keyboard, or perhaps a trackpad or a mouse, or does it just have to be able to install any application you want (without the approval of a gatekeeper such as Apple)? All of these ‘requirements’ are completely arbitrary - with no practical reason as to why they are required to be on a PC. You can still connect a keyboard to the iPad if you need one for extended periods of writing, your finger is the “mouse” and Apple’s App Store has mostly protected consumers from nefarious apps or excessively useless/buggy apps – virtually everything I need is on the App Store (in fact there are over 170,000 apps just for the iPad). You may not like this policy (I can understand that, even if I don’t agree with it), but is it really a reason to bar the iPad from being counted as a PC? Again, that’s completely arbitrary.

Arbitrary: Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

If you are still thinking that the iPad doesn’t count as a PC, what will all those Windows 8 computers in tablet/slate form be counted as? You can’t bar them from being “a PC” because they will be able to “morph” into what is essentially a Windows 8 laptop with a traditional Windows desktop, use a keyboard (and even mouse) and yet you can use it like them as tablets with a different, touch-based UI.

But if you do count them as a PCs, you surely have to count the iPad as a PC too then. They will be virtually identical devices from a functionality and experience point of view, unless you say the Windows 8 tablet is a PC because it will still have the traditional Windows desktop, and then I go back to the fact that it is an arbitrary requirement. One might actually argue (from what we know at the moment), that the iPad is more functional and will provide a better experience because it has two years of developer support with apps that have been specifically designed for the touch interface, whereas any Windows 8 tablet may be handicapped with the Windows desktop because it isn’t designed for touch-input and Metro may lack many apps at launch. The reality is that both should be counted as PCs: it is the only logical solution.

But…but…..but….

You might now point to the fact that Apple has touted the iPad as a Post-PC device, so surely if Apple themselves aren’t calling it a PC, it shouldn’t then be counted in any PC marketshare analysis. It’s a decent point, but I think Apple did that as more of a marketing move, to point out that it is a different, unique device. In fact, it is the next evolution (if not revolution) of the personal computer. Maybe the solution is just calling the “traditional” PC category something different (Desktops & Laptops perhaps?) that would make much more sense than trying to arbitrarily force the iPad out of the PC category.

One other decent rebuttal may be to then ask, if you are including the iPad, why not also include the iPhone. It’s a very good point, because I think it is also a personal computing device to some degree. I think the reason why it’s legitimate to leave the iPhone and other smartphones out of most PC market analysis is because there are enough points of differentiation between the traditional PC/iPad and the smartphone in the way it is used and experienced. These include the fact that smartphones have a distinct use case of being always-on communication devices, time management devices (Calendar/To-Do apps, etc), time-wasters (Angry Birds in a long queue, anyone?), and are occasionally used for content-creation or content consumption. They are also devices you spend using for a few minutes at a time (typically), multiple times a day — rather than PCs (including iPad), which you use for longer periods of time.

You might claim these are arbitrary reasons and, yes, to some degree they are, but that’s because the line between whether a smartphone can also be counted as a PC is a far blurrier line than that of iPads as PCs. In my opinion at least, it would be OK to include smartphones as PCs in a market analysis if there is a good reason as to why it’s an important conclusion - such as an analysis of trends. A good example of this is Horace Dediu, who included smartphones as PCs in the final graph of his article entitled “The rise and fall of personal computing”.

So as Matthew Panzarino said yesterday in a very succinct title and what I completely agree with, “tablets are PCs, get over it”.

January 2012 In Review

Starting this month we’re launching a new, month-in-review feature that will summarize the past month’s big news stories, apps and editorials that we have published on MacStories. Each month we’ll give links to all those big stories and give a summation of the big events: for example, this month we detail Apple’s Education Event and include links to all the important articles related to it. We’ll also include links to new apps, app updates and app reviews that we think are worthy of your attention. Finally, we’ll be including links to our standout editorial stories from the past month - the stories we are most proud of.

We hope you enjoy this new feature and find it useful. Our hope is that it gives some perspective on the events of the past month, particularly when news flows so fast these days.

Apple’s Education Event

The big news of January was probably Apple’s Education Event that was held on January 19th in New York. The education-themed event saw the release of iBooks 2.0 which featured the ability to read new multi-touch books and, specifically, textbooks. In order to promote the creation of these new multi-touch books, Apple also released the free iBooks Author application for OS X, allowing virtually anyone to create a beautiful and interactive book for the iBookstore. The event also saw the release of an iTunes U app for the iPhone and iPad to give students and teachers more control over their courses.

Apple’s Q1 2012 Earnings Call

The other significant piece of news from January was Apple’s Q1 2012 earnings call in which Apple revealed it had just had the best quarter in its history, posting $46.33 billion in revenue, selling 37.04 million iPhones and 15.43 million iPads during the blowout quarter. The Next Web pointed out an interesting statistic that by selling 37.04 million iPhones during the 14 week quarter, Apple had actually sold more iPhones than babies had been born during the same time period. We also posted some of the more interesting details and statistics from the earnings call in a follow-up post which is well worth the read. A final article related to the earnings call is the one about how the iPhone ASP rose in Q1 2012, despite the addition of the “free” iPhone 3GS.

Apple Continued To Rollout Products Internationally

January saw the next big wave of iPhone 4S launches in China and 21 other countries on January 13th, making the 4S available in over 90 countries. Apple’s recently launched iTunes Match also became available in 19 additional countries around Europe and South America - taking the total number of countries with iTunes Match to 37 - making it another quick international rollout.

Supplier Responsibility

This month the issue of working conditions at Apple’s suppliers again came under close inspection. It started with the NPR program ‘This American Life’ investigating the issue in one of its episodes. Apple then released its annual Supplier Responsibility report (earlier than last year) and revealed its list of suppliers for the first time. Towards the end of the month, The New York Times featured an editorial on the issue - focusing on Apple. We also linked to a paidContent article that put the NYT article into perspective and rationally laid out the reality that Apple can’t solely change manufacturing overnight.

Jailbreak

January saw the untethered A5 jailbreak finally being released, to the joy of many iPhone 4S and iPad 2 owners who had been holding out for a jailbreak for quite some months. In fact the demand for the jailbreak saw nearly 1 million downloads of the tool in just the first 24 hours. Jailbreak certainly hasn’t become irrelevant just yet.

New SVP of Retail

On January 31, Apple announced John Browett has been hired as new Senior Vice President of Retail, a position left open since Ron Johnson left Apple to become the new CEO of J.C. Penney. Browett has been the CEO of European technology retailer Dixons and previously held various executive positions at Tesco, including CEO.

Everything Else

New apps, updates to apps and reviews that we published in January 2012.

January Quick Reviews

A selection of the best editorial pieces that we published on MacStories in January 2012.

January MacStories Reading Lists

The iOS-ification Of Apple’s Ecosystem

Today’s update to AirPort Utility for Lion reminds me of a topic I was willing to write about but eventually left in my nvALT queue due iOS 5 (review) and iCloud, various app releases, and the usual news from Apple in the past months. The iOS-ification of OS X is, at this point, inevitable, and anyone who doesn’t see it, or tries to neglect, is either software-blind or has some kind of interest in that way of thinking.

I am looking at my Mac’s screen right now, and I can count dozens of iOS-inspired elements now co-existing with “old school” Aqua interfaces and controls. This transition obviously started years ago, and in retrospect it’s hard to dig up the very first example of iOS-ification on the Mac, so let’s just take a general look at the things we have today:

iPhoto (updated in 2010);

Safari’s popover for Downloads;

Safari’s tap-to-define;

Launchpad;

Linen;

Settings;

Mail;

iCal;

Address Book;

FaceTime (released in 2010);

And now, the new AirPort Utility.

Of course, many great writers have already written about the general concept of graphical resemblance of Lion (our review) to, say, an iPad, noting how several iOS apps and UI schemes have been ported down to the last pixel to OS X. The screenshots above should provide some context.

Today’s (relatively minor) software update reminds me, however, that the iOS-ification goes far beyond simply converting graphics and updating apps from one platform to another. It is actually more a conversion of the entire Apple ecosystem to an iOS-inspired system of graphical elements, user interactions, business models, user experience paradigms, and functionalities. The iOS-ification isn’t simply visual, it’s a fundamental shift of strategy that, ultimately, I believe begins and ends with iCloud – something that I have discussed before.

Sure, many apps look the same across iOS and Lion now. Some features have worked the other way around, finding their way from OS X to iOS, such as Safari Reader and over-the-air software updates. Others weren’t ported – they were released at the same time across two platforms, such as Reading List (which fits in the bigger iCloud plan). From the user experience standpoint, there’s plenty of iOS goodness to go by in Lion: full-screen mode and Auto Save + Resume give users an iOS-like environment for working with apps and never lose data; natural scrolling and gestures have unified the way a user moves content around and interacts with the operating system; the Home user’s Library directory is not visible by default in Lion, eliminating an important piece of filesystem from the default configuration of the OS.

Then there’s the business side of the ecosystem. Both iOS and Mac apps have to be sold through the App Store, with Apple retaining a 30% cut off every transaction (Update: Mac apps can still be sold outside of the Mac App Store. Many have debated, however, that going forward the obvious path is the Mac App Store, with some feature such as iCloud integration being Mac App Store-only). Just like on iOS, Mac developers will soon be forced to implement sandboxing, which limits the access a third-party app has to the filesystem. And, obviously, boxed software is going away, leaving much retail room to Mac and iOS devices showcasing the App Store. Or shelves filled with iOS accessories.

iOS-ification isn’t merely graphical: I believe someday, very soon, almost every aspect of Apple’s operations will be iOS-inspired or iOS-unified: from hardware design to user interfaces and app distribution, from developer guidelines to marketing and the way people “see” Apple these days. Those who got to know Apple in the past five years likely already think of it as “the iPhone company”, and rightfully so for a business largely based on revenue coming from iOS.

There are many questions left unanswered and open to speculation. Will the Mac adopt iOS’ Home screen concept (and shortcomings) in the future? Will the next version of iWork for OS X look something along the lines of this? Will Mac-only applications (and thus Mac-like from a UI standpoint) like Aperture, Final Cut and iBooks Author ever be ported to iOS, triggering an iOS-based rewrite and redesign? We don’t know yet. But soon, maybe?

The complete iOS-ification of the ecosystem will be long and there will still be hardware features and design experimentations that will be tested on the Mac first. We can only assume that Thunderbolt will be made available for iOS devices in the future. Macs are still based on physical keyboards, and even if they (perhaps) don’t want to, Apple’s engineers are forced to test new apps with keyboard shortcuts and a different user interaction. Macs have bigger screens, which can lead to arguable design choices like a comically large Launchpad.

But the seed has been planted, and today’s software release is just another drip of water in a field ready to flourish in iOS-based similarities, like it or not.

MacStories Reading List: January 22 - January 29

Another week gone by, another Reading List collection of great articles we’ve found around the web in the past seven days. This week saw the release of Apple’s Q1 2012 results, with an impressive 37 million iPhones sold and over $40 billion in revenue for the quarter. Interesting discussions, however, are still happening around iBooks Author, textbooks, and publishing tools. Not to mention The New York Times’ articles detailing Apple’s supply chain in China, and the experience of an Android user trying an iPhone for two weeks.

It’s time for another Reading List, so curl up with your favorite browser or read-later app, and enjoy the links we’ve collected for you. Read more