I really think the big thing is the idea of running apps side by side. Otherwise, I don't think apple is necessarily as far behind as this article makes it seem.
This is what I hoped the iPad would do (run multiple iPhone apps concurrently at 1x and allow inter-app drags).
However, the complexities of this are boggling and will make a nightmarish (or nonexistent) security model. It would trully be OLE, take 2 if it worked at all.
This is a year out. When Android 3.0 was previewed 6 months before release, I was amazed. Then I realized how buggy and rushed it was.
Apple sets a very high bar for quality. It will be interesting to see if either Google or Microsoft can compete.
It is way too early to proclaim that history is repeating itself. 20 years ago Apple were a rudderless ship. Today they are on of the most efficiently operating computer companies out there. They have a vision, they have a solid foundation on which to build, and they have the resources to execute rapidly on that vision.
>Today they are on of the most efficiently operating computer companies out there. They have a vision, they have a solid foundation on which to build, and they have the resources to execute rapidly on that vision.
Sounds like you're talking about Apple of 1982-84. Apple that had had a several years long run under Jobs. Btw, the vision they execute today is the vision outlined in the Jobs' 30 years old Macintosh business plans.
However, the complexities of this are boggling and will make a nightmarish (or nonexistent) security model. It would trully be OLE, take 2 if it worked at all.
This is a year out. When Android 3.0 was previewed 6 months before release, I was amazed. Then I realized how buggy and rushed it was.
Apple sets a very high bar for quality. It will be interesting to see if either Google or Microsoft can compete.