One OS to Rule Them All (guess which one?)

Yes, iOS and OS X are basically a single OS. Only they support different hardware platforms, run completely different apps, provide completely different SDKs, have completely different UI guidelines, and serve completely different use cases.<p>Other than that, who could tell the difference?<p>The reality is that the AppKit (OS X) and UIKit (iOS) SDKs are actually diverging, not coming together. There isn't so much as a hint of traditional keyboard+mouse UI support in the UIKit SDK, which means that iOS apps are not coming to mouse-driven desktop anytime soon. And while many new AppKit features are inspired by iOS (e.g., view-based table views), the AppKit engineers have made no effort to keep those features source code compatible with their iOS counterparts.<p>Apple has made it clear. These are two different SDKs on two divergent paths.

"Oh, and one more thing: OS X Mountain Lion boasts complete integration with Twitter, just like iOS. Microsoft will need Facebook integration in Windows 8 more than ever if it’s going to catch up to Apple (remember, Microsoft is a Facebook investor)."<p>This paragraph really makes my blood boil. I suspect "complete integration" means the same thing it does on iOS, oauth without an NSWebView. What, when I right click I'll be able to tweet the text I've selected? Give me a break.<p>There is little need for anybody to "catch up" to a feature that everybody already has. Now logging in with twitter is slightly easier and faster. I can hear you already, "twitter integration gives users a default account and eliminates the mental friction of signing into things". I'm sorry, how many programs do you log into daily? You generally log into web apps, and the browser already has pretty good oauth support.<p>This is a fantastic opportunity for Twitter, I wish I knew how much iOS5 has helped them grow, but I bet being shoved in the faces of OSX users will drive adoption even more. It's also a good move for Apple, they get to say "now we've integrated twitter across both iOS and OSX."<p>So, it's good for Twitter and good for Apple; Let's not pretend it's good for consumers.

I believe that it will be one OS with two or three UIs. For instance, you'll have a device that will look like an iPhone or iPad when you use it like an iPhone or iPad, touch screen, big icon dashboards. When you plug that device into a docking station and monitor, it spits our a more OS X like OS. Though it's still the same OS, just a different view of it, now that you've got more real-estate. I like to think of it as a responsive OS.

For all his alleged fanboyism, Gruber is a good enough student of Apple's business strategy that his analysis as to how Apple <i>isn't</i> merging Mac OS X and iOS is worth a hundred times as much as this ridiculous linkbait.

Somehow I don't see it. I'm going to use a functionally single-tasking OS through a touch interface on a 12 core Mac Pro with dual 27 inch monitors? It seems to me that they are making their full spec OS look a feel a bit more like their mobile OS to help along the halo effect, and make it more comfortable for their mobile users to make the jump to their desktop OS.<p>I don't like it, but that seems more likely. Also because iOS on the desktop would need a massive amount of expansion to be useful with much of what desktop users need to do--unless you are a very low needs user that runs a web browser and few internet dependent apps. Autocad on iOS? Protools on iOS? Maya on iOS? InDesign on iOS? Illustrator on iOS? I don't know that touch will be very good with the deeper parts of those and many similar apps.

With the Mac App Store in Snow Leopard, or Lion's Launchpad (and touchpad), it seems clear that Apple's been headed in that direction for a while.<p>What strikes me is how they're doing it iteratively. Not because it's surprising; graceful iteration has been OS X's single best feature for about a decade running. It's just interesting to observe the enormous contrast between what they're doing and the "try and alienate all our users by being as disruptive as possible" approach that Microsoft has chosen to take with Windows 8.

A unified OS experience is hardly the same as a unified OS.

If you didn't see this coming I don't think you've been paying attention. If you think the iPad is "just a toy" then you need to hand in your tech pundit credentials. It is far less of a toy right now than the Apple II was at launch, let alone the Altair. The future of mass appeal computing is in a more streamlined experience. Centralized app installation and management using a package manager type system, simplified and more universal user experience metaphors, etc. The PC as it has evolved has done wonders for bringing the power of computers to a level that's manageable by non-expert users, but it has always had persistent fundamental problems that have kept it falling short of that ideal. The mobile experience is another huge leap in that direction. It is not the final step, nor does it necessarily eclipse everything that has been done with other user experiences, but it represents the kernel of the next evolution of personal computers.

Hold on, I thought Gatekeeper would only give you verification that an app is secure, and you would otherwise still be free to install any app you want. Is Apple really restricting you to install only app store and Gatekeeper verified apps?

It is the Apple newest OS, which will blur the line between MacOSX and iOS, between desktop and mobile.