It isn't for me either (at least right now) as it pertains to my work. I have an iPad and use it all the time at home, on the road, and on vacation - but not yet for work much - but with some HWR and a few other features, it might become a solid device for work too. The difference is that I can see beyond my own personal situation into how smartphones are changing the nature of computing, how new workflows are developing, how the young are working with this technology, and how PC's might have been the only tool in the past for some occupations but tablets are now a better option.
Well it's not suited for your work and mine either but that was the point of the cars/trucks analogy. For work you may need to haul 1000 lbs of dirt up a steep hill. For home you don't need to. For the former you need a Ford F-150 for the latter a Toyota Prius would do just fine.
This is the concept that the "It can't do real work" crowd can't wrap their heads around.
iPad sales stopped growing after the release of larger iPhones in 2014, but the installed base of iPad users kept growing a much faster pace than conventional Macs. Since the beginning of 2015, Apple has sold 92.82 million iPads alongside sales of 38.93 million Macs.
While critics have scrambled to craft statics to portray iPad sales as troubled and failing, the reality is that iPad has sold many more units than Apple's Macs, generally generating more money at the same time. Apple obviously seeks to increase iPad sales, but its tablet sales remain the largest of any vendor and it continues to generate tablet profits that are the envy of the industry.Most remarkable about Apple's iPad sales is that they are augmentative to growing Mac sales
You don't need to scramble to craft statistics. You just look at the graphs. iPad sales have been tanking for four years straight. I repeat that: They're declining in sales. If these things are going to be the future and take over personal computing, they need to start increasing in sales. Until then, everything else is idle speculation.
The fact that they are declining in sales does not imply that they are also declining in usage. AppStore statistics reveal that their usage increases instead. Everything in the PC industry declines in sales, declining in sales is so vague a statement that it carries no information.
IMO The "post PC" world is still chaotic and playing out what it will be. In the US, trucks and SUV are still the best sellers. Will "post PC" turn out less so than imagined? For most people I know the iPad is the go to home internet communicator(email/internet)/work reference document reader device(PDF,form filler-outer). Voice /text device is iPhone/Samsung etc, which seems to be reaching a plateau in what they can do... i.e. the churn rates will grow longer before upgradea(ala iPad?). For 'work product' it is still the PC/Mac. But also... are not schools more and more turning to Chromebook devices? Then there is the video consumption devices like Apple TV/ Roku. Then there are what seems like 'home services devices' like Echo. What all this means... don't have a clue... but it seems to me if someone can consolidate this to a few multipurpose devices... or just one main device(computer, server like storage, wifi broadcaster, house services device) with some ancillary interface devices... they may have a winner. IMO Apple is best(if not the only one) positioned to do all that, if that is a better "post PC" path. I also find it interesting Warren Buffett has bought a lot of Apple stock... has he seen behind the curtain? Why is he so sure iPhone will keep Apple revenues so high for the long term investment he is famous for?... interesting times.
whew... what happens when you have a bout of insomnia.
Consolidation of all these devices is unlikely. There will always be tweeners, like cross-over SUVs, but it will also always make sense to create devices that focus on a specific use. As Cook related:
Anything can be forced to converge. But the problem is that the products are about tradeoffs. You begin to make tradeoffs to the point where what you have left at the end of the day doesn’t please anyone. You can converge a toaster and a refrigerator, but you know, those things are probably not going to be pleasing to the user.
It was Microsoft that made 2-in-1 devices a great option, while Apple still think it's not possible. Maybe the SP4 is not the best tablet, or the best notebook, but it's the best 2-in-1, and proved that you can converge and have a great experience. Same as a Porsche Macan / Cayenne. They are not the best pure-offroad vehicle or sports car, but are one of the best Sports SUV in the market.
Actually, contrary to popular opinion, Apple has never commented on making an IPad Pro into a 2 in 1. People keep shouting quotes about touch screen laptops, but that is not a 2 in 1.
We don't know what Apple is thinking about regarding 2 in 1's. My bet is that one of these springs, they will quietly add a touchpad to the IPad Pro's keyboard and move on. Then the next spring they'll replace the lightening connector with a USB-C and maybe add a file system. Then, in the next go around, the MacBook Pro will get an upgrade but not the MacBook. In short, it will be an evolutionary change rather than a revolutionary one.
They could do all of that today. We just don't know why they're holding back. Could they be stuck in an ideology -- like they were with the 4" IPhone?
It isn't for me either (at least right now) as it pertains to my work. I have an iPad and use it all the time at home, on the road, and on vacation - but not yet for work much - but with some HWR and a few other features, it might become a solid device for work too. The difference is that I can see beyond my own personal situation into how smartphones are changing the nature of computing, how new workflows are developing, how the young are working with this technology, and how PC's might have been the only tool in the past for some occupations but tablets are now a better option.
Well it's not suited for your work and mine either but that was the point of the cars/trucks analogy. For work you may need to haul 1000 lbs of dirt up a steep hill. For home you don't need to. For the former you need a Ford F-150 for the latter a Toyota Prius would do just fine.
This is the concept that the "It can't do real work" crowd can't wrap their heads around.
Yeah, that crowd is either "unable" to look past their own experiences to see how computing is changing more broadly, or (and I think more likely) many of them simply want to craft the narrative that "Apple is wrong & going to be in trouble" and this is yet another way to do that (when they get tired of usual meme's like Android has 80% marketshare | here comes the next iPhone killer | smartphones are becoming commodities | ...).
I've been an early adopter of every Apple product category since the Mac Plus in the 80s. I've also kept everything up-to-date. I occasionally use my iPads for casual computing, but I find the input tedious. I don't do a lot of digital stuff once I leave the office anyway, although quickly checking email or messages is easily done on my iPhone which is always in my pocket. My Apple Watch is mostly for checking the time, however it is handy for notifying me of messages, etc., but the screen is a little small for actually interacting with it. I do use it for Apple Pay though. At home my interests are more family, cooking, TV, guitar, biking, gardening, and ugh...cleaning - no iDevices necessary. At the office my iMac 5K is my go-to machine. It is just a lot more pleasurable experience than an iPad or a MBP, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION. YMMV.
Well it's not suited for your work and mine either but that was the point of the cars/trucks analogy.
For work you may need to haul 1000 lbs of dirt up a steep hill. For home you don't need to. For the former you need a Ford F-150 for the latter a Toyota Prius would do just fine.
I don't ever haul any dirt, but I do occasionally haul a bunch of people and I like a big heavy duty SUV or a big luxury sedan. I would never feel comfortable in a little lightweight car. Just because it is easy to park and good on fuel, that is not enough reason for me. Likewise, I prefer my big desktop Macs, and even though they are not portable, there are far fewer limitations than with an iPad.
Well-written article - until the last line. Apple has indeed marketed iPads as a computer. Their website page for the iPad Pro even leads with "Super. Computer." - not as some other, special "post-PC device" as the author suggests.
With that said - a basic file system and a mouse would go a long ways towards dramatically increasing the capabilities of the iPad in terms of production and ease of use.
The ONLY reason that hasn't happened is because Apple doesn't want its iPads directly competing against its laptops.
Anyone else think differently about why they don't implement these two ideas?
Well-written article - until the last line. Apple has indeed marketed iPads as a computer. Their website page for the iPad Pro even leads with "Super. Computer." - not as some other, special "post-PC device" as the author suggests.
With that said - a basic file system and a mouse would go a long ways towards dramatically increasing the capabilities of the iPad in terms of production and ease of use.
The ONLY reason that hasn't happened is because Apple doesn't want its iPads directly competing against its laptops.
Anyone else think differently about why they don't implement these two ideas?
Here it is:
Apple doesn't implement a file system at the user level because of your body's inherent inabilities and primitiveness. The finger I mean...
Files come in thousands and you just cannot manage them with your cumbersome finger. You need a tool that allows you to do precise data selections. The mouse interface is the best for that. The touch interface cannot carry a pointer on the screen.
Another reason, file management requires preemptive multitasking: you don't want your system come to a halt when you copy 19,327 files from your external device to your iPad. The current A series processors are not optimized for preemptive multitasking, they are optimized for thermal management and battery.
That said, maybe the most profound reason, a file system is a relic of the past. At least at the user level. Gone these days where a file is a basic unit of task. In today's computing tasks are complicated and a single task cannot be tied to a single file. So on what should the user focus? On the task at hand or on the management of several itty-bitty files that make up a mere single task?
This is Apple that resolved the problem with iOS. They've managed to completely hide the file system from the user, allowing the first time the user focus on the task at hand. iOS still maintains the robust file system of UNIX and is built on top of it but that file system is completely hidden from the user and there is no way to access it without jailbreaking.
Anyway you said a basic file system: that basic file system interaction already exists in iOS thanks to iCloud Drive and third party add-ons such as Dropbox or Microsoft OneDrive. macOS further supports iOS file interaction model thanks to iCloud Desktop and iCloud Documents folders that are accessible from within iCloud Drive app of iOS. Within these, you will never miss any file as long as your task requires access to certain files.
Anyway you said a basic file system: that basic file system interaction already exists in iOS thanks to iCloud Drive
I disagree with your summation of why there is no file system access on iOS. The real reason iOS does not have a user accessible file system is because it was designed for computer illiterates, school children and novices who would quickly get themselves into trouble given half a chance, resulting in viruses or errors due to accidentally deleting necessary files. It also facilitates sandboxing for security. You are correct though about the usefulness of iCloud Drive, however the default free storage is inadequate for anyone who works with movies, RAW photos, drawing or painting files, especially because you are sharing that storage for mail and backup. 5GB is just too small.
Anyway you said a basic file system: that basic file system interaction already exists in iOS thanks to iCloud Drive
I disagree with your summation of why there is no file system access on iOS. The real reason iOS does not have a user accessible file system is because it was designed for computer illiterates,
The problem of hiding the file system from the user exists even for computer literates. One of the biggest issues of early database management was to separate physical organization of the data on the disk from the high level and intellectual database tasks. SQL serves those high level purposes and the database administrator is not interested in the physical organization of the data on the disk. This is the job of the DBMS. There is a huge industry built on that approach.
Your understanding is flawed because it is based on the false assumption that iOS is designed for computer illiterates, school children and novices. IBM wouldn't commit on an operating system designed for school children to re-conquer the enterprise computing world.
Job's post-PC world is still alive and kicking - PC's to the curb. Considering that iPads last for at least seven years, four to five of those with full update support so far, and iPad sales are slowing but still in the tens of millions per quarter, unlike WinTels or Droids, this transition is going to take twenty years. As more people realise we don't need an inefficient, ugly, easy-to-break computer to type a document, the further iPad will expand.
If ms had any brains, they'd release an Office Pad.
Well-written article - until the last line. Apple has indeed marketed iPads as a computer. Their website page for the iPad Pro even leads with "Super. Computer." - not as some other, special "post-PC device" as the author suggests.
With that said - a basic file system and a mouse would go a long ways towards dramatically increasing the capabilities of the iPad in terms of production and ease of use.
The ONLY reason that hasn't happened is because Apple doesn't want its iPads directly competing against its laptops.
Anyone else think differently about why they don't implement these two ideas?
Here it is:
Apple doesn't implement a file system at the user level because of your body's inherent inabilities and primitiveness. The finger I mean...
Files come in thousands and you just cannot manage them with your cumbersome finger. You need a tool that allows you to do precise data selections. The mouse interface is the best for that. The touch interface cannot carry a pointer on the screen.
Another reason, file management requires preemptive multitasking: you don't want your system come to a halt when you copy 19,327 files from your external device to your iPad. The current A series processors are not optimized for preemptive multitasking, they are optimized for thermal management and battery.
That said, maybe the most profound reason, a file system is a relic of the past. At least at the user level. Gone these days where a file is a basic unit of task. In today's computing tasks are complicated and a single task cannot be tied to a single file. So on what should the user focus? On the task at hand or on the management of several itty-bitty files that make up a mere single task?
This is Apple that resolved the problem with iOS. They've managed to completely hide the file system from the user, allowing the first time the user focus on the task at hand. iOS still maintains the robust file system of UNIX and is built on top of it but that file system is completely hidden from the user and there is no way to access it without jailbreaking.
Anyway you said a basic file system: that basic file system interaction already exists in iOS thanks to iCloud Drive and third party add-ons such as Dropbox or Microsoft OneDrive. macOS further supports iOS file interaction model thanks to iCloud Desktop and iCloud Documents folders that are accessible from within iCloud Drive app of iOS. Within these, you will never miss any file as long as your task requires access to certain files.
"a file system is a relic of the past" Well, no. ... That was actually the main problem Microsoft ran into with Windows 8. They tried to drive their users into simply using icons (aka programs) to do what they needed to do and made the file system based desktop hard to get to... They ended up firing the guy who led that effort and backtracking with 8.1 and further with Windows 10.
On an IPhone the work flow is such that you typically don't have a strong need for a file system. Not so for the typical users of PCs.
Job's post-PC world is still alive and kicking - PC's to the curb. Considering that iPads last for at least seven years, four to five of those with full update support so far, and iPad sales are slowing but still in the tens of millions per quarter, unlike WinTels or Droids, this transition is going to take twenty years. As more people realise we don't need an inefficient, ugly, easy-to-break computer to type a document, the further iPad will expand.
If ms had any brains, they'd release an Office Pad.
to type a document efficiently you need an external keyboard. But, as Apple correctly stated, an external keyboard and touch screen do not play well together.
(But, an IPad with an external keyboard and a mouse or touchpad is a whole different ball game).
Well-written article - until the last line. Apple has indeed marketed iPads as a computer. Their website page for the iPad Pro even leads with "Super. Computer." - not as some other, special "post-PC device" as the author suggests.
With that said - a basic file system and a mouse would go a long ways towards dramatically increasing the capabilities of the iPad in terms of production and ease of use.
The ONLY reason that hasn't happened is because Apple doesn't want its iPads directly competing against its laptops.
Anyone else think differently about why they don't implement these two ideas?
Here it is:
Apple doesn't implement a file system at the user level because of your body's inherent inabilities and primitiveness. The finger I mean...
Files come in thousands and you just cannot manage them with your cumbersome finger. You need a tool that allows you to do precise data selections. The mouse interface is the best for that. The touch interface cannot carry a pointer on the screen.
Another reason, file management requires preemptive multitasking: you don't want your system come to a halt when you copy 19,327 files from your external device to your iPad. The current A series processors are not optimized for preemptive multitasking, they are optimized for thermal management and battery.
That said, maybe the most profound reason, a file system is a relic of the past. At least at the user level. Gone these days where a file is a basic unit of task. In today's computing tasks are complicated and a single task cannot be tied to a single file. So on what should the user focus? On the task at hand or on the management of several itty-bitty files that make up a mere single task?
This is Apple that resolved the problem with iOS. They've managed to completely hide the file system from the user, allowing the first time the user focus on the task at hand. iOS still maintains the robust file system of UNIX and is built on top of it but that file system is completely hidden from the user and there is no way to access it without jailbreaking.
Anyway you said a basic file system: that basic file system interaction already exists in iOS thanks to iCloud Drive and third party add-ons such as Dropbox or Microsoft OneDrive. macOS further supports iOS file interaction model thanks to iCloud Desktop and iCloud Documents folders that are accessible from within iCloud Drive app of iOS. Within these, you will never miss any file as long as your task requires access to certain files.
"a file system is a relic of the past" Well, no. ... That was actually the main problem Microsoft ran into with Windows 8. They tried to drive their users into simply using icons (aka programs) to do what they needed to do and made the file system based desktop hard to get to... They ended up firing the guy who led that effort and backtracking with 8.1 and further with Windows 10.
On an IPhone the work flow is such that you typically don't have a strong need for a file system. Not so for the typical users of PCs.
That was Microsoft's main problem not just in Windows 8 but since the very beginning of Windows. The whole Windows environment is based on the task concept: a window represents a task. Unlike Apple's Finder which initially exposes the whole file system to the user, the Windows desktop initially hides the file system from the user. In order to get full Finder functionality in Windows you have to launch Windows Explorer.
Finder exposed the full file system to the user but that was because the file system was considerably simplified in the MacOS Classic thanks to the resource mechanism. Unlike UNIX and Windows files, the files in MacOS Classic were composite: a data fork and a resource fork. All of those itty-bitty "utility files" that make up today's applications and documents were encapsulated into data structures called resources and were cleverly hidden from the user and from the Finder. Since Windows didn't have a "resource fork" mechanism, they opted to initially hide the file system from view and that was the right choice. To comply with UNIX standards OS X shouldn't adopt a composite file structure as "data fork" and "resource fork" and we have what we have now. In OS X the file system is still partially hidden from the user by means of "bundle" objects which are in fact directories, such as applications, plug-ins, installation packages and many other types of composite content.
To cut it short, even in OS X, you don't have/need access to the full file system under regular use. You don't launch an application by opening the UNIX Shell (Terminal) and by typing the full path of the application's binary file followed by Return, you just click the application's icon. You think you are doing "file management", you have access to the "file system", no you don't. In order to access the full file system and perform a full file management you have to enter into the UNIX realm. What you are doing is just "document management" and a "document" is an abstraction, it can be a flat file or a directory structure such as some Pages documents. The misunderstanding arises from mixing-up "document" and "file" concepts, those are not the same thing.
To cut it even shorter, iOS forbids you from accessing the file system but it puts no barrier in managing your documents. You can transfer your documents between iOS applications easily. You can upload and download them, move or copy them to wherever you want. Allowing such a powerful, flexible document management without a single access to the underlying file system, iOS deserves to be qualified as the most advanced of today's modern operating systems. It is the future...
I have a 15'MBP and a iPad Mini (had the original iPad previously). For me, the Mac is a better choice in a number of ways: 1. It fits very comfortably on my lap when sitting. 2. It had more than enough power to do any task needed 3. I prefer the layout of MacOS over IOS If the iPad had a built-in keyboard, I might reconsider, but for now, the Mac is King.
Not really. The iPad was Apple's fastest seller at the time, and the devices themselves have great longevity and perform their jobs-to-be-done for years. Thus sales decreasing doesn't mean "failure" by itself. Especially when you consider these decreasing sales (not "tanking") are greater than the Mac.
The trend and consumer behavior needs more time to understand. Personally I can't imagine not owning a tablet and will always purchase one when my current one is outdated.
I didn't call it a failure. I just pointed out that there's very little reason to expect a product with declining sales to be taking over a product with stable or increasing sales. And sales of Macs in dollars are actually higher than sales of iPads. And ~20% year-on-year decline in sales (more if you account for the fact that this last quarter was a week longer than usual) is pretty close to tanking.
While overall Mac devices sales increase, the overall PC market that the Mac is part of declines. The iPad declines likely because it has met the jobs to be done requirement for the people that have it. My own opinion is that the iPad has the potential for more jobs to be done that will increase sales, but not explosively like the iPhone did. The addition of the Pencil was an indication of new jobs to be done by the iPad.
But where's the pencil in that sales graph? Down y-on-y every quarter for four years (except 14Q1).
iPad is clearly doing new jobs that PCs/Macs are not ideal for. I just went through the United terminal at Newark and there every seat in every restaraunt has an iPad to put in your order (and to force you to watch ads while you eat). That's clearly a job where you wouldn't put a Mac.
Comments
For work you may need to haul 1000 lbs of dirt up a steep hill. For home you don't need to. For the former you need a Ford F-150 for the latter a Toyota Prius would do just fine.
This is the concept that the "It can't do real work" crowd can't wrap their heads around.
We don't know what Apple is thinking about regarding 2 in 1's. My bet is that one of these springs, they will quietly add a touchpad to the IPad Pro's keyboard and move on. Then the next spring they'll replace the lightening connector with a USB-C and maybe add a file system. Then, in the next go around, the MacBook Pro will get an upgrade but not the MacBook. In short, it will be an evolutionary change rather than a revolutionary one.
They could do all of that today. We just don't know why they're holding back. Could they be stuck in an ideology -- like they were with the 4" IPhone?
With that said - a basic file system and a mouse would go a long ways towards dramatically increasing the capabilities of the iPad in terms of production and ease of use.
The ONLY reason that hasn't happened is because Apple doesn't want its iPads directly competing against its laptops.
Anyone else think differently about why they don't implement these two ideas?
Apple doesn't implement a file system at the user level because of your body's inherent inabilities and primitiveness. The finger I mean...
Files come in thousands and you just cannot manage them with your cumbersome finger. You need a tool that allows you to do precise data selections. The mouse interface is the best for that. The touch interface cannot carry a pointer on the screen.
Another reason, file management requires preemptive multitasking: you don't want your system come to a halt when you copy 19,327 files from your external device to your iPad. The current A series processors are not optimized for preemptive multitasking, they are optimized for thermal management and battery.
That said, maybe the most profound reason, a file system is a relic of the past. At least at the user level. Gone these days where a file is a basic unit of task. In today's computing tasks are complicated and a single task cannot be tied to a single file. So on what should the user focus? On the task at hand or on the management of several itty-bitty files that make up a mere single task?
This is Apple that resolved the problem with iOS. They've managed to completely hide the file system from the user, allowing the first time the user focus on the task at hand. iOS still maintains the robust file system of UNIX and is built on top of it but that file system is completely hidden from the user and there is no way to access it without jailbreaking.
Anyway you said a basic file system: that basic file system interaction already exists in iOS thanks to iCloud Drive and third party add-ons such as Dropbox or Microsoft OneDrive. macOS further supports iOS file interaction model thanks to iCloud Desktop and iCloud Documents folders that are accessible from within iCloud Drive app of iOS. Within these, you will never miss any file as long as your task requires access to certain files.
Your understanding is flawed because it is based on the false assumption that iOS is designed for computer illiterates, school children and novices. IBM wouldn't commit on an operating system designed for school children to re-conquer the enterprise computing world.
If ms had any brains, they'd release an Office Pad.
Well, no.
... That was actually the main problem Microsoft ran into with Windows 8. They tried to drive their users into simply using icons (aka programs) to do what they needed to do and made the file system based desktop hard to get to... They ended up firing the guy who led that effort and backtracking with 8.1 and further with Windows 10.
On an IPhone the work flow is such that you typically don't have a strong need for a file system. Not so for the typical users of PCs.
(But, an IPad with an external keyboard and a mouse or touchpad is a whole different ball game).
Finder exposed the full file system to the user but that was because the file system was considerably simplified in the MacOS Classic thanks to the resource mechanism. Unlike UNIX and Windows files, the files in MacOS Classic were composite: a data fork and a resource fork. All of those itty-bitty "utility files" that make up today's applications and documents were encapsulated into data structures called resources and were cleverly hidden from the user and from the Finder. Since Windows didn't have a "resource fork" mechanism, they opted to initially hide the file system from view and that was the right choice. To comply with UNIX standards OS X shouldn't adopt a composite file structure as "data fork" and "resource fork" and we have what we have now. In OS X the file system is still partially hidden from the user by means of "bundle" objects which are in fact directories, such as applications, plug-ins, installation packages and many other types of composite content.
To cut it short, even in OS X, you don't have/need access to the full file system under regular use. You don't launch an application by opening the UNIX Shell (Terminal) and by typing the full path of the application's binary file followed by Return, you just click the application's icon. You think you are doing "file management", you have access to the "file system", no you don't. In order to access the full file system and perform a full file management you have to enter into the UNIX realm. What you are doing is just "document management" and a "document" is an abstraction, it can be a flat file or a directory structure such as some Pages documents. The misunderstanding arises from mixing-up "document" and "file" concepts, those are not the same thing.
To cut it even shorter, iOS forbids you from accessing the file system but it puts no barrier in managing your documents. You can transfer your documents between iOS applications easily. You can upload and download them, move or copy them to wherever you want. Allowing such a powerful, flexible document management without a single access to the underlying file system, iOS deserves to be qualified as the most advanced of today's modern operating systems. It is the future...
For me, the Mac is a better choice in a number of ways:
1. It fits very comfortably on my lap when sitting.
2. It had more than enough power to do any task needed
3. I prefer the layout of MacOS over IOS
If the iPad had a built-in keyboard, I might reconsider, but for now, the Mac is King.
iPad is clearly doing new jobs that PCs/Macs are not ideal for. I just went through the United terminal at Newark and there every seat in every restaraunt has an iPad to put in your order (and to force you to watch ads while you eat). That's clearly a job where you wouldn't put a Mac.