The iPad Pro uses a new storage controller that improves read and write speeds, with performance more comparable to desktop PCs, according to marketing on Apple's website.
This is good news, too bad it wasn't coupled with a USB-C port.
The controller was specifically chosen to match the speeds of the tablet's new A9X processor, Apple notes in the <a href="http://www.apple.com/ipad-pro/technology/">Technology</a> section of the Pro's webpage. The company isn't offering any more details, such as whether or not the part was custom-designed.
It is embedded in the A9 SoC, as such it is customs to some extent no matter how you look at it.
Apple does claim that its memory architecture lets people "quickly open even in the largest files," such as RAW photos or 4K videos. In demonstrations on Wednesday, the company showed the Pro editing three 4K sources simultaneously, something laptops often struggle with.
Nice!
Much of Apple's marketing for the tablet has involved comparing it to desktop and laptop computers. It claims for example that the A9X is 1.5 times faster than a similar desktop processor, and that any task possible on a PC should be possible on the Pro as well.
Well maybe app centric tasks, but IOS comes up short in many ways when it comes to replacing a PC. Mind you I sit here with an iPad that gets used daily and frankly I appreciate its good qualities. However some times you have no choice but to reach for the Mac.
Apps are apps, this is hardly enough RAM for todays apps. Especially if you want to use the machine like a power user would use a Mac. the lack of a backing store is a huge limitation that puts hard limits on what can be done with iOS machines.,
This claim must be based on 80% of laptops having very low spec Intel and AMD processors like Celerons and Pentiums. I was recently shopping for a laptop for my daughter and was astonished that a laptop with even an i3 processor seemed like a high end speed demon compared to the majority of what was on offer.
I've experienced this myself, the vast majority of "retail" laptops these days are more netbook like in performance than you would want to believe. By the time you get to decent performance feels you are paying fairly stiff prices. In fact you get real close to Mac Book Air like prices.
Samsung put a new fast memory controller and DDR4 memory in their S6 phones which is why they didn't include a memory expansion option as it would have negated the performance advantage of the new memory architecture.
RAM and secondary storage are two different things.
It will be interesting to see Anandtech benchmark the iPad Pro so we can see just which laptop CPUs the A9X has surpassed.
Yeah this should be very interesting as A8 was in many ways pretty close to some laptop chips. A9 looks to be very impressive jumping ahead of many x86 laptop solutions. I'd love to see a comparison to some AMD and Intel solutions with the clocks all locked to the same clock rate, this would give us a good indication of enhancements to the CPU in the A9. That is I'd like to see an instruction per cycle performance spec.
This A9X is a beast of a cpu/gpu. What an enormous leap in power! At this rate of improvement things are going to get real interesting. A10? A11? The mind boggles.
This is perhaps the most impressive "S" update in years and the A9 is just part of that. Based I what I knew of the leaks concerning 14nm class processes I was expecting at least a 50% increase in performance at the same power levels but Apple has gone way beyond that. Considering that the battery capacity has been reduced this is one very impressive chip.
Faster than 80% of PCs shipped last year? That's some stat. And one worth repeating inside one's mind. Apple clearly meant for that stat to resonate.
Well I'm certain that is based on selected benchmarks. However the PC market tis such a joke right now I'm not sure why Apple lowered itself by comparing the A9 to that stagnate market.
It foreshadows an intriguing future for iOS, iOS devices and ARM.
Well that all depends upon when the manufactures hit the wall with current process technology. There is lots of stuff in the labs that might replace the current silicon industry but nothing developed to the point of mass production Given the uncertainty of what technology comes next a wild guess would be 10GHz equivalent cell phones / iPads by the end of the decade.
I so want an iPad Pro...WITH 'Pencil.'
Lemon Bon Bon.
One thing that isn't clear is the existence of GPS in the cellular model. I left a comment on one of Apples sites asking for an explanation GPS is very important to some apps on iPad so I'm hoping it is an oversight on apples part.
Apple does claim that its memory architecture lets people "quickly open even in the largest files," such as RAW photos or 4K videos. In demonstrations on Wednesday, the company showed the Pro editing three 4K sources simultaneously, something laptops often struggle with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
This is good news, too bad it wasn't coupled with a USB-C port....
This is possibly the biggest let down when it comes to the iPad. You aren't going to be doing much 4K editing with the puny amount of storage offered.
Just curious why you think the Lightning connector isn't adequate. I agree, the fact it can handle 4K video files is fantastic, but how do you get them into it, and work with them? I've got a wireless drive I use for storage of photos and videos on my iPad now, and of course there's iCloud, but the transfer time via wireless now can be frustrating, I can only imagine when I'm working with 4K files.
One thing that isn't clear is the existence of GPS in the cellular model. I left a comment on one of Apples sites asking for an explanation GPS is very important to some apps on iPad so I'm hoping it is an oversight on apples part.
There's a germ of truth to that statement, because you don't have a slew of background tasks and applications using up system memory. iOS uses memory to cache applications and data in RAM but is quick to eject things as needed by the current application. That said, as iOS moves more and more to the desktop model, you'll find that changing. If things continue down the iPad Pro line, eventually you'll find little difference in memory usage.
It's not only (or perhaps even primarily) background tasks so much as resource size and efficiency. iOS was designed from the ground up as a a brand new light resource, light footprint OS. Windows is dragging all the legacy of windows plus a new touch interface cobbled on top of it. Windows faces multiple duplicity (and multiplicity) of resources because of it's history and legacy support.
So I think even in the future with lots of "desktop like" background resources it will still occupy half (or less) the footprint of a windows tablet. (unless MS decides to tear down windows start over and give up the legacy aspect, which I don't think is likely (or perhaps even wise given their mobile os track record and developer support))
its interesting that they kept comparing it to a desktop. perhaps this is a foreshadowing of the switch to arm across the entire line of macs
I would love to see a hybrid Mac.... half Intel, half ARM, both CPUs running in tandem... OS X and iOS running in tandem. iOS apps natively on your Mac without sacrificing any of the Mac's current strengths.
Well I'm certain that is based on selected benchmarks. However the PC market tis such a joke right now I'm not sure why Apple lowered itself by comparing the A9 to that stagnate market.
I think they did that for a reason. They've been going after that 'junk' market in stealth mode for a while. They have now declared 'open' season on it...with a sawn off shotgun.
80% of even all PC laptops is a huge market. And they've stated they're in it! From the iPad Mini all the way up to the iPad Pro! (What a beast of a computer!)
People used to complain (me included...) that Apple didn't have a 'Mac' under £1000. Or £500.
The iPad Pro with the astonishing (it is...let's be honest) A9X with 4 gigs of Ram and a 12.9 inch screen (Retina...) is about £517 UK. (It may end up being more...Apple always translates UK prices higher?) That's simply astounding.
They've been quietly going after the 'junk' PC market selling 10-20 million iPads per quarter.
An iPad that can do 9 out of the ten things most PC users do with their 'junk' computer.
As for 'low end' Macs with Arm chips...*throws the hot potato out there for someone to catch...
I think they did that for a reason. They've been going after that 'junk' market in stealth mode for a while. They have now declared 'open' season on it...with a sawn off shotgun.
80% of even all PC laptops is a huge market. And they've stated they're in it! From the iPad Mini all the way up to the iPad Pro! (What a beast of a computer!)
People used to complain (me included...) that Apple didn't have a 'Mac' under £1000. Or £500.
The iPad Pro with the astonishing (it is...let's be honest) A9X with 4 gigs of Ram and a 12.9 inch screen (Retina...) is about £517 UK. (It may end up being more...Apple always translates UK prices higher?) That's simply astounding.
They've been quietly going after the 'junk' PC market selling 10-20 million iPads per quarter.
An iPad that can do 9 out of the ten things most PC users do with their 'junk' computer.
As for 'low end' Macs with Arm chips...*throws the hot potato out there for someone to catch...
iPad. The Mac for the rest of us.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You are babbling.
This iPad isn't competition for those 80% of low-end laptops. Apple in not now in that market. The laptops that comprise that 80% are this sort of thing:
Quote:
ASUS X553MA 15.6-Inch Notebook (Intel Celeron N2840 1.9 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 1 TB HDD, Webcam, Integrated Graphics, Windows 8.1)
RRP:£229.99 Price:£219.
The iPad pro will not be £517. Based on the US - UK price differential of a Macbook Air 13" the iPad Pro will be £679 - pretty much triple the price of an eighty percenter.
For £350 I bought my daughter a 15" Toshiba laptop with a 5th gen i5 processor in it which has a CPU benchmark of 3511 vs the 3684 benchmark of the i5 in the Macbook Air I used to work out the actual likely price differential.
There is no way the iPad Pro will have greater performance than those two machines. It will cost double what I paid for the Toshiba. It is not going to take on the mid-range laptop market in either price or performance. It could take on the low end laptop market in performance but at triple the price it isn't something the price sensitive customers in that market are going to even consider.
Seeing 3D Touch on the new iPhone and knowing that the new iPad doesn't have it makes the iPad look incredibly outdated, and it's not even in stores yet.
Having pixel-accurate touch control capability is a much more intricate thing. Can't have both just yet.
I remember from the keynote, the iPad Pro also uses the custom display controller from the iMac 5K to allow for such a high res screen. So possibly there is no off-the-shelf tech that other companies can currently buy to deliver a similar device.
It's the Mac Pro and Macbook Pro that have led the way on fast Flash too. So it seems like we might be able to predict future iPad specs by looking at today's Macs.
its interesting that they kept comparing it to a desktop. perhaps this is a foreshadowing of the switch to arm across the entire line of macs
Will not ever happen.
ARM will always be slower than Intel's top processors - the ones used in Macs.
The A9x GPU is not built to handle multiple screens like a Mac, nor does it have the brute force of a desktop dedicated GPU.
The A9x is built for single tasks, not multiple simultaneous tasks like Intel's top Mac CPUs.
ARM can't run Windows. And it certainly would be much less efficient and slower in trying to emulate an Intel Processor.
ARM is built for a low energy computer. But this limits ultimately is power. This is not a limitation for a desktop Mac. If Apple's ARM chips ever approach Intel's chips, then it will use the same power as Intel's chips. So why change? It won't.
As Steve Jobs said, some people need trucks. Intel chip-based Macs are trucks.
I for one will be purchasing an iPad Pro. Hopefully Apple, or some third party will produce a thunderbolt to lightning cable that can move data ultra fast. Even USB 3 to lightning would be better.
The screen resolution is insane, the device will have a real world battery life that's better than any comparable Intel powered device and a huge library of software not available on x86. Google has developed Android pay and Samsung has its own electronic payment also. But the a MS surface does not. For people who are content with legacy windows software running on x86, the surface will appeal to them. But iOS running on ARM has a much greater library and offerings that are simply not available on Windows and will never be.
The ability to edit 3 4k video streams on a device like this is simply amazing. And this thing is performing at an i7 level of performance!! Granted the mobile i7 isn't anywhere near the level of the desktop i7 CPU, but Apple is now near the top performing x86 mobile platforms with the A10 now on the horizon. Samsung and TSMC are falling all over each other trying to advance their fabs in order to get Apple's business will also go a long way toward the A series CPU leapfrogging x86. Both companies are now outspending Intel in Capex also.
ARM CPUs will be making their way into the OS X machines. It now seems an inevitability. For now though, this machine will replace my MacBook Air. Hopefully these machines will be produced at great enough numbers to meet the demand so that there isn't a long wait to actually procure one. Despite the MS Surface pro lovers comments, the new iPad pro will sell in large numbers. The capabilities of the device are just too compelling.
I agree about the surface. It has really been running virtually unopposed in it's market segment. Now Apple announces the Pro; a competitor that costs1/3 less (the i7 is the only one that comes in the ballpark of the performance of the iPadPro) , performs far better (than the i7 version), has twice the screen (pixels), a more capable pen (err... pencil ;-), runs quieter and cooler, and gets nearly twice the battery life.
Anyone who doesn't recognize that apple just dropped the bottom out of ms surface sales (yes even before it ships) is either not being truthful, or has blind hubris that could dwarf even monkey boy's (but I guess blind hubris has been the ms theme for the last couple decades) Unless ms can pull a rabbit out of the hat with a vast improvements in virtually every metric with the surface 4 (which really isn't likely given the state of hardware) they will have to go back to only be able to sell it to ms fanboys, Andthat has been proven to be a "niche" market. (;;-)
They are now (metaphorically) attempting to drive up a 30% grade that Apple just covered in ice.
As far as porting OS X (and all the applications) over to Apple A series CPU's (to be able to use them in Mac's), I just don't see it. Besides being a huge undertaking (for both apple and developers) we would need to go back to storing two binaries (A series and intel executables) Some applications wouldn't be compatible (because they didn't yet have A seres executables) It would be a nightmare, Remember the transition to intel from PPC?
But, more importantly that (PPC-intel) was worthwhile and even possible because the intel chips were in some metrics up to 10x faster. (which made the new intel hardware much much faster and emulation, to ease the transition, possible) That just isn't the case right now.
I agree about the surface. It has really been running virtually unopposed in it's market segment. Now Apple announces the Pro; a competitor that costs1/3 less (the i7 is the only one that comes in the ballpark of the performance of the iPadPro) , performs far better (than the i7 version), has twice the screen (pixels), a more capable pen (err... pencil ;-), runs quieter and cooler, and gets nearly twice the battery life.
Anyone who doesn't recognize that apple just dropped the bottom out of ms surface sales (yes even before it ships) is either not being truthful, or has blind hubris that could dwarf even monkey boy's (but I guess blind hubris has been the ms theme for the last couple decades) Unless ms can pull a rabbit out of the hat with a vast improvements in virtually every metric with the surface 4 (which really isn't likely given the state of hardware) they will have to go back to only be able to sell it to ms fanboys, Andthat has been proven to be a "niche" market. (;;-)
They are now (metaphorically) attempting to drive up a 30% grade that Apple just covered in ice.
As far as porting OS X (and all the applications) over to Apple A series CPU's (to be able to use them in Mac's), I just don't see it. Besides being a huge undertaking (for both apple and developers) we would need to go back to storing two binaries (A series and intel executables) Some applications wouldn't be compatible (because they didn't yet have A seres executables) It would be a nightmare, Remember the transition to intel from PPC?
But, more importantly that (PPC-intel) was worthwhile and even possible because the intel chips were in some metrics up to 10x faster. (which made the new intel hardware much much faster and emulation, to ease the transition, possible) That just isn't the case right now.
I must have missed the release of the benchmarks for the iPad Pro. Where are they posted?
Comments
Yeah this should be very interesting as A8 was in many ways pretty close to some laptop chips. A9 looks to be very impressive jumping ahead of many x86 laptop solutions. I'd love to see a comparison to some AMD and Intel solutions with the clocks all locked to the same clock rate, this would give us a good indication of enhancements to the CPU in the A9. That is I'd like to see an instruction per cycle performance spec.
One thing that isn't clear is the existence of GPS in the cellular model. I left a comment on one of Apples sites asking for an explanation GPS is very important to some apps on iPad so I'm hoping it is an oversight on apples part.
In any event Golden Master install time -- bye.
Apple does claim that its memory architecture lets people "quickly open even in the largest files," such as RAW photos or 4K videos. In demonstrations on Wednesday, the company showed the Pro editing three 4K sources simultaneously, something laptops often struggle with.
This is good news, too bad it wasn't coupled with a USB-C port....
This is possibly the biggest let down when it comes to the iPad. You aren't going to be doing much 4K editing with the puny amount of storage offered.
Just curious why you think the Lightning connector isn't adequate. I agree, the fact it can handle 4K video files is fantastic, but how do you get them into it, and work with them? I've got a wireless drive I use for storage of photos and videos on my iPad now, and of course there's iCloud, but the transfer time via wireless now can be frustrating, I can only imagine when I'm working with 4K files.
Ultra fast storage for big files. 'Pro.' They weren't kidding.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You don't need to sign your username again at the bottom of every post. We get it.
This is possibly the biggest let down when it comes to the iPad. You aren't going to be doing much 4K editing with the puny amount of storage offered.
Because everyone who buys an iPad Pro will be doing 4K editing, right? There's higher capacities available for those who plan to do so.
One thing that isn't clear is the existence of GPS in the cellular model. I left a comment on one of Apples sites asking for an explanation GPS is very important to some apps on iPad so I'm hoping it is an oversight on apples part.
It's on the spec page under "Location". It says:
Wi-Fi + Cellular model
There's a germ of truth to that statement, because you don't have a slew of background tasks and applications using up system memory. iOS uses memory to cache applications and data in RAM but is quick to eject things as needed by the current application. That said, as iOS moves more and more to the desktop model, you'll find that changing. If things continue down the iPad Pro line, eventually you'll find little difference in memory usage.
It's not only (or perhaps even primarily) background tasks so much as resource size and efficiency. iOS was designed from the ground up as a a brand new light resource, light footprint OS. Windows is dragging all the legacy of windows plus a new touch interface cobbled on top of it. Windows faces multiple duplicity (and multiplicity) of resources because of it's history and legacy support.
So I think even in the future with lots of "desktop like" background resources it will still occupy half (or less) the footprint of a windows tablet. (unless MS decides to tear down windows start over and give up the legacy aspect, which I don't think is likely (or perhaps even wise given their mobile os track record and developer support))
its interesting that they kept comparing it to a desktop. perhaps this is a foreshadowing of the switch to arm across the entire line of macs
I would love to see a hybrid Mac.... half Intel, half ARM, both CPUs running in tandem... OS X and iOS running in tandem. iOS apps natively on your Mac without sacrificing any of the Mac's current strengths.
I think they did that for a reason. They've been going after that 'junk' market in stealth mode for a while. They have now declared 'open' season on it...with a sawn off shotgun.
80% of even all PC laptops is a huge market. And they've stated they're in it! From the iPad Mini all the way up to the iPad Pro! (What a beast of a computer!)
People used to complain (me included...) that Apple didn't have a 'Mac' under £1000. Or £500.
The iPad Pro with the astonishing (it is...let's be honest) A9X with 4 gigs of Ram and a 12.9 inch screen (Retina...) is about £517 UK. (It may end up being more...Apple always translates UK prices higher?) That's simply astounding.
They've been quietly going after the 'junk' PC market selling 10-20 million iPads per quarter.
An iPad that can do 9 out of the ten things most PC users do with their 'junk' computer.
As for 'low end' Macs with Arm chips...*throws the hot potato out there for someone to catch...
iPad. The Mac for the rest of us.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Cell phone chip indeed...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Makes the 'squabbles' about Motorola being Apple's cpu provider all those years...all the more ironic?
Lemon Bon Bon.
Ie. If you want a job doing right. Do it yourself.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I think they did that for a reason. They've been going after that 'junk' market in stealth mode for a while. They have now declared 'open' season on it...with a sawn off shotgun.
80% of even all PC laptops is a huge market. And they've stated they're in it! From the iPad Mini all the way up to the iPad Pro! (What a beast of a computer!)
People used to complain (me included...) that Apple didn't have a 'Mac' under £1000. Or £500.
The iPad Pro with the astonishing (it is...let's be honest) A9X with 4 gigs of Ram and a 12.9 inch screen (Retina...) is about £517 UK. (It may end up being more...Apple always translates UK prices higher?) That's simply astounding.
They've been quietly going after the 'junk' PC market selling 10-20 million iPads per quarter.
An iPad that can do 9 out of the ten things most PC users do with their 'junk' computer.
As for 'low end' Macs with Arm chips...*throws the hot potato out there for someone to catch...
iPad. The Mac for the rest of us.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You are babbling.
This iPad isn't competition for those 80% of low-end laptops. Apple in not now in that market. The laptops that comprise that 80% are this sort of thing:
RRP:£229.99 Price:£219.
The iPad pro will not be £517. Based on the US - UK price differential of a Macbook Air 13" the iPad Pro will be £679 - pretty much triple the price of an eighty percenter.
For £350 I bought my daughter a 15" Toshiba laptop with a 5th gen i5 processor in it which has a CPU benchmark of 3511 vs the 3684 benchmark of the i5 in the Macbook Air I used to work out the actual likely price differential.
There is no way the iPad Pro will have greater performance than those two machines. It will cost double what I paid for the Toshiba. It is not going to take on the mid-range laptop market in either price or performance. It could take on the low end laptop market in performance but at triple the price it isn't something the price sensitive customers in that market are going to even consider.
Having pixel-accurate touch control capability is a much more intricate thing. Can't have both just yet.
I remember from the keynote, the iPad Pro also uses the custom display controller from the iMac 5K to allow for such a high res screen. So possibly there is no off-the-shelf tech that other companies can currently buy to deliver a similar device.
It's the Mac Pro and Macbook Pro that have led the way on fast Flash too. So it seems like we might be able to predict future iPad specs by looking at today's Macs.
its interesting that they kept comparing it to a desktop. perhaps this is a foreshadowing of the switch to arm across the entire line of macs
Will not ever happen.
ARM will always be slower than Intel's top processors - the ones used in Macs.
The A9x GPU is not built to handle multiple screens like a Mac, nor does it have the brute force of a desktop dedicated GPU.
The A9x is built for single tasks, not multiple simultaneous tasks like Intel's top Mac CPUs.
ARM can't run Windows. And it certainly would be much less efficient and slower in trying to emulate an Intel Processor.
ARM is built for a low energy computer. But this limits ultimately is power. This is not a limitation for a desktop Mac. If Apple's ARM chips ever approach Intel's chips, then it will use the same power as Intel's chips. So why change? It won't.
As Steve Jobs said, some people need trucks. Intel chip-based Macs are trucks.
The screen resolution is insane, the device will have a real world battery life that's better than any comparable Intel powered device and a huge library of software not available on x86. Google has developed Android pay and Samsung has its own electronic payment also. But the a MS surface does not. For people who are content with legacy windows software running on x86, the surface will appeal to them. But iOS running on ARM has a much greater library and offerings that are simply not available on Windows and will never be.
The ability to edit 3 4k video streams on a device like this is simply amazing. And this thing is performing at an i7 level of performance!! Granted the mobile i7 isn't anywhere near the level of the desktop i7 CPU, but Apple is now near the top performing x86 mobile platforms with the A10 now on the horizon. Samsung and TSMC are falling all over each other trying to advance their fabs in order to get Apple's business will also go a long way toward the A series CPU leapfrogging x86. Both companies are now outspending Intel in Capex also.
ARM CPUs will be making their way into the OS X machines. It now seems an inevitability. For now though, this machine will replace my MacBook Air. Hopefully these machines will be produced at great enough numbers to meet the demand so that there isn't a long wait to actually procure one. Despite the MS Surface pro lovers comments, the new iPad pro will sell in large numbers. The capabilities of the device are just too compelling.
I agree about the surface. It has really been running virtually unopposed in it's market segment. Now Apple announces the Pro; a competitor that costs1/3 less (the i7 is the only one that comes in the ballpark of the performance of the iPadPro) , performs far better (than the i7 version), has twice the screen (pixels), a more capable pen (err... pencil ;-), runs quieter and cooler, and gets nearly twice the battery life.
Anyone who doesn't recognize that apple just dropped the bottom out of ms surface sales (yes even before it ships) is either not being truthful, or has blind hubris that could dwarf even monkey boy's (but I guess blind hubris has been the ms theme for the last couple decades) Unless ms can pull a rabbit out of the hat with a vast improvements in virtually every metric with the surface 4 (which really isn't likely given the state of hardware) they will have to go back to only be able to sell it to ms fanboys, And that has been proven to be a "niche" market. (;;-)
They are now (metaphorically) attempting to drive up a 30% grade that Apple just covered in ice.
As far as porting OS X (and all the applications) over to Apple A series CPU's (to be able to use them in Mac's), I just don't see it. Besides being a huge undertaking (for both apple and developers) we would need to go back to storing two binaries (A series and intel executables) Some applications wouldn't be compatible (because they didn't yet have A seres executables) It would be a nightmare, Remember the transition to intel from PPC?
But, more importantly that (PPC-intel) was worthwhile and even possible because the intel chips were in some metrics up to 10x faster. (which made the new intel hardware much much faster and emulation, to ease the transition, possible) That just isn't the case right now.
I agree about the surface. It has really been running virtually unopposed in it's market segment. Now Apple announces the Pro; a competitor that costs1/3 less (the i7 is the only one that comes in the ballpark of the performance of the iPadPro) , performs far better (than the i7 version), has twice the screen (pixels), a more capable pen (err... pencil ;-), runs quieter and cooler, and gets nearly twice the battery life.
Anyone who doesn't recognize that apple just dropped the bottom out of ms surface sales (yes even before it ships) is either not being truthful, or has blind hubris that could dwarf even monkey boy's (but I guess blind hubris has been the ms theme for the last couple decades) Unless ms can pull a rabbit out of the hat with a vast improvements in virtually every metric with the surface 4 (which really isn't likely given the state of hardware) they will have to go back to only be able to sell it to ms fanboys, And that has been proven to be a "niche" market. (;;-)
They are now (metaphorically) attempting to drive up a 30% grade that Apple just covered in ice.
As far as porting OS X (and all the applications) over to Apple A series CPU's (to be able to use them in Mac's), I just don't see it. Besides being a huge undertaking (for both apple and developers) we would need to go back to storing two binaries (A series and intel executables) Some applications wouldn't be compatible (because they didn't yet have A seres executables) It would be a nightmare, Remember the transition to intel from PPC?
But, more importantly that (PPC-intel) was worthwhile and even possible because the intel chips were in some metrics up to 10x faster. (which made the new intel hardware much much faster and emulation, to ease the transition, possible) That just isn't the case right now.
I must have missed the release of the benchmarks for the iPad Pro. Where are they posted?