1 External Drive support - use a WiFi Drive 2 Lack if mouse - use the Apple Pencil 3 Headphone jack - use a dongle or a device with a usb c jack. 3.5 headphone jacks have gone from mobile devices 4 Overpowered - come on, rendering a video in less than half the time is a problem. It will also future proof the iPad. 5 Storage - see 1
1. I agree. Or the cloud. 2. Pencil is the worst possible mouse substitute I can imagine, as not only must one move their hands from the keyboard to touch the screen, but then they have to pick up and put down a pencil, with no support to stabilize it in mid-air.
But the mouse causes Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. I haven’t heard of anyone getting carpal tunnel syndrome caused by the pencil usage.
Pencil is the worst possible mouse substitute when playing Call of Duty. But on that, the mouse is not the best input device neither, there are game controllers for that. Yet I don't see people discussing "mouse or game controller" in gaming forums, why are we into such a pointless discussion here?
Pencil can do everything that a mouse can do and even more. The mouse is a mechanical pointing device of the 1960s. Pencil is a 21st century technology and there is state of the art engineering in it, encompassing both the display and the device. Pencil is not a stylus, a stylus is a stick compared to Pencil. What the mouse interface provided and the touch interface couldn't provide was the precision data selection. With Pencil, precision data selection is possible even better than the best mouse or trackpad can provide.
You’re taking my response out of context of the article to which we’ve all been replying. The Pencil is great for fine tuned selection and editing directly on an iPad laying flat on a table. It’s terrible for an iPad propped up on a keyboard stand. It’s terrible when using an external monitor. Heck, even if the iPad is laying flat and the user is merely typing on it, having to take their hands of the keyboard to pick up and put down a Pencil is still worse than using a mouse. And forget about using it while sitting on a couch as one might with a MacBook. That’s where a trackpad rules the day. Apple has added a virtual trackpad, but that’s far from ideal, even on native Apple apps, but still better than the Pencil which you’d have to pull off its magnetic docking perch, holding the iPad with one hand, and then reattaching it, before continuing with the typing. So in general I’d say a mouse or trackpad would still be better for most everything in daily computer use, aside from drawing, editing, and taking notes.
Besides, even putting all that aside, the iPad Pro's marketing includes using the keyboard stand and an external monitor. Both make touch a less effective control method than using a mouse.
If you'd watched the Keynote you'd know or you already know that the reason to attach a 4K monitor to iPad Pro is to follow iMovie edits in real time 4K, since the iPad's own display is not 4K. The actual iPad page on Apple's site mentions only "USB-C for ... external display" and says nothing about that external display. There is no point to present it as the main "computer display" of iPad.
So the user has to continually shift his eyes back and forth from the iPad to the screen, as well as take their hands off the keyboard, to lift a Pencil to the vertical screen, and hover it unsupported in midair to make detailed selections, then put the pencil down to continue using the keyboard; all the while shifting their eyes from the iPad to the 4K monitor and back as they make the fine adjustments and make sure the Pencil is where they think it’s supposed to be on the iPad? Doesn’t really sound more efficient than a mouse ... in fact it sounds a lot worse, even if Apple only intended the external monitor to be used solely as a 4K reference display and not a workspace.
All your long anecdotal narration is irrelevant. The iPad is not for desktop usage. If you don't want to leave your comfy desk get a laptop. Neither the folding keyboard nor the 4K display are main components of iPad Pro. The monitor is there only to watch 4K iMovie edits. Besides that there is absolutely no point in buying a 4K monitor for the iPad Pro.
OK if your point is to get a trackpad on that foldable keyboard, then this is not possible: 1) How will you power it? 2) What if people with disabilities or long fingernails want to attach a mouse to that keyboard? How will you power both? 3) There is no pointer in iOS. Your request requires the whole UI to be re-written for the mouse interface. That won't happen, buy a Surface it has both touch and mouse. I am off that mouse discussion.
"3) There is no pointer in iOS."
Not exactly true. tvOS, which is based off of iOS, does use a pointer UI. Nothing stopping Apple from adopting that on the iPad Pro
Well, something is...
... We just don't know what it is -- or when it will change. Or, if it will change.
Personally, I think it is coming. This year was a consolidation year for iOS -- stabilizing it and improving its efficiency. They may not have wanted to add on a serious upgrade to get the iPad running well with a cursor.
lowededwookie said: [...] I can edit video on an iPhone just as easily as using iMovie on the Mac
"Easily," yes. Accurately, no. Fine adjustments are difficult using a finger on a small screen. One's choices are endless re-zoom operations or accepting edits that are "in the ballpark."
The fact that a task is possible on a phone or tablet does not mean it's automatically equivalent to a laptop or desktop in terms of ease-of-use, speed, workflow (particularly within a facility where one's work is part of a chain), or any other productivity measure. iPads have opened up a new form of computing that is better than a laptop for some things. That's awesome in itself. It doesn't mean that it's better than -- or even equivalent to -- previously existing input and interaction methods for some kinds of work.
Besides, even putting all that aside, the iPad Pro's marketing includes using the keyboard stand and an external monitor. Both make touch a less effective control method than using a mouse.
I disagree for the simple reason that the pen is mightier than the sword/mouse. Ever tried drawing with a mouse? Ever tried to be precise with a trackpad? All they are good for is moving stuff around but you can do that with a touchscreen and get immense precision using the Pencil.
Just because you’ve done something all the time doesn’t make it the best option. In fact if you’re serious about video editing and precision on a Mac you’d use a jog control not a mouse or at the very least a trackball such as Logitech’s MX Ergo which I’ve used back when it was the TrackMan. It is far superior to a mouse or trackpad.
While my complaint is largely semantic I completely disagree that it’s the lack of the mouse that means that the iPad Pro can’t be used as a desktop/laptop replacement. If that’s so then why the hell is Adobe bringing over full Photoshop? Why is AutoDesk bringing over the full AutoCAD engine? The issue is not lack of mouse support but lack of software support and we are starting to see this changing now thanks to the original iPad Pro.
The iPad Pro combined with the Apple Pencil is a very precise device and those decrying its abilities just don’t understand how computing is going to evolve because they’re stuck in the past. It’s Final Cut Pro X all over again and that was a moronic debate back then as well.
" get immense precision using the Pencil."
You do -- but I think he was talking about using a finger -- which is far from precise.
A pencil can be precise, but its awkard to use as a pointing device and type at the same time.
"desktop/laptop replacement. If that’s so then why the hell is Adobe bringing over full Photoshop?"
Because, in photoshop you are not both typing (rapidly) and positioning at the same time. It all depends on what you're trying to accomplish. In MS Word or Excel it sucks.
"don’t understand how computing is going to evolve because they’re stuck in the past"
It has nothing to do with new vs old ways of doing things. It all depends having the right tool for the right job. For some jobs fingers and pencils are great. For other jobs a cursor and mouse or touchpad are better.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It should just work. If you have to do a work around, the concept is compromised. Then add the escalating prices on anyone wanting anything other than base config. Well, TBH the base config has no doubt impressive margins already, so it is galling. Like far too many Apple products, the iPad Pro has become too expensive to recommend.
i honestly can’t recommend the iPad Pro. Very regretfully. The basic iPad with the old pencil, with its stupid charging solution, is the iPad I have had my workplace switch to from iPad pros. The constant war I have with the Apple Hating IT department to have iPads at all, means I really don’t need the extra lead in the saddle bag of the iPad Pro price. Actually, rather than lead in the saddle bag, maybe it’s plutonium in the saddle bag. Apple product prices is always the first weapon IT use against my use case.
Then IT moves to file management arguments (I have no answer here), and connectivity to local printers and presentation hardware. The day Surface comes with built in GPS it’s game over.
Yeah, prices. IT depts hate Apple products because their practices (& so jobs) become largely redundant which actually reduces price per seat - those salaries/services contracts ain’t cheap.
All arguments (& most across the web on iPad Pro) are down to people not getting that you don’t employ the same practice to different products, not Windows PCS, not Macs, iPads. If you do, you either spend too much money or beak the service & productivity workflows built on it. You shouldn’t need to change these, just the practice-layer/people.
Files; I use iPad Pro with OneDrive for Business +SharePoint. Done. Printers; I use a modern, AirPrint compatible printer. Don. Presentations; I use AppleTV (the most robust wireless solution) for KeyNote, PowerPoint & best of all - iBooks (as the contain reference material which you can duck into professionally) Cost; no IT involvement means huge savings.
Good luck.
Work does not enable AirPrint, work does not purchase Apple tvs, I need a way to work around IT, I am seriously thinking of using my own money to beat them. One drive is an option. I will have to buy office 365 for iPad with my own coin though. IT only want MS stuff, but office 365 is not on the corporate list, just bog standard MS office, which of course doesn’t work on the iPad. I will nite that even though they pushed Surface as a replacement laptop for a while, they have gone back to HP and Dell. Nobody wanted Surface, not robust enough for field work and a crap tablet compared with the iPad, which I had pushed out quicker than IT could stop it. That everyone has iPhones helped screw IT’s plans.
You’ll need an exec/senior leadership sponsor to back a business case showing how IT is a bit stuck/staid and how it’s hurting productivity which is meant to be one of the key justifications for having IT in the first place
Luckily, IT know nothing about productivity (they think it’s Microsoft Office) but they won’t go down without a fight and a lot of plausible referencing. You could cite IBM as demonstrating lower cost per seat but create a more local case and ask IT why they specifically disallow Apple tech when it’s so prevalent. If you have a Digital team they’ll be useful allies.
You apparently believe that IT is some separate, unrelated entity or vendor.
In most large organizations, the CIO is part of the "exec/senior leadership" you suggest appealing to. And, that CIO, with support from that team, is charged with far more than making a single user happy. It is responsible for managing enterprise level demands such as: cost managment, shared resources, enterprise level applications, data security, etc, etc., etc.....
Having consulted to the IT industry for over 30 years I have a fair grasp of how enterprise IT works/doesn’t work. It’s disturbing how many C-suite positions exist with so little idea of what the business does and how it needs to do it successfully. The ‘support’ functions of IT & Finance dictate more than support, definitely the source of decision corruption and should be at the top of the Risk Mgt system.
The sponsor needs to be within core operations as corp services aren’t qualified to understand productivity. Admittedly if the user doesn’t represent the core focus of the business, they’re in for a rough ride.
Steve Jobs probably would have agreed with that -- at least before they fired him. He preferred unconstrained "get out of my way and let me do my job" too.
Indeed, he was fired by a CEO & Board that largely didn’t understand what technology could do. He corrected that issue upon his return and went on to introduce the 3rd generation of personal computing. When you get high-level decision-making right and drive a business and it’s products design by their purpose, great things happen and you lead the market.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
You're being too hard on her/him. There's a world of difference between being wrong and lying. A simple correction without the confrontation would cover it.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
You're being too hard on her/him. There's a world of difference between being wrong and lying. A simple correction without the confrontation would cover it.
99% of what they post is negative anti-Apple FUD, and I don't have a lot of patience for that so I call it like I see it. You can do whatever you want in your own comments.
“Sure, removing the headphone jack does help make the iPad Pro even thinner, but how think does it really need to be?”
True, particularly since Apple’s issues with batteries started the moment devices became really thin. My iPad Air and my original iPad still run on original batteries. So did for many years my iPhone 5s, and SE My iPhone 6 plus, 6s plus are all on their second, soon third batteries, and I expect an ultra-thin iPad and iPad Pro be prone to the same battery issues, thus increasing total cost of ownership even further.
“Sure, removing the headphone jack does help make the iPad Pro even thinner, but how think does it really need to be?”
True, particularly since Apple’s issues with batteries started the moment devices became really thin. My iPad Air and my original iPad still run on original batteries. So did for many years my iPhone 5s, and SE My iPhone 6 plus, 6s plus are all on their second, soon third batteries, and I expect an ultra-thin iPad and iPad Pro be prone to the same battery issues, thus increasing total cost of ownership even further.
Actually the 9.7” iPad of last year is thicker than the iPad Air, so there is no ultra-thin simple iPad. Regarding the battery of larger sizes, I think one reason to go larger is the battery. On the other hand, an iPad that continuously sits on the desk is no longer an iPad, it is an under-developed laptop. The difference iPad makes is its continuous deskless usage at hand. The power of the iPad resides in its mobility. It must be lightweight to fit its purpose. This is the reason of its thinness.
It should just work. If you have to do a work around, the concept is compromised. Then add the escalating prices on anyone wanting anything other than base config. Well, TBH the base config has no doubt impressive margins already, so it is galling. Like far too many Apple products, the iPad Pro has become too expensive to recommend.
i honestly can’t recommend the iPad Pro. Very regretfully. The basic iPad with the old pencil, with its stupid charging solution, is the iPad I have had my workplace switch to from iPad pros. The constant war I have with the Apple Hating IT department to have iPads at all, means I really don’t need the extra lead in the saddle bag of the iPad Pro price. Actually, rather than lead in the saddle bag, maybe it’s plutonium in the saddle bag. Apple product prices is always the first weapon IT use against my use case.
Then IT moves to file management arguments (I have no answer here), and connectivity to local printers and presentation hardware. The day Surface comes with built in GPS it’s game over.
Yeah, prices. IT depts hate Apple products because their practices (& so jobs) become largely redundant which actually reduces price per seat - those salaries/services contracts ain’t cheap.
All arguments (& most across the web on iPad Pro) are down to people not getting that you don’t employ the same practice to different products, not Windows PCS, not Macs, iPads. If you do, you either spend too much money or beak the service & productivity workflows built on it. You shouldn’t need to change these, just the practice-layer/people.
Files; I use iPad Pro with OneDrive for Business +SharePoint. Done. Printers; I use a modern, AirPrint compatible printer. Don. Presentations; I use AppleTV (the most robust wireless solution) for KeyNote, PowerPoint & best of all - iBooks (as the contain reference material which you can duck into professionally) Cost; no IT involvement means huge savings.
Good luck.
Work does not enable AirPrint, work does not purchase Apple tvs, I need a way to work around IT, I am seriously thinking of using my own money to beat them. One drive is an option. I will have to buy office 365 for iPad with my own coin though. IT only want MS stuff, but office 365 is not on the corporate list, just bog standard MS office, which of course doesn’t work on the iPad. I will nite that even though they pushed Surface as a replacement laptop for a while, they have gone back to HP and Dell. Nobody wanted Surface, not robust enough for field work and a crap tablet compared with the iPad, which I had pushed out quicker than IT could stop it. That everyone has iPhones helped screw IT’s plans.
You’ll need an exec/senior leadership sponsor to back a business case showing how IT is a bit stuck/staid and how it’s hurting productivity which is meant to be one of the key justifications for having IT in the first place
Luckily, IT know nothing about productivity (they think it’s Microsoft Office) but they won’t go down without a fight and a lot of plausible referencing. You could cite IBM as demonstrating lower cost per seat but create a more local case and ask IT why they specifically disallow Apple tech when it’s so prevalent. If you have a Digital team they’ll be useful allies.
You apparently believe that IT is some separate, unrelated entity or vendor.
In most large organizations, the CIO is part of the "exec/senior leadership" you suggest appealing to. And, that CIO, with support from that team, is charged with far more than making a single user happy. It is responsible for managing enterprise level demands such as: cost managment, shared resources, enterprise level applications, data security, etc, etc., etc.....
Having consulted to the IT industry for over 30 years I have a fair grasp of how enterprise IT works/doesn’t work. It’s disturbing how many C-suite positions exist with so little idea of what the business does and how it needs to do it successfully. The ‘support’ functions of IT & Finance dictate more than support, definitely the source of decision corruption and should be at the top of the Risk Mgt system.
The sponsor needs to be within core operations as corp services aren’t qualified to understand productivity. Admittedly if the user doesn’t represent the core focus of the business, they’re in for a rough ride.
Steve Jobs probably would have agreed with that -- at least before they fired him. He preferred unconstrained "get out of my way and let me do my job" too.
Indeed, he was fired by a CEO & Board that largely didn’t understand what technology could do. He corrected that issue upon his return and went on to introduce the 3rd generation of personal computing. When you get high-level decision-making right and drive a business and it’s products design by their purpose, great things happen and you lead the market.
That's true. Well partly true. The part you left out is that Steve returned to Apple older, wiser and more balanced -- he finally understood the trade-offs, compromises and pressures of business while maintaining a firm grasp of technology. In short, he returned after learning how the other side of the coin works.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
An example that is true for 99% of the user population is not a lie -- even if you can show an exception that fits the 1%. Actually, THAT is the lie -- to generalize from an exception.
It should just work. If you have to do a work around, the concept is compromised. Then add the escalating prices on anyone wanting anything other than base config. Well, TBH the base config has no doubt impressive margins already, so it is galling. Like far too many Apple products, the iPad Pro has become too expensive to recommend.
i honestly can’t recommend the iPad Pro. Very regretfully. The basic iPad with the old pencil, with its stupid charging solution, is the iPad I have had my workplace switch to from iPad pros. The constant war I have with the Apple Hating IT department to have iPads at all, means I really don’t need the extra lead in the saddle bag of the iPad Pro price. Actually, rather than lead in the saddle bag, maybe it’s plutonium in the saddle bag. Apple product prices is always the first weapon IT use against my use case.
Then IT moves to file management arguments (I have no answer here), and connectivity to local printers and presentation hardware. The day Surface comes with built in GPS it’s game over.
I’ve used a Surface. They still use Windows and Windows sucks.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
An example that is true for 99% of the user population is not a lie -- even if you can show an exception that fits the 1%. Actually, THAT is the lie -- to generalize from an exception.
What are you talking about? They said iOS prevents apps from seeing MAC addresses on a network, which is patently false as I proved by jumping into the first network app I could think of that I use to manage devices on my networks, which happens to display MAC addresses. How exactly is their claim "true for 99% of users"? It's not true.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
An example that is true for 99% of the user population is not a lie -- even if you can show an exception that fits the 1%. Actually, THAT is the lie -- to generalize from an exception.
What are you talking about? They said iOS prevents apps from seeing MAC addresses on a network, which is patently false as I proved by jumping into the first network app I could think of that I use to manage devices on my networks, which happens to display MAC addresses. How exactly is their claim "true for 99% of users"? It's not true.
And, as I said, that was a mere example, and poking a hole in an example does not refute his point -- particularly if 99% of the people would no need, desire or knowledge of your external, third party solution to a problem only you and handful of others have.
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
An example that is true for 99% of the user population is not a lie -- even if you can show an exception that fits the 1%. Actually, THAT is the lie -- to generalize from an exception.
What are you talking about? They said iOS prevents apps from seeing MAC addresses on a network, which is patently false as I proved by jumping into the first network app I could think of that I use to manage devices on my networks, which happens to display MAC addresses. How exactly is their claim "true for 99% of users"? It's not true.
And, as I said, that was a mere example, and poking a hole in an example does not refute his point -- particularly if 99% of the people would no need, desire or knowledge of your external, third party solution to a problem only you and handful of others have.
It does actually, because his solitary example of how iOS is locked down is false. If your only premise is false, then the conclusion is also false.
Also, they're specifically talking about iOS preventing *apps* from doing something, ie this is a limitation that developers ('OutdoorAppDeveloper' for example) is prevented from doing with their third party software. I used an example of a third party software that does not have this limitation, thereby proving the premise was false.
This is logic 101 stuff, I'm not sure why you're arguing with me about it. ¯\(°_o)/¯
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
An example that is true for 99% of the user population is not a lie -- even if you can show an exception that fits the 1%. Actually, THAT is the lie -- to generalize from an exception.
What are you talking about? They said iOS prevents apps from seeing MAC addresses on a network, which is patently false as I proved by jumping into the first network app I could think of that I use to manage devices on my networks, which happens to display MAC addresses. How exactly is their claim "true for 99% of users"? It's not true.
And, as I said, that was a mere example, and poking a hole in an example does not refute his point -- particularly if 99% of the people would no need, desire or knowledge of your external, third party solution to a problem only you and handful of others have.
It does actually, because his solitary example of how iOS is locked down is false. If your only premise is false, then the conclusion is also false.
Also, they're specifically talking about iOS preventing *apps* from doing something, ie this is a limitation that developers ('OutdoorAppDeveloper' for example) is prevented from doing with their third party software. I used an example of a third party software that does not have this limitation, thereby proving the premise was false.
This is logic 101 stuff, I'm not sure why you're arguing with me about it. ¯\(°_o)/¯
You might spend a few moments to look up the definitions of "example" and "premise".
A locked down operating system like iOS is perfect for consumers but it is useless for professional users. Apple is all about telling users what they need. They are actually surprisingly good at it. Unfortunately that entire business model falls apart when you consider the professional market. Professionals are not interested in what Apple or any other company thinks is best for them. They need to do actual work and complete tasks. Let's say that one of those tasks is to scan the local network to determine what devices are attached. If iOS prevents apps from seeing the actual MAC addresses of those devices then the iPad Pro becomes useless to professionals that need to do that. This is just one example but iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple. Apple should either produce a professional version of iOS or allow any iOS device to be put into "pro" mode with fewer protections but no restrictions on how that device can be used. It should allow users to side load apps, access all of the hardware via the SDK without limitations and do anything the owners of those devices need to do. Only then can Apple call a device "Pro" and target professional users.
What the fuck are you talking about? I can see the MAC address of every device on my network right now in Fing on this very iPad. Why are you making shit up?
I think he just sited the Mac address as an example.
Steve did lock down the iPhone (and iOS) pretty tightly to keep extremely simple to use and bullet proof for grandma. While a pro CAN use it effectively and many do, often they will require a system (like MacOS) that has more power and flexibility.
It's not an example if it's not true, is it?
People here are constantly introducing me to features and tools I didn't know existed. OutdoorAppDeveloper probably just didn't know about Fing. I didn't.
So? They made a very specific case using that as an example of how "iOS is full of limitations like that which are entirely created by Apple", and it's false on its face. The limitation does not exist, and not knowing about a certain app that has that capability does not excuse lying to support a false narrative.
An example that is true for 99% of the user population is not a lie -- even if you can show an exception that fits the 1%. Actually, THAT is the lie -- to generalize from an exception.
What are you talking about? They said iOS prevents apps from seeing MAC addresses on a network, which is patently false as I proved by jumping into the first network app I could think of that I use to manage devices on my networks, which happens to display MAC addresses. How exactly is their claim "true for 99% of users"? It's not true.
And, as I said, that was a mere example, and poking a hole in an example does not refute his point -- particularly if 99% of the people would no need, desire or knowledge of your external, third party solution to a problem only you and handful of others have.
It does actually, because his solitary example of how iOS is locked down is false. If your only premise is false, then the conclusion is also false.
Also, they're specifically talking about iOS preventing *apps* from doing something, ie this is a limitation that developers ('OutdoorAppDeveloper' for example) is prevented from doing with their third party software. I used an example of a third party software that does not have this limitation, thereby proving the premise was false.
This is logic 101 stuff, I'm not sure why you're arguing with me about it. ¯\(°_o)/¯
You might spend a few moments to look up the definitions of "example" and "premise".
"With respect to the mouse, it’s not a matter of perception, it’s about real ergonomic productivity impact. Apple is marketing and selling the iPad with an attached keyboard to operate in a manner similar to a MacBook. Ironically, Apple has said it won’t make a MacBook with a touch screen because it doesn’t make sense for the customer to lift their hands off the keyboard. Yet this is exactly what Apple requires on the iPad hybrid." ....
That's my biggest complain with the iPad: how Apple is doing their marketing. Should I need a physical keyboard, I'll go with a MacBook.
Comments
"don’t understand how computing is going to evolve because they’re stuck in the past"
True, particularly since Apple’s issues with batteries started the moment devices became really thin. My iPad Air and my original iPad still
run on original batteries. So did for many years my iPhone 5s, and SE
My iPhone 6 plus, 6s plus are all on their second, soon third batteries, and I expect an ultra-thin iPad and iPad Pro be prone to the same battery issues, thus increasing total cost of ownership even further.
Also, they're specifically talking about iOS preventing *apps* from doing something, ie this is a limitation that developers ('OutdoorAppDeveloper' for example) is prevented from doing with their third party software. I used an example of a third party software that does not have this limitation, thereby proving the premise was false.
This is logic 101 stuff, I'm not sure why you're arguing with me about it. ¯\(°_o)/¯