I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
It's not really the iPad that was designed to appeal to any particular group.
It is the functionality that appeals to different groups and the context of that functionality.
Phones, tablets and computers can send emails and deal with attachments but if you're sending and receiving emails all the time you will definitely prefer a computer and real keyboard for the task. If you are doing the same tasks 'on the go', you definitely won't want a desktop so prefer maybe a laptop or if size and weight are an issue, tablet or ultimately a phone.
These considerations are applicable to every task. Imagine watching video. Editing photos. Document creation.
As each device becomes more capable, some tasks become a question of choice within the contextual situation of the use case.
A tablet - today - with a decent keyboard is getting closer to the functionality of a laptop but it still isn't there yet due to OS limitations. Local filesystem management especially.
The question you should ask yourself is if such limitations need to exist now.
What if Apple simply released 'AppleOS' and made it run on everything?
Not a gargantuan OS that needs 8GB to install on a watch but a watch that holds only the system elements required for a smartwatch.
What if the functionality of those devices could be intertwined?
For example (stated use case of HarmonyOS in a fitness scenario).
A shoe based sensor, earphone, watch, plus any other body sensor you wish to add.
The earphones can use Bone Voice ID to identify you and pass verbal instructions from your digital assistant in real time. The GPS in your watch can track your geographical location. The watch itself can pull in sensor data from itself. The shoe mounted sensor can pull in other data. If you choose to wear a chest mounted sensor for more precise data, that can be linked too.
With these devices working in harmony, AI (on device or cloud based) can be used to guide the user through the workout and can 'learn' and adjust instructions for future sessions. Instructions are given to the user via the earphones. Speed up, intensify, slow down or whatever...
If you are indoors and have a TV with a camera, the system can analyse skeletal points and provide feedback to the user.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference. ....
LOL... That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
It's not really the iPad that was designed to appeal to any particular group.
It is the functionality that appeals to different groups and the context of that functionality.
Phones, tablets and computers can send emails and deal with attachments but if you're sending and receiving emails all the time you will definitely prefer a computer and real keyboard for the task. If you are doing the same tasks 'on the go', you definitely won't want a desktop so prefer maybe a laptop or if size and weight are an issue, tablet or ultimately a phone.
These considerations are applicable to every task. Imagine watching video. Editing photos. Document creation.
As each device becomes more capable, some tasks become a question of choice within the contextual situation of the use case.
A tablet - today - with a decent keyboard is getting closer to the functionality of a laptop but it still isn't there yet due to OS limitations. Local filesystem management especially.
The question you should ask yourself is if such limitations need to exist now.
What if Apple simply released 'AppleOS' and made it run on everything?
Not a gargantuan OS that needs 8GB to install on a watch but a watch that holds only the system elements required for a smartwatch.
What if the functionality of those devices could be intertwined?
For example (stated use case of HarmonyOS in a fitness scenario).
A shoe based sensor, earphone, watch, plus any other body sensor you wish to add.
The earphones can use Bone Voice ID to identify you and pass verbal instructions from your digital assistant in real time. The GPS in your watch can track your geographical location. The watch itself can pull in sensor data from itself. The shoe mounted sensor can pull in other data. If you choose to wear a chest mounted sensor for more precise data, that can be linked too.
With these devices working in harmony, AI (on device or cloud based) can be used to guide the user through the workout and can 'learn' and adjust instructions for future sessions. Instructions are given to the user via the earphones. Speed up, intensify, slow down or whatever...
If you are indoors and have a TV with a camera, the system can analyse skeletal points and provide feedback to the user.
Do you still need a dedicated OS for each device?
Is seamless interaction the future?
It's interesting that the most successful consumer electronics company on earth has been firmly in the camp of a software development platform that does in fact require a number of specific niche OS variants, iPad OS being one of those, and Mac OS being another, and that doesn't appear to have changed with the arrival of the M1. Apple has indicated that they expect the performance headroom of the new iPad to draw developers to create new iPad OS apps that are desktop class, rumors being that Xcode, Final Cut, and Logic arriving from Apple within the next year, and certainly other third party Apps as well.
Perhaps, it will be that Huawei is wrong about Harmony OS, and will live with the consequences as relative mediocrity of its devices in the marketplace. Since I'm not a customer of Huawei, they can, and should, do what they like, but I do believe that the result isn't going to be anything but pedestrian in its outcome. Your mileage seems to vary on that, but until the results are in the marketplace, I remain skeptical.
Edit;
Interesting that Apple is pushing a political move that reminds me of the defense industry; having a presence in many states;
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
Apple isn't going to put Mac OS on the iPad.
EOS
I guess that make you an ideologue as well, as you continue pushing your Mac OS narrative, to no effect.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
It's not really the iPad that was designed to appeal to any particular group.
It is the functionality that appeals to different groups and the context of that functionality.
Phones, tablets and computers can send emails and deal with attachments but if you're sending and receiving emails all the time you will definitely prefer a computer and real keyboard for the task. If you are doing the same tasks 'on the go', you definitely won't want a desktop so prefer maybe a laptop or if size and weight are an issue, tablet or ultimately a phone.
These considerations are applicable to every task. Imagine watching video. Editing photos. Document creation.
As each device becomes more capable, some tasks become a question of choice within the contextual situation of the use case.
A tablet - today - with a decent keyboard is getting closer to the functionality of a laptop but it still isn't there yet due to OS limitations. Local filesystem management especially.
The question you should ask yourself is if such limitations need to exist now.
What if Apple simply released 'AppleOS' and made it run on everything?
Not a gargantuan OS that needs 8GB to install on a watch but a watch that holds only the system elements required for a smartwatch.
What if the functionality of those devices could be intertwined?
For example (stated use case of HarmonyOS in a fitness scenario).
A shoe based sensor, earphone, watch, plus any other body sensor you wish to add.
The earphones can use Bone Voice ID to identify you and pass verbal instructions from your digital assistant in real time. The GPS in your watch can track your geographical location. The watch itself can pull in sensor data from itself. The shoe mounted sensor can pull in other data. If you choose to wear a chest mounted sensor for more precise data, that can be linked too.
With these devices working in harmony, AI (on device or cloud based) can be used to guide the user through the workout and can 'learn' and adjust instructions for future sessions. Instructions are given to the user via the earphones. Speed up, intensify, slow down or whatever...
If you are indoors and have a TV with a camera, the system can analyse skeletal points and provide feedback to the user.
Do you still need a dedicated OS for each device?
Is seamless interaction the future?
It's interesting that the most successful consumer electronics company on earth has been firmly in the camp of a software development platform that does in fact require a number of specific niche OS variants, iPad OS being one of those, and Mac OS being another, and that doesn't appear to have changed with the arrival of the M1. Apple has indicated that they expect the performance headroom of the new iPad to draw developers to create new iPad OS apps that are desktop class, rumors being that Xcode, Final Cut, and Logic arriving from Apple within the next year, and certainly other third party Apps as well.
Perhaps, it will be that Huawei is wrong about Harmony OS, and will live with the consequences as relative mediocrity of its devices in the marketplace. Since I'm not a customer of Huawei, they can, and should, do what they like, but I do believe that the result isn't going to be anything but pedestrian in its outcome. Your mileage seems to vary on that, but until the results are in the marketplace, I remain skeptical.
Edit;
Interesting that Apple is pushing a political move that reminds me of the defense industry; having a presence in many states;
If you want to build a new plane, make sure every Congressional District gets a piece of the manufacturing action
Yes, it might not work out as planned. I'm definitely open to that scenario but from a conceptual perspective the questions and proposed advantages are interesting.
Longer term, I'm sure everyone will be at least considering similar options.
Running an app on two hardware devices simultaneously, is definitely an interesting concept.
So, what is it about iPad hardware running the Mac's M1 chip that prevents or limits it from running MacOS?
What component does it lack?
Absolutely nothing. There is no reason why Apple wouldn't be able (with some effort) to get macOS running on an iPad. The same has been true since iPad came out, and isn't significantly more true now.
But Apple don't want to do that. Why would they?
Until recently -- when Apple ported MacOS to the M1 chip then replaced the A series chip in the iPad with an M1 -- it may have been theoretically possible but not really feasible because MacOS would not run on an ARM based processor. Now that both Macs and the M1 iPad run the same processor it becomes much more feasible and practical.
Apple did not take 10 years to port macOS to the ARM instruction set. They could have done it at any time. They didn't, because they didn't want macOS on the iPad. I doubt very much that anything has changed in that regard. It's always been feasible, and practicality has nothing to with it. Apple's willingness is the only thing that matters, and they have shown zero.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
The logic seems pretty self evident to me, so not sure what you don't get.
In answer to your "idea"
When has Apple ever done something "because it could"
No it isn't. It is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If you don't like that, Apple's message is buy something else, like a Mac.
I still can't find the logic (or accuracy) in any of that. Sorry.
This is why you will find Apple continuing not to do what you want them to do. Seriously, they sell a lot of iPads to a lot of people who report back high levels of customer satisfaction. The thing you think is a problem isn’t. Because it’s not a problem, there’s no need to fix it.
If the iPad doesn’t do the things you want, buy a device that does. There’s a nice array of Macs that will, or if you’re all about the tablet/notebook combo thing, buy a Surface. Telling strangers on an online forum that Apple should make you a combo device is not going to get you one.
Good that you don't work at Apple. They would still be pushing out the Apple II because, well, there's just no need for anything better.
The issue here is that Apple does not agree with your definition of “better.”
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
“LOL... That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger.”
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
It's not really the iPad that was designed to appeal to any particular group.
It is the functionality that appeals to different groups and the context of that functionality.
Phones, tablets and computers can send emails and deal with attachments but if you're sending and receiving emails all the time you will definitely prefer a computer and real keyboard for the task. If you are doing the same tasks 'on the go', you definitely won't want a desktop so prefer maybe a laptop or if size and weight are an issue, tablet or ultimately a phone.
These considerations are applicable to every task. Imagine watching video. Editing photos. Document creation.
As each device becomes more capable, some tasks become a question of choice within the contextual situation of the use case.
A tablet - today - with a decent keyboard is getting closer to the functionality of a laptop but it still isn't there yet due to OS limitations. Local filesystem management especially.
The question you should ask yourself is if such limitations need to exist now.
What if Apple simply released 'AppleOS' and made it run on everything?
Not a gargantuan OS that needs 8GB to install on a watch but a watch that holds only the system elements required for a smartwatch.
What if the functionality of those devices could be intertwined?
For example (stated use case of HarmonyOS in a fitness scenario).
A shoe based sensor, earphone, watch, plus any other body sensor you wish to add.
The earphones can use Bone Voice ID to identify you and pass verbal instructions from your digital assistant in real time. The GPS in your watch can track your geographical location. The watch itself can pull in sensor data from itself. The shoe mounted sensor can pull in other data. If you choose to wear a chest mounted sensor for more precise data, that can be linked too.
With these devices working in harmony, AI (on device or cloud based) can be used to guide the user through the workout and can 'learn' and adjust instructions for future sessions. Instructions are given to the user via the earphones. Speed up, intensify, slow down or whatever...
If you are indoors and have a TV with a camera, the system can analyse skeletal points and provide feedback to the user.
Do you still need a dedicated OS for each device?
Is seamless interaction the future?
It's interesting that the most successful consumer electronics company on earth has been firmly in the camp of a software development platform that does in fact require a number of specific niche OS variants, iPad OS being one of those, and Mac OS being another, and that doesn't appear to have changed with the arrival of the M1. Apple has indicated that they expect the performance headroom of the new iPad to draw developers to create new iPad OS apps that are desktop class, rumors being that Xcode, Final Cut, and Logic arriving from Apple within the next year, and certainly other third party Apps as well.
Perhaps, it will be that Huawei is wrong about Harmony OS, and will live with the consequences as relative mediocrity of its devices in the marketplace. Since I'm not a customer of Huawei, they can, and should, do what they like, but I do believe that the result isn't going to be anything but pedestrian in its outcome. Your mileage seems to vary on that, but until the results are in the marketplace, I remain skeptical.
Edit;
Interesting that Apple is pushing a political move that reminds me of the defense industry; having a presence in many states;
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
Apple isn't going to put Mac OS on the iPad.
EOS
I guess that make you an ideologue as well, as you continue pushing your Mac OS narrative, to no effect.
Perhaps they won't. Administrative biases and marketing concerns often steer product directions.
But if advocating for what is right makes me an ideologue, then fine. I'll be in good company with the likes of Steve.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
“LOL... That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger.”
Yep!
“That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger”
But, here's a hint to help you figure it out: Right Wing snowflakes take everything personally -- so they get offended when their message is shown to be bullshit.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
“LOL... That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger.”
Yep!
“That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger”
But, here's a hint to help you figure it out: Right Wing snowflakes take everything personally -- so they get offended when their message is shown to be bullshit.
You seem nice.
I don't know for certain who all you're going ad hominem on and labeling as "Right Wing snowflakes," but surely you're projecting the bit about taking everything personally.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
Apple isn't going to put Mac OS on the iPad.
EOS
I guess that make you an ideologue as well, as you continue pushing your Mac OS narrative, to no effect.
Perhaps they won't. Administrative biases and marketing concerns often steer product directions.
But if advocating for what is right makes me an ideologue, then fine. I'll be in good company with the likes of Steve.
In your own mind, you might be in good company with Steve, you aren't actually, but you still won't be using Mac OS on your iPad, and that is in fact, what this is all about.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
I'll wait to see how Apple and developers flesh out the M1 iPad Pro's without Mac OS, thanks, but you can keep ranting about it, and dissing Apple indefinitely, as if that will make any difference.
"This is my favorite question because you know, you have one camp of people who believe that the iPad and the Mac are at war with one another right it’s one or the other to the death. And then you have others who are like, no, they’re bringing them together — they’re forcing them into one single platform and there’s a grand conspiracy here,” he says.
“They are at opposite ends of a thought spectrum and the reality is that neither is correct. We pride ourselves in the fact that we work really, really, really hard to have the best products in the respective categories. The Mac is the best personal computer, it just is. Customer satisfaction would indicate that is the case, by a longshot.”
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa,” says Ternus. “Our focus is, what is the best way? What is the best iPad we can make what are the best Macs we can make. Some people are going to work across both of them, some people will kind of lean towards one because it better suits their needs and that’s, that’s all good.”
If you follow along, you’ll know that Apple studiously refuses to enter into the iPad vs. Mac debate — and in fact likes to place the iPad in a special place in the market that exists unchallenged. Joswiak often says that he doesn’t even like to say the word tablet.
“There’s iPads and tablets, and tablets aren’t very good. iPads are great,” Joswiak says. “We’re always pushing the boundaries with iPad Pro, and that’s what you want leaders to do. Leaders are the ones that push the boundaries leaders are the ones that take this further than has ever been taken before and the XDR display is a great example of that. Who else would you expect to do that other than us. And then once you see it, and once you use it, you won’t wonder, you’ll be glad we did.”
You might want to rethink your position...but, you won't.
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, we’re never thinking about what we should not do on an iPad because we don’t want to encroach on Mac or vice versa - Isn't this in-line with what people like George, myself and few others are suggesting?
Only if you are misreading the link, because it is apparent that Apple is not going to put Mac OS on the iPad. If you think about it, and most haven't, the iPad was always about appealing to people that were not versed in traditional computing, and wanted something that was more in line with content viewing and creation, which are notably easy on the iPad.
The only thing that is "apparent" is that you are saying they shouldn't -- even when your reasons turn out to disprove your own case.
(It's what often happens when one starts with the conclusion and backs into reasons to support that conclusion -- a common failing of ideologues).
Apple isn't going to put Mac OS on the iPad.
EOS
I guess that make you an ideologue as well, as you continue pushing your Mac OS narrative, to no effect.
Perhaps they won't. Administrative biases and marketing concerns often steer product directions.
But if advocating for what is right makes me an ideologue, then fine. I'll be in good company with the likes of Steve.
In your own mind, you might be in good company with Steve, you aren't actually, but you still won't be using Mac OS on your iPad, and that is in fact, what this is all about.
Perhaps not -- that is only one way Apple could do it. But, since they've been having so much trouble bringing iPadOS up to where it needs to be (in order to enable it to be fully functional in laptop mode) that is the quickest, easiest, cheapest and simplest. Hopefully, Apple will find a better way. But, while they flail about, the iPad remains hobbled when in laptop mode.
So, what is it about iPad hardware running the Mac's M1 chip that prevents or limits it from running MacOS?
What component does it lack?
Absolutely nothing. There is no reason why Apple wouldn't be able (with some effort) to get macOS running on an iPad. The same has been true since iPad came out, and isn't significantly more true now.
But Apple don't want to do that. Why would they?
Until recently -- when Apple ported MacOS to the M1 chip then replaced the A series chip in the iPad with an M1 -- it may have been theoretically possible but not really feasible because MacOS would not run on an ARM based processor. Now that both Macs and the M1 iPad run the same processor it becomes much more feasible and practical.
Apple did not take 10 years to port macOS to the ARM instruction set. They could have done it at any time. They didn't, because they didn't want macOS on the iPad. I doubt very much that anything has changed in that regard. It's always been feasible, and practicality has nothing to with it. Apple's willingness is the only thing that matters, and they have shown zero.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
The logic seems pretty self evident to me, so not sure what you don't get.
In answer to your "idea"
When has Apple ever done something "because it could"
No it isn't. It is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If you don't like that, Apple's message is buy something else, like a Mac.
I still can't find the logic (or accuracy) in any of that. Sorry.
Well I can't really help that, it's all there plain as day.
If you think Apple couldn't port macOS to the iPad before the M1 then you'll have to offer some reasoning behind your thought. It seems to be to be pretty obvious that they could but chose not to. Hell, iPadOS shares a pretty major portion of its code with macOS anyway, it's never been a technical issue, it's always been Apple's decision.
So, what is it about iPad hardware running the Mac's M1 chip that prevents or limits it from running MacOS?
What component does it lack?
Absolutely nothing. There is no reason why Apple wouldn't be able (with some effort) to get macOS running on an iPad. The same has been true since iPad came out, and isn't significantly more true now.
But Apple don't want to do that. Why would they?
Until recently -- when Apple ported MacOS to the M1 chip then replaced the A series chip in the iPad with an M1 -- it may have been theoretically possible but not really feasible because MacOS would not run on an ARM based processor. Now that both Macs and the M1 iPad run the same processor it becomes much more feasible and practical.
Apple did not take 10 years to port macOS to the ARM instruction set. They could have done it at any time. They didn't, because they didn't want macOS on the iPad. I doubt very much that anything has changed in that regard. It's always been feasible, and practicality has nothing to with it. Apple's willingness is the only thing that matters, and they have shown zero.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
The logic seems pretty self evident to me, so not sure what you don't get.
In answer to your "idea"
When has Apple ever done something "because it could"
No it isn't. It is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If you don't like that, Apple's message is buy something else, like a Mac.
I still can't find the logic (or accuracy) in any of that. Sorry.
Well I can't really help that, it's all there plain as day.
If you think Apple couldn't port macOS to the iPad before the M1 then you'll have to offer some reasoning behind your thought. It seems to be to be pretty obvious that they could but chose not to. Hell, iPadOS shares a pretty major portion of its code with macOS anyway, it's never been a technical issue, it's always been Apple's decision.
Very good! It was slow, but you're catching on!
Yes, Apple could, but for administrative and/or marketing reasons chooses not to bring the iPad up par with Macbooks while it is in laptop mode.
So, what is it about iPad hardware running the Mac's M1 chip that prevents or limits it from running MacOS?
What component does it lack?
Absolutely nothing. There is no reason why Apple wouldn't be able (with some effort) to get macOS running on an iPad. The same has been true since iPad came out, and isn't significantly more true now.
But Apple don't want to do that. Why would they?
Until recently -- when Apple ported MacOS to the M1 chip then replaced the A series chip in the iPad with an M1 -- it may have been theoretically possible but not really feasible because MacOS would not run on an ARM based processor. Now that both Macs and the M1 iPad run the same processor it becomes much more feasible and practical.
Apple did not take 10 years to port macOS to the ARM instruction set. They could have done it at any time. They didn't, because they didn't want macOS on the iPad. I doubt very much that anything has changed in that regard. It's always been feasible, and practicality has nothing to with it. Apple's willingness is the only thing that matters, and they have shown zero.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
The logic seems pretty self evident to me, so not sure what you don't get.
In answer to your "idea"
When has Apple ever done something "because it could"
No it isn't. It is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If you don't like that, Apple's message is buy something else, like a Mac.
I still can't find the logic (or accuracy) in any of that. Sorry.
Well I can't really help that, it's all there plain as day.
If you think Apple couldn't port macOS to the iPad before the M1 then you'll have to offer some reasoning behind your thought. It seems to be to be pretty obvious that they could but chose not to. Hell, iPadOS shares a pretty major portion of its code with macOS anyway, it's never been a technical issue, it's always been Apple's decision.
Very good! It was slow, but you're catching on!
Yes, Apple could, but for administrative and/or marketing reasons chooses not to bring the iPad up par with Macbooks while it is in laptop mode.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
EDIT: It's not that Apple "chooses not to bring the iPad up to par" it's that they refuse to make macOS installable on the iPad. A different proposition. They don't want to confuse the product lines and I doubt they ever will. The M1 changes nothing in that regard.
EDIT2: I think I understand why you didn't understand the logic before, I wasn't saying "Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor" at all, I was saying Apple held back from putting macOS on the iPad. You misunderstood me. They haven't put macOS on the iPad for 10 years, and there's no reason to think anything has changed now.
So, what is it about iPad hardware running the Mac's M1 chip that prevents or limits it from running MacOS?
What component does it lack?
Absolutely nothing. There is no reason why Apple wouldn't be able (with some effort) to get macOS running on an iPad. The same has been true since iPad came out, and isn't significantly more true now.
But Apple don't want to do that. Why would they?
Until recently -- when Apple ported MacOS to the M1 chip then replaced the A series chip in the iPad with an M1 -- it may have been theoretically possible but not really feasible because MacOS would not run on an ARM based processor. Now that both Macs and the M1 iPad run the same processor it becomes much more feasible and practical.
Apple did not take 10 years to port macOS to the ARM instruction set. They could have done it at any time. They didn't, because they didn't want macOS on the iPad. I doubt very much that anything has changed in that regard. It's always been feasible, and practicality has nothing to with it. Apple's willingness is the only thing that matters, and they have shown zero.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
The logic seems pretty self evident to me, so not sure what you don't get.
In answer to your "idea"
When has Apple ever done something "because it could"
No it isn't. It is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If you don't like that, Apple's message is buy something else, like a Mac.
I still can't find the logic (or accuracy) in any of that. Sorry.
Well I can't really help that, it's all there plain as day.
If you think Apple couldn't port macOS to the iPad before the M1 then you'll have to offer some reasoning behind your thought. It seems to be to be pretty obvious that they could but chose not to. Hell, iPadOS shares a pretty major portion of its code with macOS anyway, it's never been a technical issue, it's always been Apple's decision.
Very good! It was slow, but you're catching on!
Yes, Apple could, but for administrative and/or marketing reasons chooses not to bring the iPad up par with Macbooks while it is in laptop mode.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
EDIT: It's not that Apple "chooses not to bring the iPad up to par" it's that they refuse to make macOS installable on the iPad. A different proposition. They don't want to confuse the product lines and I doubt they ever will. The M1 changes nothing in that regard.
EDIT2: I think I understand why you didn't understand the logic before, I wasn't saying "Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor" at all, I was saying Apple held back from putting macOS on the iPad. You misunderstood me. They haven't put macOS on the iPad for 10 years, and there's no reason to think anything has changed now.
Yes, I did think that -- because until MacOS could run on an ARM style processor, there was no option for it to run on an iPad.
But, now there is.
Will Apple go there? I hope so. (Or some similar alternative). By enabling the ability to switch OS's to match the mode of the hardware, would greatly increase its power and functionality while in Laptop mode without impacting its functionality as a tablet.
I think, at this point, its more an administrative and marketing decision more than a technical one mostly because it would canabolize mac sales. It wouldn't make an iPad a perfect laptop. But, for those who's needs are 75% tablet and 25% laptop, it would be a viable product.
I don't know man. This feels like typical Apple: deny, deny, deny the thing. Right up until the moment they introduce the thing. I just feel like MacOS has been slowly but surely iOSified (iPadOSified if you will) more and more. Could I just be reinforcing my preconceived notions with non-coincidental coincidences? Probably. Likely.
It hasn’t tho. They’ve added a couple things on the surface, like the notifications center. But fundamentally Mac computing is a different use case and user experience.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
You really like using that graphic huh? As for the OS unification, I freely admit I could be wrong and admitted as much in the comment you quoted. The clarity of their statements means little in this circumstance though. Previous declarations about different things were just as emphatic, right up to the point they weren't. As I said, it's just a feeling. It's not a prognostication or anything grand. If it turns out I'm wrong, no big deal. If it turns out I'm right I'm an omniscient all seeing God. I can live with either outcome.
They weren't nearly as emphatic. And the market around them changed in some cases. So if another company like MS, or Samsung produced a hybrid device that was actually useful then they would think about it. For now they clearly mean what they have said. Its not like they are not trying to make cross ( Apple) platform coding easier, they are working full belt on that, SwiftUI being the most portable. In the middle of these efforts they are clearly saying - no merging.
And the history of the operating systems that Apple produces is one of divergence, not convergence. From OS X, to iOS, iPad Os, watchOS and tvOS.
George is absolutely correct on this topic. He is NOT asking for merging the iOS and MacOS. He is simply expecting 2 different OSes to run in same hardware which is very much capable of doing that (M1 iPad Pro) in different scenarios, based on user selection. There is NOTHING out of ordinary in that ask from George. It is a perfectly valid expectation.
IF Apple does not take this path, the ONLY reason would be shareholder's interest - i.e. sell 2 devices to customers to increase revenue instead of selling 1 device which is capable of performing both the functions (tablet & laptop) equally well. If that is the decision that Apple takes, then that would be a bad move on the part of Apple. We will have to wait and see which way they go.
No, it's not a "perfectly valid expectation." Apple designs their hardware and operating systems concurrently as single units. They don't create generic hardware to run whatever you want to put on it. This is why their devices work as well as they do. Slapping MacOS into an iPad because some guy on a message board insists that it ought to work ok is ridiculous. It's not about greedily selling two devices instead of one. It's about not selling mismatched devices that undermine their entire business model just because some small segment of the market can't get past their fantasy narrative of "what Apple should do."
Or a different merging of a car and Truck would be the SUV which Are extremely popular with Americans.
Australia has UTE's, which are analogous to the car with beds, like the Ford Ranchero, and Chevrolet El Camino, and there are some SUV's that have this, but it isn't the defining feature.
Regarding the OP, I doubt that Apple will even consider a 2 in 1 until long after they have fully transition to Apple Silicon, and if it does happen, it will be new product category sitting between Mac Book Air/Mac Book Pro's, and the iPad. Heck, I'd expect an Folding iPhone Pro with USB4 long before a 2 in 1, and I'd be skeptical if that will ever happen either.
That's a nice way of stating that Mac OS will never run on an iPad. iPad is best in its class, tablets, and Apple won't want to risk that.
Apple already has a 2 in 1. It's the iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard. The trouble is they have not upgraded the OS to be as powerful as that of MacOS or Windows. But that is a very fixable problem and they seem to be working on it -- chugging along slowly but steadily.
But, as has been pointed out, they now also have the option of switching to MacOS when the device is in laptop mode and then back to iPadOS when it's in tablet mode.
Apple has a number of ways to go there.
This is a catch-22. If Apple allows macOS on the iPad Pro when in laptop mode, the potential downside is that developers have little incentive to develop apps that are touch-first and optimized for iPadOS.
Imagine how bad reception for the iPad would have been if changing from Landscape to Portrait required a reboot and information might be trapped in one Version of the OS not the other.
How is dual boot mac/pad any different?
Will always be better user experience for Apple to make iPadOS better and push developers to adapt. I can't see Apple going the easy way here.
After all what more does iPadOS need to do to make it easier for Mac Developers to cross-over they could make more and more default behaviour widgets to help streamline. A good thing for users either way but in the end each app has some unique interactions they need to convert to hybrid touch/mouse before they can offer an iPadPro Version that won't seem half baked.
They are totally different. You are comparing two different things.
But yes, it may be better if Apple brought iPadOS up to par with MacOS (Although many seem to think that a merged OS is not a good idea). But regardlless, they do not seem likely to do that -- at least not anytime soon.
So, some sort of switching to the appropriate OS is the quickest, easiest way to providing the M1 iPad with its full potential: And, it could be as optional as Bootcamp is now: "You are in laptop mode, do you want to switch to MacOS?"
That would be right up there with the worst user experience ever, and there isn't a chance in hell of Apple ever doing that.
Why?
The worst user experience is trying to do Mac level stuff on weak iPadOS. It's horrible.
Allowing the user to switch to a more appropriate OS if they want to would solve that.
No really.
It's called an iPad, not a Mac. The iPad is not intended, nor will it, mimic the Mac, so your report of the "horrible" user experience really missed the fucking point.
Like complaining about my not being able to load full sheets of plywood into the trunk of my Volvo; it was never intended for that.
Ahem. This is the part where you go buy a Surface and move on.
Thanks for agreeing with my point: the iPad sucks at doing MacOS stuff.
That's why it needs to be able to run MacOS when it is needed and the user desires it. Now that M1 Macs and M1 iPads are using the same hardware (except for input devices) there's no technical reason why the M1 iPad can't be upgraded to run either iPadOS or MacOS as the need and the configuration arises. Any restrictions along those lines are strictly administrative and/or marketing -- and both are beneath Apple. They are something a lesser company would pull.
Coming I. To this conversation a couple of weeks late, but if anyone is still following…
Good grief. Your first statement is spot on. The iPad sucks at doing Mac stuff. No one’s disagreeing there. The trouble is how that leads to your second statement. It doesn’t.
You’re saying: the iPad sucks at doing Mac stuff therefore the iPad needs to run macOS.
Apple and those here agreeing with Apple are saying: yep. the iPad sucks at doing Mac stuff… imagine that! It’s not a Mac!! However, the product that excels at doing Mac stuff us … you guessed it … the Mac!! So if you want to do Mac stuff buy a Mac. If you want to do iPad stuff buy an iPad. If you want to do both, buy both!
Admittedly, I’m not as adamant as some here about Apple never releasing a hybrid device. Personally I do wish someone would make macOS run on that new M1 iPad Pro but I want it for very different reasons to why you and others like you want it. I don’t want or need a hybrid device. I just want a portable Mac that has the screen separate from the keyboard and trackpad. So for me the solution is a MBP that I can detach the screen from. If someone gets macOS running on an iPad that’s a potential solution for me. But none of that is what we’re talking about here. So…
I’ll never say never but I personally believe Apple has no incentive to make a hybrid device. For a number of reasons.
1. Purely from the perspective of what they believe is best for users, Apple’s philosophies are so different to MS and others making hybrid devices. They want to make each device excel at what it’s designed for and not compromise that to make it do anything else. It’s similar to why they let go of “legacy” tech and don’t do backwards compatibility anywhere near as much as MS and others (Sheesh, it took the best part of a decade and a half for the world to finally let go of Win XP!) One of the biggest reasons Apple’s devices are more secure, more stable, etc. is because they don’t try to shoehorn everything in, they say no to a lot of stuff, purge old code, etc.
So yes there’s some overlap but overall, the iPad is intrinsically designed for different use cases compared with a Mac. They believe this so fundamentally, and so they limit each device to only what it does best. And as much as those relatively few here may or may not like that, it works for the vast majority of Apple’s target customers as evidenced by consistently chart topping customer satisfaction. While the customers are this happy with the devices produced by this philosophy, how is it in theirs or the customers’ interests for them to change said philosophy?
2. They have no financial or business reason to make a hybrid device. The philosophy that says if you want the functionality of both, buy both, obviously leads to more sales. And sure, if that were the ONLY reason Apple didn’t make a hybrid device then, yes, they’re greedy corporate asses. But it’s not. See point 1.
I’d possibly argue that if they’re ever going to make a hybrid device then when they do it will cost close to the sum of the prices of the corresponding Mac and iPad it could replace. But probably everyone will cry “way too expensive” and continue buying the separate devices instead anyway.
Could they add macOS to the M1 iPad Pro, so that it can behave like a MBA/P then? Probably, but what user problem does it actually solve that isn’t solved by a less expensive iPad plus a MBA? I can see the use cases for it for people like us, but we’re the vast minority in Apple’s customer base, and the vast majority won’t buy it.
On the other hand, Apple made a “hybrid” device when they merged iPod, phone, and tiny computer into one device. But in that case they didn’t already have a phone and tiny computer they were merging with the iPod. It was a completely new product line that met needs they weren’t already meeting. (and it cost three times the price of the corresponding iPod anyway, give or take).
One further point. Arguing that the iPad and Mac are now pretty much the same hardware misses all the ways they’re different. There’s a lot more to these devices than just the processor and a display. Additionally there are some fundamental differences behind the philosophies of each device also. Some of this is showing up in the Epic case. Epic wants iOS opened up more like the Mac but that goes against everything iOS and iPadOS are about. I(Pad)OS is all locked down and macOS is much more open. I think if they could do everything over they’d have the Mac as locked down as iPad is - that was always Steve’s goal: end to end control. But they couldn’t do it originally on the Mac because of too much history and the technology wasn’t right for it when the Mac was first evolved. And they can’t do it now because that ship has sailed — we can all imagine the outcry among Mac users if they did that now.
But they could and did do it by the time iOS came around. They’re never going to give up the locked-down-ness of i(Pad)OS unless forced to by law, and the law is never going to force that. Some of this locked-down-ness is in the hardware not just the OS. So they can’t put macOS on an iPad as it currently is without changing THOSE hardware differences (remember the device is much more than just the chip), which will then compromise what the iPad is otherwise, which they’re never goi g to do. Hence AppleZulu’s repeated point that if they do ever do it, it’ll be a new product line.
So… None of this is to argue what I do or don’t think they should do. But it’s to explain Apple’s reasoning and as much as we might think our reasoning for a hybrid device is reasonable, those reasons still don’t line up with Apple’s philosophies or business model. We can argue whether or not we agree with Apple’s philosophies, but there’s no question, a hybrid iPadOS/macOS device is not in line with Apple’s fundamental philosophies, at least not any time soon without some fundamental changes that may or may not happen, and therefore it’s very likely it won’t happen.
So, what is it about iPad hardware running the Mac's M1 chip that prevents or limits it from running MacOS?
What component does it lack?
Absolutely nothing. There is no reason why Apple wouldn't be able (with some effort) to get macOS running on an iPad. The same has been true since iPad came out, and isn't significantly more true now.
But Apple don't want to do that. Why would they?
Until recently -- when Apple ported MacOS to the M1 chip then replaced the A series chip in the iPad with an M1 -- it may have been theoretically possible but not really feasible because MacOS would not run on an ARM based processor. Now that both Macs and the M1 iPad run the same processor it becomes much more feasible and practical.
Apple did not take 10 years to port macOS to the ARM instruction set. They could have done it at any time. They didn't, because they didn't want macOS on the iPad. I doubt very much that anything has changed in that regard. It's always been feasible, and practicality has nothing to with it. Apple's willingness is the only thing that matters, and they have shown zero.
You're saying that Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor because they didn't want to port MacOS to the iPad?
I don't get your logic.
The idea of dual booting either MacOS or iPadOS on the iPad comes from: 1) Like a dog, "they do it because (now) they can"
2) iPadOS is so weak once you expand out of basic tablet mode.
The logic seems pretty self evident to me, so not sure what you don't get.
In answer to your "idea"
When has Apple ever done something "because it could"
No it isn't. It is exactly what Apple wants it to be. If you don't like that, Apple's message is buy something else, like a Mac.
I still can't find the logic (or accuracy) in any of that. Sorry.
This is why you will find Apple continuing not to do what you want them to do. Seriously, they sell a lot of iPads to a lot of people who report back high levels of customer satisfaction. The thing you think is a problem isn’t. Because it’s not a problem, there’s no need to fix it.
If the iPad doesn’t do the things you want, buy a device that does. There’s a nice array of Macs that will, or if you’re all about the tablet/notebook combo thing, buy a Surface. Telling strangers on an online forum that Apple should make you a combo device is not going to get you one.
Good that you don't work at Apple. They would still be pushing out the Apple II because, well, there's just no need for anything better.
Sure, but the thing here is the point where AppleZulu, and Apple, and others, don’t agree with you that it’s better.
Comments
It is the functionality that appeals to different groups and the context of that functionality.
Phones, tablets and computers can send emails and deal with attachments but if you're sending and receiving emails all the time you will definitely prefer a computer and real keyboard for the task. If you are doing the same tasks 'on the go', you definitely won't want a desktop so prefer maybe a laptop or if size and weight are an issue, tablet or ultimately a phone.
These considerations are applicable to every task. Imagine watching video. Editing photos. Document creation.
As each device becomes more capable, some tasks become a question of choice within the contextual situation of the use case.
A tablet - today - with a decent keyboard is getting closer to the functionality of a laptop but it still isn't there yet due to OS limitations. Local filesystem management especially.
The question you should ask yourself is if such limitations need to exist now.
What if Apple simply released 'AppleOS' and made it run on everything?
Not a gargantuan OS that needs 8GB to install on a watch but a watch that holds only the system elements required for a smartwatch.
What if the functionality of those devices could be intertwined?
For example (stated use case of HarmonyOS in a fitness scenario).
A shoe based sensor, earphone, watch, plus any other body sensor you wish to add.
The earphones can use Bone Voice ID to identify you and pass verbal instructions from your digital assistant in real time. The GPS in your watch can track your geographical location. The watch itself can pull in sensor data from itself. The shoe mounted sensor can pull in other data. If you choose to wear a chest mounted sensor for more precise data, that can be linked too.
With these devices working in harmony, AI (on device or cloud based) can be used to guide the user through the workout and can 'learn' and adjust instructions for future sessions. Instructions are given to the user via the earphones. Speed up, intensify, slow down or whatever...
If you are indoors and have a TV with a camera, the system can analyse skeletal points and provide feedback to the user.
Do you still need a dedicated OS for each device?
Is seamless interaction the future?
LOL... That's the standard right wing tactic: When you lose the argument, attack the messenger.
Perhaps, it will be that Huawei is wrong about Harmony OS, and will live with the consequences as relative mediocrity of its devices in the marketplace. Since I'm not a customer of Huawei, they can, and should, do what they like, but I do believe that the result isn't going to be anything but pedestrian in its outcome. Your mileage seems to
vary on that, but until the results are in the marketplace, I remain skeptical.
Edit;
Interesting that Apple is pushing a political move that reminds me of the defense industry; having a presence in many states;
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/04/apple-commits-430-billion-in-us-investments-over-five-years/
If you want to build a new plane, make sure every Congressional District gets a piece of the manufacturing action
EOS
I guess that make you an ideologue as well, as you continue pushing your Mac OS narrative, to no effect.
Longer term, I'm sure everyone will be at least considering similar options.
Running an app on two hardware devices simultaneously, is definitely an interesting concept.
Ahhh! The old "Apple is right because Apple is always right" argument.
I don't know for certain who all you're going ad hominem on and labeling as "Right Wing snowflakes," but surely you're projecting the bit about taking everything personally.
I added a more nuanced link from Ben Bajarin;
https://techpinions.com/m1-ipads-and-versatile-magic-glass/60545
Perhaps not -- that is only one way Apple could do it. But, since they've been having so much trouble bringing iPadOS up to where it needs to be (in order to enable it to be fully functional in laptop mode) that is the quickest, easiest, cheapest and simplest. Hopefully, Apple will find a better way. But, while they flail about, the iPad remains hobbled when in laptop mode.
If you think Apple couldn't port macOS to the iPad before the M1 then you'll have to offer some reasoning behind your thought. It seems to be to be pretty obvious that they could but chose not to. Hell, iPadOS shares a pretty major portion of its code with macOS anyway, it's never been a technical issue, it's always been Apple's decision.
So why did you say you didn't get the logic?
EDIT: It's not that Apple "chooses not to bring the iPad up to par" it's that they refuse to make macOS installable on the iPad. A different proposition. They don't want to confuse the product lines and I doubt they ever will. The M1 changes nothing in that regard.
EDIT2: I think I understand why you didn't understand the logic before, I wasn't saying "Apple held back converting the Mac to an ARM style processor" at all, I was saying Apple held back from putting macOS on the iPad. You misunderstood me. They haven't put macOS on the iPad for 10 years, and there's no reason to think anything has changed now.
Admittedly, I’m not as adamant as some here about Apple never releasing a hybrid device. Personally I do wish someone would make macOS run on that new M1 iPad Pro but I want it for very different reasons to why you and others like you want it. I don’t want or need a hybrid device. I just want a portable Mac that has the screen separate from the keyboard and trackpad. So for me the solution is a MBP that I can detach the screen from. If someone gets macOS running on an iPad that’s a potential solution for me. But none of that is what we’re talking about here. So…
I’ll never say never but I personally believe Apple has no incentive to make a hybrid device. For a number of reasons.
So yes there’s some overlap but overall, the iPad is intrinsically designed for different use cases compared with a Mac. They believe this so fundamentally, and so they limit each device to only what it does best. And as much as those relatively few here may or may not like that, it works for the vast majority of Apple’s target customers as evidenced by consistently chart topping customer satisfaction. While the customers are this happy with the devices produced by this philosophy, how is it in theirs or the customers’ interests for them to change said philosophy?