This point has to be hammered home: Steve Jobs would have immediately released MacOS on the iPad
But he didn't? The iPad was released under Steve Jobs and ran iOS, not macOS.
The original iPad could not run an Intel based MacOS.
But now that MacOS has come closer to iPadOS and the M1 iPad adopted the Mac's processor that is no longer the case.
Steve never let some purity test stand in the way of building a better product.. Quite the opposite actually. He ate those that did for breakfast.
But, I can't really blame them for not biting this bullet at this time. Both the Mac teams and iPad teams have had a lot to deal with. But, going forward progress will demand that they either bring iPadOS up to MacOS standards (at least while its in laptop mode) or add bootcamp to the iPad. The latter would be the quickest and simplest.
This typifies the lack of thought that the "put MacOS on an iPad" crowd has put into what it would take for this to actually happen.
You seem to think the only technical limitation is the processor as if having an M1 solves all challenges. Let's think about this for a moment.
1. MacOS isn't designed for touch. So critical features like keyboard shortcuts have to be completely rethought. I can't imagine using MacOS if I had to select everything via drop down menus at the top of the screen every time I wanted to create a new folder, document, quit an App.
2. How do you handle dual booting? MacOS has a way to do this but iPadOS doesn't.
3. What happens to the scrutiny of iPadOS? MacOS gives you complete access to the file system on a hard drive. So while booted into MacOS there is a risk of iPadOS being unintentionally altered or worse malware being introduced.
That's just spitballing it on issues that would need to be addressed. Could Apple solve all of these and the laundry list that isn't here? Probably, given enough time and effort? Is it worth that time and effort to satisfy some small number of users who want MacOS on an iPad because.... well, ya'll have never really articulated why it should be there, the argument seems to be "because the iPad has an M1" .... I'd think the time and effort is better spent elsewhere. I'm also guessing Apple has put way more thought into what it would take to put MacOS on an iPad than any of the commenters that keep demanding it be done.
LOL...
1. You are correct that MacOS is not designed for touch. But then neither was iPadOS designed to operate in laptop mode -- which is clearly part of its current charter. So, allowing the user to select macOS when they need MacOS makes sense.
2) How do you "handle" bootcamp? The same way you handle it on Macs: It's called programming.
3) What happens to security if the user has full access to their files? The same thing that happens today with MacOS: nothing.
And why should iPad be upgraded to do all that it can do -- versus being hobbled with a weak OS? If you gotta ask that question, you won't understand the answer.
Perhaps the biggest concern with adding MacOS to iPads via bootcamp is: what will that do to MacBook sales?
The answer: MacBooks would have to get better to stay competitive. THey would have to offer things that iPads cannot.
For Apple users, that's a Win-Win situation. And isn't that what it's all about?
1. Seriously? iPad is 100% usable without a keyboard and mouse. MacOS is 100% unusable without a keyboard and ouse. The idea that Apple should install 35+ gigs of software on a dive that starts at 128 gigs and the user can't even make use of it without addition hardware? That is ridiculous.
2. “It’s called programming” ? Well no sh!t in involves programming. And you seriously things it’s that simple? Just sprinkle a little programming on iPadOS and the iPad and we are all set! P.S. Bootcamp allowed for booting Windows on a Mac and is really not applicable to here since we are talking about MacOS not Windows. Macs had the ability to have more than one bootable OS well before boocamp. That fact that you think that it’s “bootcamping” is a lot like “it’s called programming” in that it underscores your lack of understanding of what you are even asking for.
3. iPad and iPhone’s security is, in part, because you can’t access the files system. Further iPadOS and MacOS handle volume/file encryption differently. So what you are are suggesting requires a complete rethinking of iPad or Mac security. And you really think there is no malware for the Mac? I'll give any easy example here. When Mac users installed Zoom, the Zoom app installed, configured and launched an Apache web server on the Mac without the user being so much as notified and removing Zoom didn't remove the server, it just sat there running and was a significant security risk. It's somewhat troubling that you think things like that are "nothing". And being able to access, edit, replace and remove parts of iPadOS would be problematic not to mention being able to insert malware into iPadOS.
Lastly you dodged on why Apple should bother with your “you wouldn’t understand the answer”. But given your demonstrated lack of understanding of the technical issues it isn’t a surprise.
This point has to be hammered home: Steve Jobs would have immediately released MacOS on the iPad
But he didn't? The iPad was released under Steve Jobs and ran iOS, not macOS.
The original iPad could not run an Intel based MacOS.
But now that MacOS has come closer to iPadOS and the M1 iPad adopted the Mac's processor that is no longer the case.
Steve never let some purity test stand in the way of building a better product.. Quite the opposite actually. He ate those that did for breakfast.
But, I can't really blame them for not biting this bullet at this time. Both the Mac teams and iPad teams have had a lot to deal with. But, going forward progress will demand that they either bring iPadOS up to MacOS standards (at least while its in laptop mode) or add bootcamp to the iPad. The latter would be the quickest and simplest.
This typifies the lack of thought that the "put MacOS on an iPad" crowd has put into what it would take for this to actually happen.
You seem to think the only technical limitation is the processor as if having an M1 solves all challenges. Let's think about this for a moment.
1. MacOS isn't designed for touch. So critical features like keyboard shortcuts have to be completely rethought. I can't imagine using MacOS if I had to select everything via drop down menus at the top of the screen every time I wanted to create a new folder, document, quit an App.
2. How do you handle dual booting? MacOS has a way to do this but iPadOS doesn't.
3. What happens to the scrutiny of iPadOS? MacOS gives you complete access to the file system on a hard drive. So while booted into MacOS there is a risk of iPadOS being unintentionally altered or worse malware being introduced.
That's just spitballing it on issues that would need to be addressed. Could Apple solve all of these and the laundry list that isn't here? Probably, given enough time and effort? Is it worth that time and effort to satisfy some small number of users who want MacOS on an iPad because.... well, ya'll have never really articulated why it should be there, the argument seems to be "because the iPad has an M1" .... I'd think the time and effort is better spent elsewhere. I'm also guessing Apple has put way more thought into what it would take to put MacOS on an iPad than any of the commenters that keep demanding it be done.
LOL...
1. You are correct that MacOS is not designed for touch. But then neither was iPadOS designed to operate in laptop mode -- which is clearly part of its current charter. So, allowing the user to select macOS when they need MacOS makes sense.
2) How do you "handle" bootcamp? The same way you handle it on Macs: It's called programming.
3) What happens to security if the user has full access to their files? The same thing that happens today with MacOS: nothing.
And why should iPad be upgraded to do all that it can do -- versus being hobbled with a weak OS? If you gotta ask that question, you won't understand the answer.
Perhaps the biggest concern with adding MacOS to iPads via bootcamp is: what will that do to MacBook sales?
The answer: MacBooks would have to get better to stay competitive. THey would have to offer things that iPads cannot.
For Apple users, that's a Win-Win situation. And isn't that what it's all about?
1. Seriously? iPad is 100% usable without a keyboard and mouse. MacOS is 100% unusable without a keyboard and ouse. The idea that Apple should install 35+ gigs of software on a dive that starts at 128 gigs and the user can't even make use of it without addition hardware? That is ridiculous.
2. “It’s called programming” ? Well no sh!t in involves programming. And you seriously things it’s that simple? Just sprinkle a little programming on iPadOS and the iPad and we are all set! P.S. Bootcamp allowed for booting Windows on a Mac and is really not applicable to here since we are talking about MacOS not Windows. Macs had the ability to have more than one bootable OS well before boocamp. That fact that you think that it’s “bootcamping” is a lot like “it’s called programming” in that it underscores your lack of understanding of what you are even asking for.
3. iPad and iPhone’s security is, in part, because you can’t access the files system. Further iPadOS and MacOS handle volume/file encryption differently. So what you are are suggesting requires a complete rethinking of iPad or Mac security. And you really think there is no malware for the Mac? I'll give any easy example here. When Mac users installed Zoom, the Zoom app installed, configured and launched an Apache web server on the Mac without the user being so much as notified and removing Zoom didn't remove the server, it just sat there running and was a significant security risk. It's somewhat troubling that you think things like that are "nothing". And being able to access, edit, replace and remove parts of iPadOS would be problematic not to mention being able to insert malware into iPadOS.
Lastly you dodged on why Apple should bother with your “you wouldn’t understand the answer”. But given your demonstrated lack of understanding of the technical issues it isn’t a surprise.
"Seriously? iPad is 100% usable without a keyboard and mouse." Yes, for certain things - but for what some call "real computing" -those things where it has to be configured as a laptop with external keyboard and mouse, it can do them, but it is generally agreed that it sucks at it.
"no sh!t in involves programming. And you seriously things it’s that simple? "
Yes. It is that simple. Especially since it's already been written and just needs to be copied with a few modifications. Not a big deal. If you were a programmer you would know that.
"iPad and iPhone’s security is, in part, because you can’t access the files system
That isn't a security feature. That is a left over from MacOS being dummied down to iPhone level. It was meant to be simple and easy -- and it is. But for real computing it needs something more robust -- like MacOS.
And finally, that wasn't a dodge. It was that you've already demonstrated your lack of understanding of the issues.
This point has to be hammered home: Steve Jobs would have immediately released MacOS on the iPad
But he didn't? The iPad was released under Steve Jobs and ran iOS, not macOS.
The original iPad could not run an Intel based MacOS.
But now that MacOS has come closer to iPadOS and the M1 iPad adopted the Mac's processor that is no longer the case.
Steve never let some purity test stand in the way of building a better product.. Quite the opposite actually. He ate those that did for breakfast.
But, I can't really blame them for not biting this bullet at this time. Both the Mac teams and iPad teams have had a lot to deal with. But, going forward progress will demand that they either bring iPadOS up to MacOS standards (at least while its in laptop mode) or add bootcamp to the iPad. The latter would be the quickest and simplest.
I'm not sure about that. He was very adamant about letting the Mac remain a Mac and letting the iPad remain an iPad.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
"Broderick responded simply that each platform is unique and distinct and will remain so." Or, to paraphrase "Because we said so." This point has to be hammered home: Steve Jobs would have immediately released MacOS on the iPad and on a Mac Nano (that looks exactly like an Apple TV with an M1 processor) not because it would maximize short term profit but because it would maximize industry disruption and bring Apple a much larger share of the overall computer market over the coming decades. The PC industry has NOTHING to compete with the M series CPUs in low end small form factor PCs and tablets. They won't have anything to compete with it for YEARS. That's how you dominate. You apply your technological advantage in one market to disrupt another market. Cook is a fantastic CEO and has kept the product line full but he can't disrupt like Steve Jobs could.
The very same Steve Jobs who said if he went back to Apple he’d use mac to sponsor what come next and let it then die.
Seems to me what SJ would do is exactly what is happening. What seems strange is iPad didn’t have iPadOS from day one is it could have grown faster.
Because the first few version of the iPad were held back by the amount of RAM.
"Broderick responded simply that each platform is unique and distinct and will remain so." Or, to paraphrase "Because we said so." This point has to be hammered home: Steve Jobs would have immediately released MacOS on the iPad and on a Mac Nano (that looks exactly like an Apple TV with an M1 processor) not because it would maximize short term profit but because it would maximize industry disruption and bring Apple a much larger share of the overall computer market over the coming decades. The PC industry has NOTHING to compete with the M series CPUs in low end small form factor PCs and tablets. They won't have anything to compete with it for YEARS. That's how you dominate. You apply your technological advantage in one market to disrupt another market. Cook is a fantastic CEO and has kept the product line full but he can't disrupt like Steve Jobs could.
The very same Steve Jobs who said if he went back to Apple he’d use mac to sponsor what come next and let it then die.
Seems to me what SJ would do is exactly what is happening. What seems strange is iPad didn’t have iPadOS from day one is it could have grown faster.
Because the first few version of the iPad were held back by the amount of RAM.
Yes, that is true...
But as times progressed the iPad began to take on new, more demanding tasks -- and Apple started suggesting that it could replace a laptop while they added an external keyboard and mouse.
iPadOS was the realization that iOS was holding the iPad back and it needed its own OS in order for it to be all it could be.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Yeh, or iPadOS will be upgraded to the point where it's unnecessary. But one of the two.
The current situation is a machine very capable of running in laptop mode from a hardware perspective but doing it with an OS that isn't fully capable of doing laptop type work in a user friendly, efficient way -- which makes for a poor user experience.
MacOS on a touch screen device will never ever happen. The company has been clear on this. And it’s even more clear now with Craig’s testimony on the problems with Mac security.
Whatever thwarted version of the Mac you think could run on the iPad would be a disaster for security on the iPad or be totally throttled.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Are you claiming to be a programmer? Because you are clearly technically illiterate on this. The very fact that you think that the M1 chip has anything to do with this, or that you can just throw away questions with "it's just programming" indicates that.
And 2 in 1s are not the future of computing. The surface is getting slated.
Theres no technical or financial reason for Apple to do this. Mac OS on an iPad will clearly reduce Mac sales, if it even worked. It would be a security nightmare and a UI disaster. They have been clear all along that the tablet market and the PC market are different.
Steve Jobs could not be clearer on the diasctintion and on which type of device is going to win, he believed we were in the post PC era, and if you look at the stats he was right. The only thing he got wrong was that the tablet market itself didn't grow as he expected, because of the fact that Phone sizes grew.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
The iPad is touch first, has cameras and accessories, and apps that leverage that. The Mac is designed with the mouse and keyboard at the center of its interaction, and the apps reflect that.
2 things
1. Who said in had to stay that way. Apple COULD Engineer it if only on a limited basis if. they wanted to similarly to point 2.
2.Again they kind of lose this argument by allowing developers to make mods to their iPad Apps so they can run on the Mac. There is to reason that development could be a 2 way street.
Yeh, or iPadOS will be upgraded to the point where it's unnecessary. But one of the two.
The current situation is a machine very capable of running in laptop mode from a hardware perspective but doing it with an OS that isn't fully capable of doing laptop type work in a user friendly, efficient way -- which makes for a poor user experience.
MacOS on a touch screen device will never ever happen. The company has been clear on this. And it’s even more clear now with Craig’s testimony on the problems with Mac security.
Whatever thwarted version of the Mac you think could run on the iPad would be a disaster for security on the iPad or be totally throttled.
When you add an external keyboard and mouse it is no longer a "Touch screen device". it's a laptop with a shitty OS.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Are you claiming to be a programmer? Because you are clearly technically illiterate on this. ....
Theres no technical or financial reason for Apple to do this. ...
It is you who is either technically illiterate or intentionally obtuse.
And, Steve was clear that his designs were not based either technical reasons nor financial ones -- but on making great products.
Right now, the iPad is a great tablet. But, when you switch it over to laptop mode it's OS is much improved but still woefully inadequate to the task.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
1. We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device. Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).
2. Yes, they did explain why: "Because I said so...." LOL... As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.
3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
1. We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device. Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).
2. Yes, they did explain why: "Because I said so...." LOL... As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.
3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it.
1. The iPad is designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. It is a great tablet. Calling it a “shitty laptop” is like calling it a “shitty home theater.”
2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.
3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
1. We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device. Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).
2. Yes, they did explain why: "Because I said so...." LOL... As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.
3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it.
1. The iPad is designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. It is a great tablet. Calling it a “shitty laptop” is like calling it a “shitty home theater.”
2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.
3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.
1. That ended when they added an external keyboard and trackpad or mouse. Adding those makes it a laptop with a shitty OS.
2. See #1 above. And that REALLY ended when Apple started suggesting that it was laptop replacement. Remember: "What's a computer?"
3. When a customer needs a tablet and laptop (a 2 in 1) going with Apple they end up with not a 2 in 1 but 1.5 in 1 -- a good tablet and a shitty laptop. The solution that I have heard countless times in this forum is "just buy and carry both".
At one time all of your claims were true. But time marches on and things change. It's time Apple caught up.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
1. We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device. Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).
2. Yes, they did explain why: "Because I said so...." LOL... As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.
3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it.
1. The iPad is designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. It is a great tablet. Calling it a “shitty laptop” is like calling it a “shitty home theater.”
2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.
3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.
1. That ended when they added an external keyboard and trackpad or mouse. Adding those makes it a laptop with a shitty OS.
2. See #1 above. And that REALLY ended when Apple started suggesting that it was laptop replacement. Remember: "What's a computer?"
3. When a customer needs a tablet and laptop (a 2 in 1) going with Apple they end up with not a 2 in 1 but 1.5 in 1 -- a good tablet and a shitty laptop. The solution that I have heard countless times in this forum is "just buy and carry both".
At one time all of your claims were true. But time marches on and things change. It's time Apple caught up.
I remember that ad. It was a great ad by the way and come when they introduced the 10.5" iPad Pro. But ever since Apple introduced the redesigned 11" / 12.9" iPad Pros in 2018, there hasn't been much chatter from Apple execs or ads about the iPad Pro being a laptop replacement. The most recent interview with Greg Joswiak when the M1 iPad Pro was announced he went out of his way to say that Apple's focused on making the best devices (Mac & iPad) in each of their respective categories.
Yeh, or iPadOS will be upgraded to the point where it's unnecessary. But one of the two.
The current situation is a machine very capable of running in laptop mode from a hardware perspective but doing it with an OS that isn't fully capable of doing laptop type work in a user friendly, efficient way -- which makes for a poor user experience.
MacOS on a touch screen device will never ever happen. The company has been clear on this. And it’s even more clear now with Craig’s testimony on the problems with Mac security.
Whatever thwarted version of the Mac you think could run on the iPad would be a disaster for security on the iPad or be totally throttled.
When you add an external keyboard and mouse it is no longer a "Touch screen device". it's a laptop with a shitty OS.
Doesn't matter, it is nowhere near macOS nor is it supposed to be. Its just another and not very good interface, basically there to help people type more than anything else. It is not and does now mean that the iPad is going to be anything like macOS either.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
1. We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device. Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).
2. Yes, they did explain why: "Because I said so...." LOL... As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.
3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it.
1. The iPad is designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. It is a great tablet. Calling it a “shitty laptop” is like calling it a “shitty home theater.”
2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.
3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.
1. That ended when they added an external keyboard and trackpad or mouse. Adding those makes it a laptop with a shitty OS.
2. See #1 above. And that REALLY ended when Apple started suggesting that it was laptop replacement. Remember: "What's a computer?"
3. When a customer needs a tablet and laptop (a 2 in 1) going with Apple they end up with not a 2 in 1 but 1.5 in 1 -- a good tablet and a shitty laptop. The solution that I have heard countless times in this forum is "just buy and carry both".
At one time all of your claims were true. But time marches on and things change. It's time Apple caught up.
They are saying that it is a laptop replacement for most people, which is it. With the keyboard you can type faster. Mostly its for consumption, not creation. The iPad replaces the laptop for that set of customers who didn't need the Truck ( to use Steve Jobs' analogy), but got one when that was all that was available. but now can use a car.
And to those of you who think that a macOS app could run on an iPad, that might be true of a small subset of applications, but that isn't macOS on the iPad. Just as running some iOS apps on macOS doesn't turn macOS into iOS.
"3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it. "
So you are saying.... is always a straw man argument. I don't have an iPad because I have a laptop. I "lug around" my iPhone when walking about.
Most people need 1 or 2 out of 3 of a phone, laptop and tablet. Almost nobody needs 3 of 3. If you want the laptop experience the new AIR, which is cheaper than some iPads, is for you.
I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight. This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.
I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.
I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.
Yes, I agree.
I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.
They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No". It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.
On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities. They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS). But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped. It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.
This is the most likely route I see Apple taking. If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.
Maybe not. Probably not.
But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace. They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped. There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.
So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.
I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing. But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past. Why? As these two guys demonstrated: it's the old "because I said so" routine. And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles". Or, to take it step further: Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine. Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine. That's just silly. An iPad will cut it in the lower grades. But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.
Still beating that dead horse, I see.
1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no.
2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that.
3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks.
1. We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device. Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).
2. Yes, they did explain why: "Because I said so...." LOL... As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.
3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it.
1. The iPad is designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. It is a great tablet. Calling it a “shitty laptop” is like calling it a “shitty home theater.”
2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.
3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.
1. That ended when they added an external keyboard and trackpad or mouse. Adding those makes it a laptop with a shitty OS.
2. See #1 above. And that REALLY ended when Apple started suggesting that it was laptop replacement. Remember: "What's a computer?"
3. When a customer needs a tablet and laptop (a 2 in 1) going with Apple they end up with not a 2 in 1 but 1.5 in 1 -- a good tablet and a shitty laptop. The solution that I have heard countless times in this forum is "just buy and carry both".
At one time all of your claims were true. But time marches on and things change. It's time Apple caught up.
They are saying that it is a laptop replacement for most people, which is it. With the keyboard you can type faster. Mostly its for consumption, not creation. The iPad replaces the laptop for that set of customers who didn't need the Truck ( to use Steve Jobs' analogy), but got one when that was all that was available. but now can use a car.
And to those of you who think that a macOS app could run on an iPad, that might be true of a small subset of applications, but that isn't macOS on the iPad. Just as running some iOS apps on macOS doesn't turn macOS into iOS.
"3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it. "
So you are saying.... is always a straw man argument. I don't have an iPad because I have a laptop. I "lug around" my iPhone when walking about.
Most people need 1 or 2 out of 3 of a phone, laptop and tablet. Almost nobody needs 3 of 3. If you want the laptop experience the new AIR, which is cheaper than some iPads, is for you.
What he wants is something akin to the MS Surface Pro but made by Apple.
Comments
Lastly you dodged on why Apple should bother with your “you wouldn’t understand the answer”. But given your demonstrated lack of understanding of the technical issues it isn’t a surprise.
Yes, for certain things - but for what some call "real computing" -those things where it has to be configured as a laptop with external keyboard and mouse, it can do them, but it is generally agreed that it sucks at it.
And 2 in 1s are not the future of computing. The surface is getting slated.
Theres no technical or financial reason for Apple to do this. Mac OS on an iPad will clearly reduce Mac sales, if it even worked.
It would be a security nightmare and a UI disaster. They have been clear all along that the tablet market and the PC market are different.
Steve Jobs could not be clearer on the diasctintion and on which type of device is going to win, he believed we were in the post PC era, and if you look at the stats he was right. The only thing he got wrong was that the tablet market itself didn't grow as he expected, because of the fact that Phone sizes grew.
When you add an external keyboard and mouse it is no longer a "Touch screen device". it's a laptop with a shitty OS.
2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.
3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.
They are saying that it is a laptop replacement for most people, which is it. With the keyboard you can type faster. Mostly its for consumption, not creation. The iPad replaces the laptop for that set of customers who didn't need the Truck ( to use Steve Jobs' analogy), but got one when that was all that was available. but now can use a car.
And to those of you who think that a macOS app could run on an iPad, that might be true of a small subset of applications, but that isn't macOS on the iPad. Just as running some iOS apps on macOS doesn't turn macOS into iOS.
"3. So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job. Got it. "
So you are saying.... is always a straw man argument. I don't have an iPad because I have a laptop. I "lug around" my iPhone when walking about.
Most people need 1 or 2 out of 3 of a phone, laptop and tablet. Almost nobody needs 3 of 3. If you want the laptop experience the new AIR, which is cheaper than some iPads, is for you.